It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


What Putin has achieved till now

page: 6
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 1 2014 @ 11:12 PM

originally posted by: victor7
a reply to: DJW001

The real reason is the capital flight from Russia which leaves no funds for investments into other industries. The robbery is going on at all levels with whole departmental groups involved in making massive frauds and splitting the loot.

Corruption is the way of life in Russia. Some say Russia of today is more corrupt than Soviet Union in the 1980s.

Normal procedure at the top of any power pyramid?

In US it is wall street banks who are at the top and do the hustling. In Russia the oligarchy. Same game just different players and victims. Mikhail Khodorkovsky lost 15 Billion dollars when he was arrested.

And on the US side to come Derivatives wall street crash 2.0. The upgraded version.
edit on 1-10-2014 by LittleByLittle because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 05:13 AM
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Learn history!

The embassy decided to warn passengers before her next crossing not to sail aboard Lusitania. The Imperial German Embassy placed a warning advertisement in 50 American newspapers, including those in New York

Undeclared war munitions

Lusitania was officially carrying among her cargo rifle/machine-gun ammunition, shrapnel artillery shells without powder charges and artillery fuses.

Beesly has stated that the cargo also included 46 tons of aluminium powder, which was used in the manufacture of explosives and which was being shipped to the Woolwich Arsenal. Author Steven Danver states that the Lusitania was also secretly carrying a large quantity of nitrocellulose (gun cotton), although this was not listed as such on the cargo manifest either.

Furthermore there was a large consignment of "fur", sent from Dupont de Nemours, an explosives manufacturer, and some 90 tons butter and lard destined for the Royal Navy Weapons Testing Establishment in Essex. Although it was May, this lard and butter was not refrigerated; it was insured by the special government rate but the insurance was never claimed.

In September 2008, bullets known to be used by the British military were uncovered from the wreck by diver Eoin McGarry. They were found in an area of the ship not previously known to have been carrying cargo.

posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 09:58 AM
a reply to: LittleByLittle

Corruption is the internal decay which destroys any system. Results in huge brain drain and thwarts the growth of overall economy. In Russia's case emigration to overseas. The corrupt have enough resources to easily go and settle other places. Poor see hopelessness and strive harder and alternative ways to leave.

One way for Putin to push back at the western encroachments would be to control and cleanse corruption from the Russian society. Corruption makes country weak and weakness invites aggression.

posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 12:36 PM
a reply to: maghun

Oh, well, if the Germans announced that they would be sinking civilian ships I guess that makes it okay.

posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 01:48 PM
a reply to: DJW001

Civilian ship with war munitions in war zone? Germans should have let it go...

Why Putin against "democratic" ethnic cleansing in Ukraine? He should have let it done...

posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 02:37 PM
a reply to: DJW001

In fact, the Zimmerman Telegram was the "dirty trick."

Gotta love the old school propaganda.

posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 03:06 PM
a reply to: maghun

Learn history!

And when they sank it there was nothing showing proof of what Germany was saying was true, and in fact it wasn't until very many years later was it known, and it had nothing to do with western media as you speculated here... we see in the western media outlets... Where to begin? Lusitania, 911, Iraq WMDs, MH370, MH17 and so on...

So what exactly did western media have to do with it?

As for the rest I can agree with some of those, but that's for a different thread.

posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 03:19 PM
a reply to: maghun

Why Putin against "democratic" ethnic cleansing in Ukraine? He should have let it done...

Um, exactly what ethnic cleansing would that be?

Because if I remember correctly Crimea and it's Russian government are the only ones doing that to the Tartars...

“We have asked the Crimean Tatars to vacate part of their land, which is required for social needs,” Temirgaliyev said. “But we are ready to allocate and legalize many other plots of land to ensure a normal life for the Crimean Tatars,” he said.

And just so we both understand the meaning of ethnic

ethnic cleansing noun
: the practice of removing or killing people who belong to an ethnic group that is different from the ruling group in a country or region

So now Ukraine is doing neither of those, because they are targeting separatists which are made up of different ethnic backgrounds from different countries and as far as I have seen they still have pro Russians living in Ukraine without the fear of the Ukraine gov't.

posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 05:33 PM

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: maghun

What about Putin? Can you refute any point from Shaker's list?

And away we go:

- broken the back of the AngloZionist-backed oligarchy in Russia.

Just like Hitler broke the back of the British war mongers and their Jewish masters. To give Putin his due, he is not anti-Semitic; in fact, he sees Russian Jews as a vital part of the Russian tapestry. Unfortunately, many of his admirers are little better than Nazis who have scratched out "Germany" and written "Russia" in in crayon.

- achieved a truly miraculous success in Chechnia (one which nobody, prophets included, had foreseen).

Setting aside the biblical tone, the "miracle involved the wanton destruction of 160,000 lives, using tactics that his supporters are now condemning Kyiv for using.

- literally resurrected the Russian economy.

Yes, Putin single handedly drilled every single oil and gas well. He knew where to put them because he put the gas there personally on the second day of Creation.

On a more serious note, Putin did not single handedly repair the Russian economy, either. It was in such bad shape after the free for all when communism collapsed that almost anything would have been an improvement. As it was, he organized the oligarchs like a criminal syndicate. Once everyone knew their place, the turf wars ended and Putin could get them working together for Mother Russia. By appearing to play by the rules, Putin encouraged "Western" investment in Russia, making its extractive economy possible.

- rebuilt the Russian military, security and intelligences forces.

Fair enough.

- severely disrupted the ability of foreign NGOs to subvert Russia.

You mean he clamped down on organizations that promulgated dangerous ideas like the rule of law, civil rights and representative government.

- done more for the de-dollarization of the planet than anybody before.

You say that as though it were self evidently a good thing.

- made Russia the clear leader of both BRICS and SCO.

Simply wrong. China is already the second largest economy in the world. Also, China has more influence over the United States than Russia has. Without China, the BRICs are nothing.

- openly challenged the informational monopoly of the western propaganda machine (with projects like RussiaToday).

In other words, he has expanded Russia's traditional propaganda capacities rather than find a way to project "soft power."

- stopped an imminent US/NATO strike on Syria by sending in a Russian Navy Expeditionary Force (which gave Syria a full radar coverage of the entire region).

What makes you think that there was going to be a US/NATO strike on Syria? Obama being weak does not mean that Putin is s

- made it possible for Assad to prevail in the Syrian civil war.

Do you ever actually watch the news?

- openly rejected the Western “universal civilizational model” and declared his support for another, a religion and tradition based one.

Sadly true. He has rejected the Westphalian system and Enlightenment values for superstitious medieval totalitarianism.

- openly rejected a unipolar “New World Order” lead by the AngloZionists and declared his support for a multi-polar world order.

No. He is attempting to make Russia into a Great Power again, by hook or by crook.

- supported Assange (through RussiaToday) and protected Snowden

And heaven help them if they expose Russian malfeasance the way they did American.

- created and promoted a new alliance model between Christianity and Islam thus undermining the “clash of civilization” paradigm.

This is simply delusional. If the responsible actors in the Levant cannot bring the House of Islam into order, we will see Russian heads on poles across Central Asia.

- booted the AngloZionists out of key locations in the Caucasus (Chechnia, Ossetia).
- booted the AngloZionists out of key locations in Central Asia (Manas base in Kyrgyzstan)

It is easy to boot imaginary enemies out of real places.

- gave Russia the means to defend her interest in the Arctic region, including military means.

Translation: He intends to violate centuries old agreements about the use of the sea, by force of arms.

- established a full-spectrum strategic alliance with China which is at the core of both SCO and BRICS.

Translation: Xi has made Putin his b----.

- is currently passing laws barring foreign interests from controlling the Russian media.

He is clamping down on free speech.

-gave Iran the means to develop a much needed civilian nuclear program.

And helped it become what is called in arms control circles a "rapid transition state."

- is working with China to create a financial system fully separated form the current AngloZionist controlled one (including trade in Rubles or Renminbi).

You mean China is stringing him along. They will never take payment in Rubles, but if Russia wants to start paying tribute in gold....

- re-establised Russian political and economic support for Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, Ecuador, Brazil, Nicaragua and Argentina.

And we all know how great those economies are doing.

- very effectively deflated the pro-US color-coded revolution in Russia.

That existed only in his mind and those of his followers.

- organized the “Voentorg” which armed the NAF.

Sh! Don't let BornAgainAlien hear that! He fervently believes that Russia isn't arming anyone.

- gave refuge to hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian refugees.

What was his optionthere?

- sent in vitally needed humanitarian aid to Novorussia.

Among other things.

- provided direct Russian fire support and possibly even air cover to NAF in key locations (the “southern cauldron” for example).

Stop saying that! You're exposing Putin's lies!

- last but not least, he openly spoke of the need for Russia to “sovereignize” herself and to prevail over the pro-US 5th column.

You mean, like anyone who opposes Putin becoming President For Life?

Very good points, thanks. The OP is fervently pro-Putin, the article is fanatically anti-Israel, anti-American and anti-Kiev.

Putin as a leader represents a paradigm of devolution for Russia into fascism. Russia has never completely finished the social modernization processes that swept through the West with the French Revolution and the revolutions of 1848-49, the American Revolution and Cromwell's results in England. Germany gradually went through these so much so that the Hitlerite regime could not be successful there, except for a few dark years.
You could say that it is no surprise that business and innovation thrives in democratic societies and is hampered in autocratic ones. Currently Russia is only recovering economically because of oil and gas.

Which is no guarantee for democracy and freedom - arms, yes.

posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 07:33 PM
a reply to: Kokatsi

You could say that it is no surprise that business and innovation thrives in democratic societies and is hampered in autocratic ones

Until the business become larger and create monopoly and oligopoly and destroy any concept of free market and become the autocratic problem holding back people from competing fairly and controlling information to enslave them and destroy the middle class.

One side Corporate fascism vs State controlled fascism. On both sides the common theme is fascism.

Can you give me an example of a democratic society without a power pyramid controlling them?

Every western country is under IMF, FED control to force the countries to be in the debt based banking system where a group of people can live of countries taxes since most countries have loans. Pay taxes to feed the bank owners. The whole monetary system is in itself a giant Ponzi scheme.
edit on 2-10-2014 by LittleByLittle because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 08:11 PM
a reply to: Kokatsi

You could say that it is no surprise that business and innovation thrives in democratic societies and is hampered in autocratic ones. Currently Russia is only recovering economically because of oil and gas.

Russia needs an autocratic society to protect new and small business start ups from mafia and criminal pressures. Remember 1990s under Yeltsin! No thanks, Putin system is much more pro business protection.

Russia needs an autocratic society to control corruption and law breaking. Corruption increases the prices of goods and service as vendor needs to recoup the bribes paid.......somewhere in the retail chain. This leads to less disposable incomes with general population and that in turn discourages investment into new ventures.

Buddy, travel to a third world country in Asia or Africa. You will return with a strong wish for military like rule in those places after seeing lawlessness and disrespect for common pity laws...........following these common pity laws is the reason life is so much more comfortable in the west.

Forget about Russia missing several revolutions in 18-19-20th centuries. A turnaround type change can be brought in 2-5 years very easily when it comes to following law and abiding by the social responsibilities. By product benefits of such practices soon follow in the form of successful capitalism with ethical safety nets like free healthcare etc.

posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 08:14 PM
a reply to: LittleByLittle
I agree to the first part. Capitalism makes no difference between the democratic states of postwar Europe and the neo-liberal (economics) and neo-conservative (political ideology) of the post seventies model. However, I am for a controlled capitalism, or a moderate Socialist model, where corporations cannot enjoy the rights of legal entities and Rooseveltian checks and balances are built into business.
Then the IMF could have no great role. It is idiocy that states or cities should take loans on a regular basis. Or that education should be in the budget financed this year when its fruits are borne ten years from now. The new market fundamentalism opened the door to speculation, invited geopolitical enemies like China into the formerly moderated "welfare state model", did away with tariffs and established tax havens and greenfield to a hitherto unprecedented rate.

Theoretically what Putin does could be even good - except armed aggression doesn't fit well into the ideal model.

Theoretically he could claim that hey, we are poorer but we are freer over here in Russia. But that is simply not the case. The collapse of the Soviet model opened up the door to a horrible medieval oligarchy system everywhere in Eastern Europe, save perhaps Slovenia and the Czech Republic. The legal system has been reshuffled accordingly, for huge untalented billionaires suddenly controlling everything. You can find every drawback of the neoconservative/neoliberal West in Russia without any of its still not eroded advantages in everyday life.

Plus we should not forget that the Russian military runs on alcohol. The highest amount of world consumption of alcohol is Russia today. Do we want these guys to control our future? Rather not. Just because they discovered more oil and gas, the average Russian person is not free, Russia has imperialist ambitions - see Chechnya, Grusia which they should have let go.

The constant argument that Ukraine is not a country, reminds me of the times when Hitler was annexing Austria - the Anschluss. Austria was not regarded as a separate country, it was just an extension of the Reich. The fact they talked slightly differently did not give them grounds to keep their separate country.

Ukraine gave up its nuclear arms. Why? Is there any consideration for this noble gesture? No, Putin's news agencies play on the strings of a national paranoia - which is partially justified as some conservative Westerners failed to include Russia in the New World (meaning the one after the fall of the Berlin Wall), and failed to finance the transition. They let Russia become into an aggravated, excluded monster state, having extreme poverty but nuclear arms and right-wing squads terrorizing people of color and gays. Locking up young punk women of 20 for a year for a protest song. All in the name of a patriarchal right-wing étatist philosophy no better than radical Islam.

Let's listen to Pussy Riot clips. They tell you something valuable about Russian reality.
Let's listen to the crocodile addicts - Russia is the home of the single most deadly drug epidemic in the world, paling heroin and coc aine, even meth.

Why? Is that also the fault of the "Zionist West"?

Come on.

posted on Oct, 2 2014 @ 08:23 PM
a reply to: SLAYER69

I questioned and argued with my teachers to the point of once being sent to the schools counselor for being disruptive when I called him out for his spewing of archaic Mccarthyistic propaganda.

After making my case to the counselor and Vice Principle about the incident I got switched to another class for the rest of the year. He on the other hand retired shortly there after. Voluntarily?


posted on Oct, 3 2014 @ 01:46 AM
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

So what exactly did western media have to do with it?

...accurate, unbiased reporting...

posted on Oct, 3 2014 @ 01:54 AM
a reply to: tsurfer2000h

Ukrainian democrats in masks have nice slogans, like: "Ukraine is Europe" and "Hang Russians on a branch".

The result:

Lavrov: 400 Bodies Found in Ukraine Mass Graves Are Evidence of War Crime

ethnic cleansing noun:
the practice of removing or killing people who belong to an ethnic group that is different from the ruling group in a country or region

edit on 10am101u10 by maghun because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 3 2014 @ 02:00 AM
a reply to: maghun

Now all Lavrov has to do is produce the bodies, prove that they were killed recently and prove that it was Kyiv loyalists and not separatists who did it. So far he has not even produced the bodies.

posted on Oct, 3 2014 @ 02:09 AM
a reply to: Kokatsi

Very good points, thanks. The OP is fervently pro-Putin, the article is fanatically anti-Israel, anti-American and anti-Kiev.

Thanks for your opinion. Little correction: I'm pro-human.

Is this the new standard of democracy?

posted on Oct, 3 2014 @ 02:12 AM

originally posted by: maghun
a reply to: Kokatsi

Very good points, thanks. The OP is fervently pro-Putin, the article is fanatically anti-Israel, anti-American and anti-Kiev.

Thanks for your opinion. Little correction: I'm pro-human.

Is this the new standard of democracy?

For a pro-human, you sure delight in looking at graphic images of atrocities.

posted on Oct, 3 2014 @ 02:19 AM
a reply to: DJW001


The OSCE confirmed the finding on September 25 and reported its concerns to the European Union.


"We would support full and thorough investigation to get to the bottom of the facts," Psaki said Wednesday.

From September 8, before the fondong of mass graves:

Amnesty International

posted on Oct, 3 2014 @ 02:27 AM
a reply to: maghun

Yes, it is well known that detachments of volunteers were abusing the locals. They were not acting under orders. There were mass killings in the region under the Tatars, Russians, Soviets and Nazis. Much bad blood, but it has yet to be proved that there were mass killings this time around, nor who committed them. Let's see what the OSCE says.

new topics

top topics

<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in