While the World Focuses on Bush, Putin Actually Becomes a Tyrant

While the World Focuses on Bush, Putin Actually Becomes a Tyrant

www.dailymail.co.uk

As ex-President Putin settles in to his new role as Prime Minister, he has every reason to congratulate himself.

After all, he has not only written the script for his constitutional coup d'etat, but staged the play and given himself the starring role as well.

Of course, he has given a walk-on role to Dmitry Medvedev, his personally anointed successor.

But the transfer of power from Putin to his Little Sir Echo, Medvedev, and the show of military strength with those soldiers and clapp

(visit the link for the full news article)

Yes, we see what seems like thousands of articles and posts here on ATS about Bush the tyrant, Bush the fascist, Bush = hitler, Bush taking away all of our rights, etc., etc. ad nauseum.

While right in plain sight of the world, Putin is doing all of the above - and no does anything or says anything other than to give Putin a pass.

www.dailymail.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Thats because russia has a history of very strong leaders. USA is supposed to stand for something which it clearly does not.

Putin is doing a great job, the english cannot stand it they have Brown(socalled genius), lol.

If you read english news and believe about russia, your not looking at the situation in the right way.

reply to post by centurion1211


exactly

reply to post by centurion1211


Putin is a scary guy. Bush is like everyone's drunk uncle who's easy and oh-so-much fun to make fun of!









Mod Edit: Entire quote of preceding post removed. Reply To function used. Please see ABOUT ATS: Warnings for excessive quoting, and how to quote. Thank you - Jak


[edit on 19/5/08 by JAK]

...And a freely elected tyrant at that.

Face it, after the disaster of that Western-backed clown/drunk Yeltsin, who sold off Russia at firesale prices to Western interests, Putin came in and put the dacha in order. The man is very, very smart, and has done a great deal for his country.

As andy 1033 pointed out, Russia has always had strongmen as leaders; it had an all-powerful Tsar until 1917, then an all-powerful Premier in the Communist period. In historical terms, Putin is among the most liberal of the country's rulers.

The sniping from the UK is from those City of London vultures who thought they were going to walk off with Russia's wealth for nothing, then got gob-smacked by Putin (think Yukos Oil) when he gave Russia back to the Russians. Frankly, good for him. He's got brains and cojones, and Russia is lucky to have him.

reply to post by centurion1211


I completely agree. Bush has his name being thrown around like rice at a wedding, but Fascism is not only lurking, but taking control of an entire nation. Though, the tides are turning against us as Americans here as well and that can't (shouldn't) be ignored, the same thing we're (we?) is happening realtime in Russia. I would hate to say we shouldn't be upset with our current circumstances, though as people we should all unite to make this kind of modern day curtain dance a thing of the past.

Right. Come to think of it, in spite of all he says, Bush must be Putin's favorite leader these last several years. While Putin has been creating his dictatorship Bush has kept everyone's attention focused on himself. If there's a conspiracy here, it's Putin's - and I don't think Bush is purposely helping him.

I'm not sure how many of you read the article, but if you think that Putin is good for Russia then there is something wrong. While it is true that Russia never did have a democracy, it is now being run by organized criminal elements, and Putin is the head of the snake. Widespread corruption, political prisoners, murdering members of the press that are brave enough to speak out; how is that good for a country?
The worst part is the Russian people don't expect justice or freedom, just stability. The have known nothing but corruption, so they see no wrong in it and they do nothing about it. We in the West expect and demand more.

reply to post by TheComte


I agree. The russian government under Putin has more in common with the fictitious "SMERSH" (with Putin as Blofeld) in the orginal James Bond stories than a democracy.

I wonder if Putin has a white long-haired cat ...

[edit on 5/18/2008 by centurion1211]

Tres amusing...

Nothing like watching people falling all over themselves apologizing for a dictator... Especially when they are mired in democratic self loathing...

:shk:

The scant few responses to this topic is quite telling.

[edit on 18/5/2008 by Mirthful Me]

Originally posted by andy1033
Thats because russia has a history of very strong leaders. USA is supposed to stand for something which it clearly does not.

Strong leaders like stalin, with over 20 million of his own people's deaths to his "credit".

Putin is doing a great job, the english cannot stand it they have Brown(socalled genius), lol.

Read the article. Putin is only doing a great job og making himself the hew tyrant of russia.

If you read english news and believe about russia, your not looking at the situation in the right way.

So, in your opinion, the only "right way" to look at what Putin is doing in russia is to bend over ...

Again, read the article.



And to Mirthful Me,

Exactly - the point of the thread.

Mod Edit: BB Code.


[edit on 18/5/2008 by Mirthful Me]

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
Tres amusing...

Nothing like watching people falling all over themselves apologizing for a dictator... Especially when they are mired in democratic self loathing...

:shk:

The scant few responses to this topic is quite telling.

[edit on 18/5/2008 by Mirthful Me]

Its always like this in this place, I dont know why people here on ATS have a hard time calling something for what it is.

All the Putin apologist only need to look to his twin brother from another mother Hugo Chavez and yes you get 2 democratically elected individuals that have manage to push back the democratic achievements of those 2 countries for a couple of decades.

But of course you attach Bush name to the story and not many would come out and same something that would come close to sound like supporting Bush, but guess what?! None of them had been good for the world! Not Bush, not Putin.

Putin has been bad for his country and Bush horrible for thr country and the world. Amazingly Putin has much more support than Bush in his country which is telling.

I think Bunch nailed it. They are both bad. The only difference lies in the fact that Putin is actually smart and can make decisions on his own unlike Bush, who takes his order from Cheney et al.

Also, I always felt Russia had an anti-new world order feel to it. Don't know why.

Originally posted by Mirthful Me
Tres amusing...

Nothing like watching people falling all over themselves apologizing for a dictator... Especially when they are mired in democratic self loathing...

A bit like the Decider, when he had his man-crush and looked into Putin's soul and saw what he wanted to be, non?

Ah, ils oublient tellement vite....

Edit to add: But really, this article is simply a propaganda piece, and is pretty transparent in its motivation.

You know, articles just like this were written about FDR, calling him a dictator after he won his third term, in the midst of WWII, so let's have some perspective.

And as for "democratic self-loathing": Our system has become increasingly dysfunctional with the rise of corporatism and the MIC, and our elected officials are ever-more beholden to these powerful interests, ever-more reliant on their money, and ever-less responsive to their constituents. They are insulated with the rise of entrenched incumbency.

The system upon which this republic is founded is a cause for great pride, but its present state is one for equally great concern.

Just asking for a wider perspective, is all.

[edit on 19-5-2008 by gottago]

Originally posted by Bunch
Its always like this in this place, I dont know why people here on ATS have a hard time calling something for what it is.

Indeed.

All the Putin apologist only need to look to his twin brother from another mother Hugo Chavez and yes you get 2 democratically elected individuals that have manage to push back the democratic achievements of those 2 countries for a couple of decades.

But the poor are eating more than they used to while the middle classes expands as oil and natural resource wealth are redirected to the people. This all while the average US citizen works ever more hours to gain the same income...

But of course you attach Bush name to the story and not many would come out and same something that would come close to sound like supporting Bush, but guess what?! None of them had been good for the world! Not Bush, not Putin.

So , comparatively speaking, what did Putin do that comes close to the recent US foreign adventures? In fact what did the USSR do that comes close to the abuses of the US national security state during the cold war?

Putin has been bad for his country and Bush horrible for thr country and the world. Amazingly Putin has much more support than Bush in his country which is telling.

But things got better for Russians under Putin while they got worse for Americans under Bush? I am not sure that Putin has far more support than Bush ( neither won by landslides or had massive voter turnouts) and i must admit that comparatively speaking it was much easier to raise living standards in Russian than it was to do so in the USA. That being said it was clearly never the intent of Bush and the gang to do anything beneficial for average Americans while Putin and Chavez clearly had such things in mind.

As you may or may not have surmised i wouldn't like them for a presidents and as far as i can tell the majority of Russians and Americans didn't want them either. As we all should have figured out by now Bush lost both elections( and is thus clearly unelected and by his actions a dictator) but i suppose most haven't spent as much time trying to figure out just how fairly Putin got elected.

Another interesting question arises if one proposes to shift Putin to the US and Bush to the RF . Under the constraints of the US constitutional/judicial + US armed forces would Putin have tried what he did in Russia and what might Bush and his friends have done with the quite extensive armaments and less well ingrained judicial/governments processes in Russia? So my feeling is basically that both Chavez and Putin would have been suitable restrained in the US system and would comparatively have done far more for Americans than Bushco did. Since it's feeling , it not unsupported, i would appreciate it if you frame your response in that way.

Stellar

[edit on 19-5-2008 by StellarX]

What a hate filled piece of crap article

I saw an interview on tv with him about this book and he's so disgustingly smug. He went to Russia with hate in a predetermined agenda and dislike for Russia in general - and then seems suprised that people are happy that the chaos of the 90's are over.

He holds the chaos of Boris Yeltsin's tenure as a good period in Russian history. He then holds oligarchs like Khodorovsky as proponents of democracy and human rights - just as he was in the process of trying to sell off to Cheney and co.

I get the impression that alot of people that are pissed off that Russia is on the rise and hasn't succombed to what they thought Russia should do.

I think Russia's recent gains will speak for themself.

Ol' Pootsky hasn't gone unnoticed by all Americans, but not nearly enough of us. He's been a painfully transparent blight to me since the original 2000 election when he literally characterized his main opponent as "the candidate of the Jews, homosexuals and foreigners." And as a former KGB chief, everyone knows he HAS to have an extraordinary level of paranoia.

I definitely would've voted for Kasparov the last time. He was/is the only one with a clue of a free society. What we have now is a rather obvious legacy of Napoleonic complexes. At 5'3" Medvedev is clearly the pet project of the 5'5" Putin.

reply to post by Lightworth


To say Kasparov is the main opponent is laughable.

The guy is merely a pawn of the Americans. I think Putin made an excellent point when he said that Kasparov doesn't talk to Russia, but to America instead.

Originally posted by TheComte
I'm not sure how many of you read the article, but if you think that Putin is good for Russia then there is something wrong. While it is true that Russia never did have a democracy, it is now being run by organized criminal elements, and Putin is the head of the snake. Widespread corruption, political prisoners, murdering members of the press that are brave enough to speak out; how is that good for a country?
The worst part is the Russian people don't expect justice or freedom, just stability. The have known nothing but corruption, so they see no wrong in it and they do nothing about it. We in the West expect and demand more.

Wow that sounds remarkably familiar.

In fact I reckon you could transfer all of the above and apply it to the US in some shape or form.

The newspaper article wasn't worth reading we all know there is corruption in governments, at least the Russians aren't invading countries the other side of the planet.