Putin Calls U.S. 'Frightening Monster,' Urges French Solidarity

reply to post by pexx421


You want to know how many native Americans were killed? There were 12 million native North Americans when the europeans arrived and only 237,000 by 1900. How many of those that died was the responsibility of the U.S., the exact number is unknown but it is alot.

I don't deny the sins of the U.S. you should try to stop denying the sins of the Russians.

As it relates to this thread....

Why do you think that Eastern European countries want to join NATO?? Have you ever thought that they might know something about those Russians? Have you ever thought that they might have been screwed over by those Russians?

Why do you think those NATO hopefuls are not listening to Putin? Maybe because Putin is a throwback to the old days of Soviet Russia with all the political repression, the gulags, the terror, the starvation, the brutal crushing of dissent. If the U.S. is anything like you say it is, you and everyone that talks about American genocide would have been taken to a labor camp in Alaska and worked to the bone.

There is a very good reason why Georgia and Ukraine want to join NATO. Don't you think they would seek protection from the U.S. if the U.S. was the biggest most frightening, genocidal power that walked the earth?

Maybe the reason for NATO's expansion is because there are people scared that Putin wants to bring back one of the biggest most frightening, genocidal powers that have ever existed.

People are scared of Putin, people are scared of the Russians, there is a deep dark history with that many Baltic and Eastern European people don't want to relive.

How simplistic. And therein lies the problem. See, no one wants to admit to problems because no one wants to have to WORK on them.. If things are bad people just automatically skip to packing up and leaving. The whole point here is first admitting what is wrong with the country so that you can then change it. First you have to Open your Eyes to what really is. Are there good people in our country? absolutely. The majority of our country is good (albeit uneducated and unaware) people. However yes, the elite minority are the ones with all the power, and no change wont come easy.... and of course, most people are not willing to sacrifice their car, their air condition, and their LCD TV for the hope of doing the right thing.
Honestly, nothing good in our country ever came without violent demand from the people, and it always came at the cost of violent resistance from the powers that be. Generally thats how most governments work. It took bullets and blood to free the slaves....and then more bullets and blood to enforce that freedom. It took people sacrificing their lives in order to achieve womens sufferage. It took college students getting shot by police in order to end vietnam. it took workers being shot by national guardsmen to earn workers rights to safe working environments. All these things our government fought to keep from us, and all these things thousands of people willingly went to jail for, and thousands got killed for. So yes, change is possible, but likely not without violence, and it takes people willing to see the truth, and to get up off their couches, and to leave the comfort of their air conditioning, and to leave the safe haven of their fantasy world where everything is just fine, and it takes people caring for something more than just themselves and their own comfort.

hey, that last post was to cree wolf....anyway, in response to yours, im not denying the russians there crimes, im just unaware that it could be worse than the americans. I would say that the eastern europeans leaning away from russia is not so different from the south americans organizing to resist the United States.... and i have to point out that while russia may have powerful negative influence over the countries around them, The US has powerful negative influence all over the world.
As far as us in america being whisked to a camp for our statements and criticisms of our government...well the "homegrown terrorist act" will see to that, as will the patriot acts. They do now have the right to designate anyone whom "the secretary general infers to be a threat to national security" as well as anyone who "uses language wich may be constued to incite violence against the government" as a war criminal, and arrest them without due process and lock them up without the rights of habeus corpus or representation. Further in the event of a national emergency such as war or natural disaster, the president signed a bill 6 months ago which gives him the power to indefinitely put off elections, take control of all national guards, and declare martial law. In light of these new events, things are getting quite scary. I wouldnt say we live in a de facto fascism now, but the fences are being put in place.

Originally posted by US Monitor
Please provide a link to this. I am not aware of the US whining about a Russian missile defense system in Cuba. I am aware of Russia trying to place nuclear missiles in Cuba in the Cuban Missile Crisis, but those were not "defense missiles" by any stretch of anyone's outlandish imagination.

Which was in response to the US placing IRBM's on the USSR's borders which they agreed to remove a few months if the USSR removed it's missiles from Cuba...

And as for the article itself, I didn't read anywhere in there where the US is forcing any country to join NATO.

So it's your argument that a well armed state such as the US can't get it's way without having to resort to brute force? Have you heard of the term 'globailization' at least and do you understand the implications of interrconnected economies?

In fact I haven't ever heard of the US forcing any country to join NATO or threaten any country that wants to leave NATO.

Since when is what you know or don't know a qualification i need to care about? Why wouldn't the US put severe pressure on nations who wish to leave NATO? What was it's response to France leaving NATO in 1966? Would that perhaps explain some of the common sentiments towards that country? I will agree that the US can only do so much to force or threaten first world nations such as France but does that really matter when they have consistently proved what they can do to third world nations such as Korea and Vietnam?

Quite the opposite of the old Warsaw Pact. And wasn't it Russia that shot down a Georgia UAV over land that belongs to Georgia? Talk about an aggressive monster using force to coerce countries.

The Warsaw pact was formed as response to the formation of NATO and at the time the US/NATO certainly had a strategic edge.

Just ask the poor people of Chechyna that are suffering because of Russian aggression.

So what would happen if Florida and or Texas decided that they would like to be more closely alligned to Mexico or just be independent? What do you think will happen if groups in that state have long been suspected or known to have attacked federal buildings in other states? How many top Russian military officials resigned as result of that 'invasion' and how many army formations sabotaged their equipment or at first refused to attack and only did so very half heartedly later? What would it take to get Russians to be as gung ho about invading completely foreign nations given their antipathy towards even keeping all the nominally Russian territorities from ceding?

A country (Russia) that has lead the international way of aggression since the end of WWII.

I know this will sound very strange but if you don't mind i would like you to name the conflicts where they were on the wrong side of history; where did they support the faction that did not enjoy the majority support in that country? Why , when i looked, did i find that they overwhelmingly seemed to have armed , or at least half heartedly , supported the actual freedom fighters?

The country that built the Berlin Wall in the first place.

To prevent the CIA and others from sabotaging Eastern German infrastructure and generally trying to stem the flow of educated/wealthy Germans who were abandonining their 'posts' and thus making it worse for ALL eastern Germans. It's not that the USSR were benevolent but US policy decisions massively contributed to not only the building of the wall but to the problems that arises from a civil society losing such a proportion of it's most educated citizens. If the USSR were so 'crazed' and violent why didn't they build the wall on the first day or just keep control of ALL Berlin which they in fact paid for in blood? Why did they cede control of such large sections at all?

Held Eastern Europe hostage, attacked countries like Afghanistan for no reason. Caused the Nuclear Arms Race.

They didn't hold Eastern Europe hostage any more than the fascist leaders who did so before them. Eastern Europe were run by dictators before and during the second world war and while it wasn't fair' Eastern Europeans leaders contributed in part to the power Nazi Germany were able to project into the Soviet Union in 1941. At any point the USSR could have taken control of Yugoslavia and the rest of the Eastern Europe but they never did! As for the Afghanistan they were 'invited' in by the government of the day ( and one that was in my knowledge more legtimate than the one of South Vietnam) so it's hard to overly concerned about that when the US installed a puppet in South Vietnam and then used him as excuse for the violence against ALL of Vietnam.

Now Putin, the dictator in training for Russia is just talking to help justify his takeover of Russia, and is just putting his KGB training to use.]

Unlikely Bush he was in fact elected both times and won by margins Bush could only dream about. Democracy in Russia is by no means perfect in Russia but at least the people actually selected their own leader and unlike the case in the US they are in fact enjoying relatively great economic benefits as results while things are getting harder for the overwhelming majority of American\ citizens. .

Stellar

Originally posted by manson_322


indeed Putin is correct, the USA has been becoming a imperialist monster day by day which is growing stronger and stronger ...

the world must awaken to this imperialist threat to contain or else , it may have dire consequences ...

www.bloomberg.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

How did you work that one out?
I must of missed the meeting in which we declared Putin as a hero for democracy

I do not see America using its oil and gas as a weapon on her neighbouring countries in order to gain influence and hijack domestic policy. Those totalitarian idiots in Moscow are though.

Do you even know what imperialism is? Because last time I checked; the US was not building an empire and creating colonies across the world (Bush is not President of Iraq, so don't play the Iraq card).

In fact, the European Union is the closet thing to an imperial force in the world.

Btw, I take it supporting undemocratic regimes, who attack the West, is now the new thing for conspiracy theorists now? In the mean time I shall look forward to your next post in which you claim the Sudanese government is a force of good

outstanding (stellar x). And yes, as to afghanistan, The united states was arming the mujahideen (read: al qaida) in insurrection against the afghan government...now keeping in mind that prior to this afghanistan had a burdgeoning democracy, and was in fact one of the most democratic of the arab states. Then we began inciting uprising with the express intent of drawing russia in to support the legitimate afghan government, which they did. the rest is history

[edit on 1-6-2008 by pexx421]

no in america we dont use oil and gas to attack our foes, we use napalm and depleted uranium.
Wait, what am i saying? we have an EXTENSIVE history of cutting our neighbors off from oil, gas, food, and other necessities. We regularly use embargos in our reportoire of ways to force other countries to toe the line of our corporations, the imf, and the world bank. and what undemocratic regimes are attacking the west? i know WE have attacked lots of countries...but i dont recall any other countries attacking us since japan.

[edit on 1-6-2008 by pexx421]

hate to say it but putin has a point.

No this is not a one line post

Originally posted by StellarX
Democracy in Russia is by no means perfect in Russia but at least the people actually selected their own leader

Your kidding me right?

Yeah, the United Russia party (Putins party) did get elected....but so would you if your party had direct control over the entire media in Russia. Best way to describe the Russian system is a democratic one party state. (United Russia get about 70% of the vote)

The official opposition in Russia is the Communist Party, who achieved a 20% average of the vote. The Commies, as official opposition, have 57 in parliament (Duma) compared to United Russia's 315.

I'd rather have the United States system.

[edit on 1-6-2008 by infinite]

well thats not so dissimilar to our system. We technically have a 2 party system, but its really de facto one party, the corporate party, and if your not a member of that club (like ron paul, mike gravel, etc) then even with the 2nd most campaign contributions and greatest support base (like ron paul has) you have no chance of getting elected here.

reply to post by pexx421


I'm sorry, but the Russian system is nothing like America.
Numerous critics of Putin have been exiled and killed off, opposition media has been shut down and intimidated by the police.

And, last time I checked, London was not filled with American exiles fleeing Bush whereas Russian exiles are from Putin.


[edit on 1-6-2008 by infinite]

no ours is a little different. Here its people who try to peddle natural medicine who get shut down by the police and locked up. There are plenty stories about people disappearing around the Clintons also. And we have several leaders at different times who were taken out by our ruling class, JFK, King, Robert Kennedy, etc. And of course if you present any news contrary to the governments agenda you are quickly fired. The difference between Communism and democracy is we have to be more subtle about it. Didnt 34 people just get arrested for exercising free speech?? arent we engaging in state sanctioned torture now? Cant americans now be arrested without habeus corpus or due process? Is someone in the government not reading this email right now as i type it? im pretty sure that when i put the words president, assassin, or bomb here, there is a little computer right now going off in some office and recording this blog! HAHAHA!! it would be funnier if it wasnt so true.

anyway, i was saying the electoral systems are similar in that you really only have one choice for president here as well, a grasping greedy, ambitious and well paid for corporatist, and also, that nothing gets on the news without being screened first, and certainly nothing our government does not want on it.

ah, and there was also a bit of humor in my original post, but it doesnt come across the wires so well.

[edit on 1-6-2008 by pexx421]

Originally posted by US Monitor
reply to post by DimensionalDetective

 

Really? How do you figure that one? I live in Chicago and am downtown daily for work. Haven't seen any cops out stopping people to check there papers, haven't had any restrictions on my travel. So please do tell me how my state is becoming more facist by the day. I look forward to having a good laugh.

So your premise is, as long as YOUR limited daily life is untouched, anything else goes! Sounds like you would have been happy in Germany in the 30s.

Originally posted by infinite
reply to post by pexx421

 

I'm sorry, but the Russian system is nothing like America.
Numerous critics of Putin have been exiled and killed off, opposition media has been shut down and intimidated by the police.

And, last time I checked, London was not filled with American exiles fleeing Bush whereas Russian exiles are from Putin.


[edit on 1-6-2008 by infinite]

Thats because we think we can get rid of him in 7 months. When the next fake attack comes and they suspend elections, I would think you would see more activity in that regard.

reply to post by wytworm


With all due respect, conspiracy theorists have been saying for years "the next attack is coming" and it hasn't. The midterm elections were meant to been "cancelled" because of a terrorist attack according to some on ATS and, again, it never happened.

Elections will not be suspended.

Originally posted by wutone
I guess it was perfectly OK and an example of humanity and respect for the principles of peace when the USSR overran and controlled Eastern Europe with an iron fist?

But who had it before they overran it and what were that power broker doing to the USSR? Why did the rulers/dictators of so many of those countries support Nazi Germany and why didn't they , like the Yugoslavians' fight them as best they could? Why was it the responsibility of the USSR to trust those countries or their ruling classes not to do it again in the future? In fact wouldn't the dogged resistance of some sections of the the Yugoslav people, to foreign occupation, serve as qualification for why the USSR did not move to occupy them as well? Haven't the Afghans proved time and time again that they did not like foreign occupiers and doesn't that least partly explain why Iran and Afghanistan were left alone?

Originally posted by wutone
Yep those saintly Soviets sure worked for freedom in forcing the Eastern European countries to be communist governments.

So those countries were not run by dictators before Russia liberated them from de-facto , and sometimes outright, German occupation? Why didn't the US and allies demand that those countries be set free to do as they please? Why did the US and allies destroy the social movements in France, Greece, Italy and elsewhere that would seek to make them more independent and more responsive to the needs of the various peoples?

he peaceful and understanding Soviets showed their compassion as the sent tanks to quell protests.

Well the US national security state did invade, terrorize or bomb countries when they could not get there way and the fact that the USSR sometimes had to use tanks and soldiers ( like the US did in Korea, Vietnam and so forth) just means that they are conquerors and oppressors themselves. In my opinion they were just more justified in trying to gain a 'buffer zone' against Capitalist/imperial expansion; it's not that they were trying to take over the world but that Capitalism already did and desperately tried to protect it's holdings.

On top of that, the Soviets sure showed their care for human life as they starved millions of Ukrainians.

I'm not entirely convinced that it was a not just criminal mismanagement but given Stalin's proclivity for slaughtering those who opposed him it's hard to see why he couldn't or wouldn't have engineered the severity of that famine.

I love how you bash one screwed up government by ignoring another.

I don't 'love' anything about what i do here and i am sorry if you got the impression that i am unconditionally 'defending' the SU. That is certainly not my intent and i do try to qualify my views on why the USSR were entity behind the outrage that we commonly refer to as the 'cold' war.

Stellar

reply to post by manson_322


Damn fools. The US doesn't control the world yet because of people like us, who raise their voices, create political havoc etc... Russia is a country deeply uneducated, full of ignorants who think G strings increase Sexual Transmitted Diseases risks... Putin is placing its pawns in the objective of creating a climate of dissent in the heart of NATO. Using Russian gas and newly-made money he prepares for the invasion of Georgia, to secure oil resoruces and gain additional power in the Balkans and ...yes, support from the Iranians...And he calls the US a monster ? Luckily for us his Red Army is the shadow of what it once was...Think about that before using your free speech man...say something meaningful

Originally posted by Matt_Mulder
reply to post by manson_322

 

Damn fools. The US doesn't control the world yet because of people like us, who raise their voices, create political havoc etc... Russia is a country deeply uneducated, full of ignorants who think G strings increase Sexual Transmitted Diseases risks...
ok it's time for a guy from east europe to speak his mind, hearing this from an americans which are notorious for... aa lets just say not being very inteligent is a little odd.I'm totally agreeing with Putin his is right once again and the whole world is sharing his opinion.Saying that the eastern european countries wanting to join nata is not exactly true Bulgaria for instance joint nato because our corrupt government wanted so dispite the fact that 90% of bulgarians were against our membership and are prorussian orienteted and most of us hate america.If some estonian or latvian noobs are nato orientated that's their problem they can only lose from that kind of politic and surely will.People from South-east europe will stick to Russia nomatter what.I can't believe haw can the UN allow US to terrorise the indipendet sovereing countries across the worl and not doing nothing this madness has to stop .Take care for your own problems in US like healthcare,poverty,recession and after that "deliver democracy" and fight unexisting terrorism.

There is nothing wrong with having Ex Soviet Union states joining NATO.
I live in Chicago, but I was born in Romania. It used to be a communist nation. Now it is a Present day Democracy. Part of both EU and NATO. I'm glad to say that the country itself has improved since the beginning of the 21st Century.

Putin is just aggravated because Soviet Russia wished to join NATO! But was declined permission. Soviet Russia then decided to create the WARSAW pact.

en.wikipedia.org...

"In 1954, the Soviet Union suggested that it should join NATO to preserve peace in Europe.[9] The NATO countries, fearing that the Soviet Union's motive was to weaken the alliance, ultimately rejected this proposal."

Map of European Alliances around 1950s

upload.wikimedia.org... .png

Modern Day NATO

op-for.com...

Wonder whose not invited.

Heres probably the recent date they asked to join NATO.
query.nytimes.com...

They lost the Cold War, now they feel like NATO/EU is closing in on them.
I'm sure that Russia will be allowed in NATO, or EU in the near future.
But that depends on their actions. Due to Putin's remarks, it will only take longer. Thats MPOV!

[edit on 780America/Chicagof2008Sun, 01 Jun 2008 12:44:33 -0500America/Chicago 3012America/Chicago by Trams]