Frontline - Putin's Way
Options
Darth Sidious
Members Posts: 2,507 ✭✭✭✭✭
Wow, just wow.
I am a big fan of PBS's Frontline, some of the best journalism of our time. The recent special on Putin is incredible and a must watch IMO if you like\follow world news.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/putins-way/
I am a big fan of PBS's Frontline, some of the best journalism of our time. The recent special on Putin is incredible and a must watch IMO if you like\follow world news.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/putins-way/
Comments
-
how do you feel about the jewish oppression in Russia?????
-
how do you feel about the jewish oppression in Russia?????
Do you want to discuss the video or do you just want to stalk me over the internet like a lovesick-scorned ? ?
-
Darth Sidious wrote: »
Lol that was funny I have no issues with Putin Russia has always been some kind of a dictatorship. And the Jews such as yourself have always lived under pressure there.
Putin is just carrying on tradition. Every night I keep seeing infomercials begging for money to send poor Russian Jews to Israel. -
Darth Sidious wrote: »
LOL damn -
Putin can get away with a lot, an American reporter said recently Russia probably has better designed nukes and missiles then America. And amazingly his leadership is still tight around him, despite the sanctions
He's a strong leader, whether we dislike him or not, he has strong connections to organized crime and military leadership, who really wants to mess with someone like that -
there's a lot of reasons this is unlikely, but i'll just start with "there's a reason why Russia's there with China trying to steal that kind of technology from the US"kingblaze84 wrote: »Putin can get away with a lot, an American reporter said recently Russia probably has better designed nukes and missiles then America.
-
there's a lot of reasons this is unlikely, but i'll just start with "there's a reason why Russia's there with China trying to steal that kind of technology from the US"kingblaze84 wrote: »Putin can get away with a lot, an American reporter said recently Russia probably has better designed nukes and missiles then America.
Well this Forbes magazine article says Russia may have better nuke capabilities then America now....
http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2014/11/20/could-russias-new-nuclear-weapons-win-world-war-iii/
Russia has developed long-range cruise missiles of a new generation that will soon be deployed on submarines of the Black Sea Fleet and missile ships of the Caspian Flotilla.
The U.S. State Department admitted as much in a report published at the beginning of September, stating that Russia has passed us in nuclear weapons capability for the first time in 40 years.
-
Forbes is also apparently citing Pravda, so...kingblaze84 wrote: »Well this Forbes magazine article says Russia may have better nuke capabilities then America now....
-
Forbes is also apparently citing Pravda, so...kingblaze84 wrote: »Well this Forbes magazine article says Russia may have better nuke capabilities then America now....
The US State Dept admitted in Sept that Russia has better nuclear capabilities though and I read in a military magazine not long ago that Russia has plasma technology that can remain hidden from ANY system, including America's. And this was an American magazine, the article is online somewhere. It's why I don't think arming Ukranian rebels is a good idea, especially when Russia is so blatant in what they are doing.
Everything is all good, until it isn't (Pearl Harbor, 9/11, etc) -
Nuclear weapons are like two combatants pointing guns at each others head. Arguing that your gun will blow out more of your enemies brains than his gun will blow out of yours is of no military or strategic value.
-
look, anything's possible, but i would take any article that claims Russia has some next-level technology that's head and shoulders above the US with a HUGE grain of salt.kingblaze84 wrote: »and I read in a military magazine not long ago that Russia has plasma technology that can remain hidden from ANY system, including America's.
-
look, anything's possible, but i would take any article that claims Russia has some next-level technology that's head and shoulders above the US with a HUGE grain of salt.kingblaze84 wrote: »and I read in a military magazine not long ago that Russia has plasma technology that can remain hidden from ANY system, including America's.
I'm not completely sold on that either but I don't think Russia's military is as weak as some here have said in the past. Their military is pretty bold and cocky to be taking over an American ally's nation slowly like this. They've killed thousands of Ukrainian troops, despite the American pledge to protect Ukraine in the 80s. That must mean Russia's military is no joke. -
the thing to keep in mind is that the stuff we're touting here (nuclear missiles) is largely academic even if true, whereas what's citing regarding the weakness of their military (right or wrong) tends to be the more tangible stuff.kingblaze84 wrote: »I'm not completely sold on that either but I don't think Russia's military is as weak as some here have said in the past.
and weaker than the US, which is the current topic, is also very different than weaker than Country X.
well, it wasn't in the 1980s when the USSR broke up... but this is your reminder that RUSSIA also pledged not to do the stuff you just mentioned.kingblaze84 wrote: »They've killed thousands of Ukrainian troops, despite the American pledge to protect Ukraine in the 80s. That must mean Russia's military is no joke.
also, killing Ukrainians isn't the best indicator of the quality of the Russian military in many respects.
-
the thing to keep in mind is that the stuff we're touting here (nuclear missiles) is largely academic even if true, whereas what's citing regarding the weakness of their military (right or wrong) tends to be the more tangible stuff.kingblaze84 wrote: »I'm not completely sold on that either but I don't think Russia's military is as weak as some here have said in the past.
and weaker than the US, which is the current topic, is also very different than weaker than Country X.
well, it wasn't in the 1980s when the USSR broke up... but this is your reminder that RUSSIA also pledged not to do the stuff you just mentioned.kingblaze84 wrote: »They've killed thousands of Ukrainian troops, despite the American pledge to protect Ukraine in the 80s. That must mean Russia's military is no joke.
also, killing Ukrainians isn't the best indicator of the quality of the Russian military in many respects.
Yeah but Russia through the rebels are killing thousands of Ukrainian troops DESPITE the American pledge to protect Ukraine. And America has the toughest military in the world and Russia is still ignoring that to send rocket launchers and bullets all over Ukraine run towns and cities. So Russia's military has to be at a minimum, very bold and very strong. If it was a random third world nation doing stuff like this to an American ally, people in DC would be sending drones and air raids to the nation attacking as we speak. That's my main point. -
...and despite the RUSSIAN pledge to ensure Ukraine's integrity. somehow, it feels like the US is not the country that should be getting criticized about this.kingblaze84 wrote: »Yeah but Russia through the rebels are killing thousands of Ukrainian troops DESPITE the American pledge to protect Ukraine.
think this through: why does Russia ? around in Ukraine mean anything about the comparison of Russian military strength to American military strength?kingblaze84 wrote: »And America has the toughest military in the world and Russia is still ignoring that to send rocket launchers and bullets all over Ukraine run towns and cities. So Russia's military has to be at a minimum, very bold and very strong.
...which is still not a point about the strength of Russia's MILITARY, unless we're saying the issue here is "US concerned all the drones would be shot down."kingblaze84 wrote: »If it was a random third world nation doing stuff like this to an American ally, people in DC would be sending drones and air raids to the nation attacking as we speak. That's my main point.
perhaps it would help to think about this another way: remember how your above article compared current Russian nuclear strength to what it was in the 1970s? did you see the Russians fighting us then simply because people considered the military strength comparable?
-
...and despite the RUSSIAN pledge to ensure Ukraine's integrity. somehow, it feels like the US is not the country that should be getting criticized about this.kingblaze84 wrote: »Yeah but Russia through the rebels are killing thousands of Ukrainian troops DESPITE the American pledge to protect Ukraine.
think this through: why does Russia ? around in Ukraine mean anything about the comparison of Russian military strength to American military strength?kingblaze84 wrote: »And America has the toughest military in the world and Russia is still ignoring that to send rocket launchers and bullets all over Ukraine run towns and cities. So Russia's military has to be at a minimum, very bold and very strong.
...which is still not a point about the strength of Russia's MILITARY, unless we're saying the issue here is "US concerned all the drones would be shot down."kingblaze84 wrote: »If it was a random third world nation doing stuff like this to an American ally, people in DC would be sending drones and air raids to the nation attacking as we speak. That's my main point.
perhaps it would help to think about this another way: remember how your above article compared current Russian nuclear strength to what it was in the 1970s? did you see the Russians fighting us then simply because people considered the military strength comparable?
I'm lost in some ways with this post but I'll just say Russia's military strength is without a doubt a factor in why the US is acting the way it is in Ukraine. The sanctions are strong and that does mean the White House isn't afraid of Russia doing something but at the same time, we can't deny Russia's military might. The reports are out there, I'm sure the Pentagon knows more then we do and military magazines say the White House definitely respects the strength of Russia's armies. Democrats and Republicans usually like to jump into wars but against Russia, they wish to be more cautious. Of course, Russia's military could be weaker then we think, but history shows they have good fighters and great nuclear weapon capacity.
With that being said, I wonder if Obama will agree to send weapons to Ukraine next week, as some say he might. That would really escalate things there -
okay, let's try this again:kingblaze84 wrote: »I'm lost in some ways with this post but I'll just say Russia's military strength is without a doubt a factor in why the US is acting the way it is in Ukraine.
you threw up an article that compared US military strength to Russian military strength. whatever you think about that comparison, it doesn't really have anything to do with Ukraine, because how we're responding to that conflict doesn't have anything to do with how our military stacks up against Russia. we wouldn't be over there with tanks and planes IF ONLY our military was a little comparatively stronger.
Russia's military can be bold because they're not likely to suffer physical consequences from it in Ukraine... but that kind of applies to most any military. and they're DEFINITELY stronger than Ukraine's (for a lot of reasons).
and honestly, sending weapons to Ukraine is probably a mixed idea at best, but to be fair, at some point, you'd probably like to show Russia a little more resolve since they won't stop ? around over there. -
okay, let's try this again:kingblaze84 wrote: »I'm lost in some ways with this post but I'll just say Russia's military strength is without a doubt a factor in why the US is acting the way it is in Ukraine.
you threw up an article that compared US military strength to Russian military strength. whatever you think about that comparison, it doesn't really have anything to do with Ukraine, because how we're responding to that conflict doesn't have anything to do with how our military stacks up against Russia. we wouldn't be over there with tanks and planes IF ONLY our military was a little comparatively stronger.
Russia's military can be bold because they're not likely to suffer physical consequences from it in Ukraine... but that kind of applies to most any military. and they're DEFINITELY stronger than Ukraine's (for a lot of reasons).
and honestly, sending weapons to Ukraine is probably a mixed idea at best, but to be fair, at some point, you'd probably like to show Russia a little more resolve since they won't stop ? around over there.
Yeah Ukraine's military isn't that great but it has verbal backing from the world's most powerful military, and Ukraine still lost Crimea and other parts of its nation. To be fair though, I do believe Russia will back down a little if Ukraine does get American weapons but I don't think they will back down a whole lot. The parts of eastern Ukraine that Russia wants stronger connections with have lots of oil and over 500,000 people that grow a lot of food Russians need in their tough times. In fact, Germany and France failed to persuade Putin from taking over more of Ukraine today. Putin is in this for the long term, he knows America is too tied up fighting 3 wars in the Middle East to do much militarily and most of Europe doesn't want more sanctions
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-02-07/putin-rejects-attempts-to-contain-russia-after-peace-talks-fail?cmpid=yhoo
-
...and despite written promises from Russia to the contrary.kingblaze84 wrote: »Yeah Ukraine's military isn't that great but it has verbal backing from the world's most powerful military, and Ukraine still lost Crimea and other parts of its nation.
but look at the circumstance: this WASN'T Russia rolling into Ukraine saying "? it, bring it on, US," it's them playing games about the whole thing
the whole thing ultimately seems nonsensical because Crimea is a money hole and Russia, already having economic issues, should be past the point of wanting to pour MORE money into things seized from Ukraine. so i don't even know what the logical answer to all of this even is.kingblaze84 wrote: »In fact, Germany and France failed to persuade Putin from taking over more of Ukraine today. Putin is in this for the long term, he knows America is too tied up fighting 3 wars in the Middle East to do much militarily and most of Europe doesn't want more sanctions -
...and despite written promises from Russia to the contrary.kingblaze84 wrote: »Yeah Ukraine's military isn't that great but it has verbal backing from the world's most powerful military, and Ukraine still lost Crimea and other parts of its nation.
but look at the circumstance: this WASN'T Russia rolling into Ukraine saying "? it, bring it on, US," it's them playing games about the whole thing
the whole thing ultimately seems nonsensical because Crimea is a money hole and Russia, already having economic issues, should be past the point of wanting to pour MORE money into things seized from Ukraine. so i don't even know what the logical answer to all of this even is.kingblaze84 wrote: »In fact, Germany and France failed to persuade Putin from taking over more of Ukraine today. Putin is in this for the long term, he knows America is too tied up fighting 3 wars in the Middle East to do much militarily and most of Europe doesn't want more sanctions
I believed at one point Russia seizing Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine would ONLY be money hole for Russia but it turns out some experts believe Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine have oil reserves worth in the TRILLIONS. And more importantly then that, Russia can use eastern Ukrainian land and water space to build an oil and gas pipeline that BEFORE the annexation, was thought to be only possible through Turkey. Russia is taking a big gamble true, but if these oil reserves are found, the sanctions just might be worth it. It's why Russia seems so focused on grabbing more and more land from Ukraine (with lots of support from eastern Ukrainians who resent the bankrupt Ukraine govt who can't do ? for them)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation
.....western oil experts estimate that Russia's seizing of Crimea, and the associated control of an area of Black Sea more than three times its land area gives it access to oil and gas reserves potentially worth trillions of dollars. It also deprives Ukraine of its chances of energy independence. Most immediately however, analysts say, Moscow's acquisition may alter the route along which the South Stream pipeline would be built, saving Russia money, time and engineering challenges. It would also allow Russia to avoid building in Turkish territorial waters, which was necessary in the original route in order to avoid Ukrainian territory.[125][126]
-
well, experts believe a lot of things, so let's get something concrete before we call it a financial coup, okay? meanwhile they're having to fund a lot of Crimean (and other) stuff they probably don't love having to do with their economics right now.kingblaze84 wrote: »I believed at one point Russia seizing Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine would ONLY be money hole for Russia but it turns out some experts believe Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine have oil reserves worth in the TRILLIONS.
-
well, experts believe a lot of things, so let's get something concrete before we call it a financial coup, okay? meanwhile they're having to fund a lot of Crimean (and other) stuff they probably don't love having to do with their economics right now.kingblaze84 wrote: »I believed at one point Russia seizing Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine would ONLY be money hole for Russia but it turns out some experts believe Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine have oil reserves worth in the TRILLIONS.
A nation as large as Russia and as poor as it is in my opinion would not risk so much economic pressure and its enemy NATO coming closer to it without a serious chance of reward. Putin so far is being rewarded with high approval ratings and if anything a tighter grip on power, especially after the Chinese made that huge deal with them last year. Otherwise, I don't see why Putin would be doing this either (unless he really does want to be the protector of people from eastern Ukraine......)
-
If the U.S. Arms Ukraine, Russia Vows Retaliation
Despite President Obama’s claim on Monday that he has not yet made a decision about supplying defensive weapons to the Ukrainian army, which is battling Russia-backed separatists who want an independent region within that country, the Russian media is full of predictions. They’re warning of the terrible impact further U.S. involvement in the conflict might have.
Quoting a member of the Russian Defense Ministry's public advisory board who requested anonymity, The Moscow Times reported Monday that if the U.S. supplied arms to Ukraine, it would be viewed as an act of war.
That action would not only increase the tension in the region, it would also force the Kremlin to “respond asymmetrically against Washington or its allies on other fronts,” the publication reported.
--With that being said, Obama shouldn't give weapons to Ukraine, the war against ISIS is gonna be long enough and fighting ISIS and Russia at the same damn time is a horrible idea. But I have a feeling Congress and Obama will give Ukraine the weapons anyway. -
RUSSIA is a washed up and dying society with population decline, a failing currency and a corrupt government i predict that when putin dies the system he built will collapse and russia will fall into disarray with certain parts of the asian section of the country being absorbed by china or attempting to be independent. Some russian cities are already mostly ethnically chinese right now. The only thing that gives russia any leverage in the world is it's military and oil. The price of oil is set on the world market, so while it's an economic asset it can also be a weakness especially since america is set to become a major energy producer and on top of that sustainable energy is improving every couple of years.
outright naked aggression will only work on weak nations like ukraine, THE taking of Crimea was a good and necessary move but now they are pushing ? too far, risking a conflict they cannot hope to win. Even if they take all of ukraine they are going to lose in the long run. The best thing russia could do is diversify it's economy and BECOME more democratic if not at least more transparent. -
that's the reward right there, though.kingblaze84 wrote: »A nation as large as Russia and as poor as it is in my opinion would not risk so much economic pressure and its enemy NATO coming closer to it without a serious chance of reward. Putin so far is being rewarded with high approval ratings and if anything a tighter grip on power-
