It's a pointless act.
It's a pointless act.
So Conservatives think the answer to everything is conflict and Liberals think the answer to everything is a hug? Let me guess...the part about the Liberals offend you slightly. Perhaps Conservatives and Liberals believe in the same things only they choose to show their support for the same things depending on who sits in the White House.
And international diplomacy? Just a way of saying that you are willing to deface your values for the easier path. How many dictators received our support during the Cold War thanks to good old fashion "diplomacy?" How many people on this earth suffer while the powerful sit back on their high horses and pulpits discussing matters of diplomacy? I loathe the word when used as a means to turn away or to appease tyrants and twisted regimes that strong arm those around them simply to continue a pretended status of power.
Apparently Democrats are the one who're stuck in the Cold War (according to the poster on the first page) but the last two pages are filled with Republicans crying about a past President and the Cold War.
Also, we can't attack Russia anyway. Are you guys insane? At the very least, assuming we could actually win in Russia while we're engaged in two wars and broke financially (and that's a big assumption), they'll bomb the hell out of us. Yay, let's let our American civilians die because Republicans have an inferiority complex.
I think it is beyond historical left-right partisanship, I hope you noticed that I noticed that even Clinton was acting as a POTUS even when impeached. A Left may be a Left because he is misinformed or uninformed. Some good friends of mine are liberals and good people at the same time. I hope you noticed my critics of Bushís approach to Russia and stimulus. But no decent person in the position of the SOTUS would go to a foreign PM and initiate a conversation about (how bad was) his predecessor (also while being even worse). This is about the baboon giggling at Ďtraditionalí Putinís jokes, and taking the place of the POTUS.
a sample of the 'traditional" jokes:
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSOOCos6Es4&feature=related"]YouTube - Putin disses Bush[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IqmZkrm0jVw&feature=related"]YouTube - Putin at Larry King' show[/ame]
ÖÖÖ ÖÖ. she sankÖÖ.. or in other words Ė what a stupid question (at this time and this place)
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMifzZehatE&feature=related"]YouTube - Incident at the Putin's Press conference[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q55SxoaiJjw&feature=related"]YouTube - Putin placed Hillary where she belongs (St Valentine's Day)[/ame]
The French press leaked out that Putin wanted Georgian President Saakashvili to be hanged by the balls but Sarkozy was so great that he talked Putin out of this action (goingto the capital of Georgia and taking the criminal down as Bush took Sadam)
In Russia Putin answers direct calls, so you can call him from the US and ask any questions.
So the caller asks Ė is it true that you wished to hung Saakashvili by A certain part of the body (avoiding saying by ballS)? Putin answers question with a question, -Ď Why by A part? Ď (meaning that Saakashvili has 2 balls.) [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jP1ZzcSjlDA"]YouTube - Putin about Saakashvili's balls[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3INgrK_xxm4&feature=related"]YouTube - –ě—ā–≤–Ķ—ā –ü—É—ā–ł–Ĺ–į —Ą—Ä–į–Ĺ—Ü—É–∑—Ā–ļ–ĺ–ľ—É –∂—É—Ä–Ĺ–į–Ľ–ł—Ā—ā—É –Ĺ–į —Ā–į–ľ–ľ–ł—ā–Ķ[/ame]
And I donít see how he makes Russians nervous. Putin has no nerves. As all Russians he is quite sentimental, but in a fight he has no nerves. This is the proof of the both qualities. [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IdXwu2MXR_s"]YouTube - Putin Judo[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jx3m5nFpRcQ&feature=related"]YouTube - Vladimir Putin Kisses Young Boy On The Stomach[/ame]
And here he and his coach list all qualities absent in the baboon.
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7yjCaCQPO8"]YouTube - Putin & Co to teach you judo[/ame]
Putin Warns US About Socialism
ĎíIn the 20th century, the Soviet Union made the state's role absolute. In the long run, this made the Soviet economy totally uncompetitive. This lesson cost us dearly. I am sure nobody wants to see it repeated.
Nor should we turn a blind eye to the fact that the spirit of free enterprise, including the principle of personal responsibility of businesspeople, investors and shareholders for their decisions, is being eroded in the last few months. There is no reason to believe that we can achieve better results by shifting responsibility onto the state.
And one more point: anti-crisis measures should not escalate into financial populism and a refusal to implement responsible macroeconomic policies. The unjustified swelling of the budgetary deficit and the accumulation of public debts are just as destructive as adventurous stock-jobbing.íí
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZK6Dk_DUs_4&feature=channel"]YouTube - "US should listen to Putin"[/ame]
[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMR1BZ9aYM8"]YouTube - Putin answers questions at Davos[/ame]
Should I comment? Or you can do it for me?
Last edited by justone; 07-09-09 at 08:13 AM.
"He who does not think himself worth saving from poverty and ignorance by his own efforts, will hardly be thought worth the efforts of anybody else." -- Frederick Douglass, Self-Made Men (1872)
Little children trust their mothers. We know that. You are not a child, and I am not your mother. I am not asking you trust me, and the less I need your trust when you are not sure. We want to build our relation like a business partnership. And we have to look at all the details to make the business mutually profitable. If any detail is unclear to you you have to address it openly amd directly, and to expect the same from other side.
This is difference between the 2 politicians. Obama wants you to trust him not going into any details. Putin does not want you to trust him, but to trust yourself. It seems like many in the US have a big problem with trusting themselves. And you express it.
Did I ever say in my posts ďtrust meí? No. I always said look at the details and make an attempt to trust to yourself. Not to me, not to what you know from somebody else, but to yourself.
You are wrong Ė God is in details, evil avoids details.
Last edited by justone; 07-09-09 at 11:11 PM.
This is the first time (I think) that Obama has met Medvedev or Putin since he became president. He didn't go to Russia with the intent to solve every single point of contention we have with them. The State Department usually lays the groundwork for major policy agreements behind the scenes, and the President just shows up to sign it. The purpose of this meeting was mostly for Obama to meet with the Russian leaders and to pledge a new beginning in our relations.
A reduction in nuclear arms is a great place to start the long task of mending Russo-American relations. Neither country is really giving anything up. But most importantly, it flatters the Russians, because they will believe that their country has just helped make the world a safer place. More than anything, most Russian people just want to be taken seriously by the United States. I think a lot of the hostility in recent years stems from the feeling among Russians that they were NOT taken seriously when they were weak during the 1990s. That's not to say that we won't have any conflicts with them if only we take them seriously...but the mutual hostility between the countries would be greatly reduced and it would make cooperation on areas of mutual interest much easier. This seems like a good place to start. It's a nice gesture on the United States' part, but doesn't actually give away much.
As for the Afghan transit line, that's great. It's in both of our countries' interests to fight Islamic extremism in Afpak, and this is a perfect example where resentment of the United States had previously prevented Russia from cooperating even when they could benefit as well. It's not going to change the course of the war by itself, but it is helpful. To those who are attaching sinister motives to this, I think you're being paranoid. Remember that just because we're opening a Russian supply line doesn't mean that we have to close our other supply lines and become dependent on this.
Both Obama and Medvedev wanted to walk away with this meeting with some sort of token agreement so that they could present it as a victory to their citizens. Obama got the Afghan supply line agreement, and Medvedev got the missile reduction agreement. Seems fair to me.
Last edited by Kandahar; 07-09-09 at 11:36 PM.
Are you coming to bed?
I can't. This is important.
Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD