Gyroscopic Investing

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opini ... ml?hp&_r=0

Aside from his patently specious claim that it was the rebels who used the gas, I find much of his op-ed thought provoking. When Russia looks like the sane and responsible world power one can be forgiven for wondering if someone spiked their after work beer.

Vladimir is clearly thinking like a sane, intelligent adult.

One point I find particularly interesting is his reference to when the US/Russia were allies against the Nazis. Other than pointing out that obvious fact...is he hinting that the US and Russia should be natural allies in combating the current major totalitarian ideology, namely jihadistic Islam?

"Aside from his patently specious claim that it was the rebels who used the gas..."


What evidence do you have that his claim is specious?

I find Buchanan very compelling in this regard:

"The basic question that needs to be asked about this horrific attack on civilians, which appears to be gas related, is: Cui bono?

To whose benefit would the use of nerve gas on Syrian women and children redound? Certainly not Assad’s, as we can see from the furor and threats against him that the use of gas has produced.

The sole beneficiary of this apparent use of poison gas against civilians in rebel-held territory appears to be the rebels, who have long sought to have us come in and fight their war."

http://buchanan.org/blog/congress-veto-obamas-war-5773

Vladimir knows his history while the US politicians try to forget theirs as soon as possible. Compared to Russia's and China's foreign policies the US acts like a wild animal.

Putin is playing Obama like a banjo.

Syria is to U.S. foreign policy as health care reform is to U.S. domestic policy.

The headline on Drudge about this Op-Ed was "Obama mocks U.S.A". I read it and I didn't see any tone of mocking at all. I figure Drudge must have been talking about the last sentence in which he takes exception to Obama's apparent reference to "American Exceptional-ism" in his Tuesday night speech (which I didn't listen to). Putin stated that it was not a good thing for a country to see itself as "exceptional" and I don't see anything unreasonable about that. I've always figured that most foreigners probably bristle when they hear Americans say that.

MediumTex wrote: Putin is playing Obama like a banjo.

I'd have fewer problems with his assertions were Putin less of a hypocritical sack of crap. Anyone remember the Russian invasion of Georgia?  What a douche.

But still, he has really been giving it to Obama on this one. I'm torn between my hatred of both men on how that makes me feel. Since I don't want us to bomb Syria, I'll go with satisfaction.

RuralEngineer wrote: I'd have fewer problems with his assertions were Putin less of a hypocritical sack of crap. Anyone remember the Russian invasion of Georgia?  What a douche.

But still, he has really been giving it to Obama on this one. I'm torn between my hatred of both men on how that makes me feel. Since I don't want us to bomb Syria, I'll go with satisfaction.

LOL. Anyone who thinks Putin's motivations are not guided by Russian national interests is delusional. But in this particular case, Russian national interests happen to more closely correspond with the rule of international law and humanitarian considerations than our government's motivations. That works for me.

Ad Orientem wrote:

RuralEngineer wrote: I'd have fewer problems with his assertions were Putin less of a hypocritical sack of crap. Anyone remember the Russian invasion of Georgia?  What a douche.

But still, he has really been giving it to Obama on this one. I'm torn between my hatred of both men on how that makes me feel. Since I don't want us to bomb Syria, I'll go with satisfaction.

LOL. Anyone who thinks Putin's motivations are not guided by Russian national interests is delusional. But in this particular case, Russian national interests happen to more closely correspond with the rule of international law and humanitarian considerations than our government's motivations. That works for me.

Yeah.

Anyone remember when Putin ordered the 2002 gas attack against the hostage takers in the Moscow theatre that resulted in the deaths of 40 hostage takers and 125 hostages?

Putin is clearly not overly troubled by the domestic use of chemical weapons.

As I recall, Putin is also not above using various types of poison to take out political rivals as well.

And when it comes to brutality in dealing with rebels, the Chechen war was surely as brutal as the Syrian civil war has been.  I don't recall the Syrian government destroying any cities as completely as Russia destroyed Grozny.



Why is no one in the media making this point about the apparent hypocrisy of Putin's position?

MediumTex wrote:

Ad Orientem wrote:

RuralEngineer wrote: I'd have fewer problems with his assertions were Putin less of a hypocritical sack of crap. Anyone remember the Russian invasion of Georgia?  What a douche.

But still, he has really been giving it to Obama on this one. I'm torn between my hatred of both men on how that makes me feel. Since I don't want us to bomb Syria, I'll go with satisfaction.

LOL. Anyone who thinks Putin's motivations are not guided by Russian national interests is delusional. But in this particular case, Russian national interests happen to more closely correspond with the rule of international law and humanitarian considerations than our government's motivations. That works for me.

Yeah.

Anyone remember when Putin ordered the 2002 gas attack against the hostage takers in the Moscow theatre that resulted in the deaths of 40 hostage takers and 125 hostages?

Putin is clearly not overly troubled by the domestic use of chemical weapons.

As I recall, Putin is also not above using various types of poison to take out political rivals as well.

And when it comes to brutality in dealing with rebels, the Chechen war was surely as brutal as the Syrian civil war has been.  I don't recall the Syrian government destroying any cities as completely as Russia destroyed Grozny.



Why is no one in the media making this point about the apparent hypocrisy of Putin's position?

Actually I've seen quite a few people making those and related points. Russia is not an enlightened democratic state as evidenced by its cleptocratic government and abusive policies towards political dissent and gay people. But in this case they are mostly right.

Ad Orientem wrote: Actually I've seen quite a few people making those and related points. Russia is not an enlightened democratic state as evidenced by its cleptocratic government and abusive policies towards political dissent and gay people. But in this case they are mostly right.

Maybe Putin and Obama are just the geopolitical equivalent of "Dumb and Dumber."

Just a couple of goofy delusional narcissists with a taste for violence and self-righteousness battling for an imaginary moral high ground.





***

Here are a couple from the blooper reel:

Ad Orientem wrote:
Actually I've seen quite a few people making those and related points. Russia is not an enlightened democratic state as evidenced by its cleptocratic government and abusive policies towards political dissent and gay people. But in this case they are mostly right.

Regards homosexual activists, I guess your statement implies the definition of "enlightened democratic state" requires celebration of sexually libertine behavior and propaganda.

From what I've read, my interpretation is that Putin is trying to protect the health and morality of the Russian people in restricting homosexual activism. I fully concede that the values he is promoting seem explicitly Christian and not the secularist agenda reigning in the West.

murphy_p_t wrote: Regards homosexual activists, I guess your statement implies the definition of "enlightened democratic state" requires celebration of sexually libertine behavior and propaganda.

From what I've read, my interpretation is that Putin is trying to protect the health and morality of the Russian people in restricting homosexual activism. I fully concede that the values he is promoting seem explicitly Christian and not the secularist agenda reigning in the West.

Whoa, this thread is going to go in all kinds of interesting places now.

***WARNING*** ***WARNING***
Thread hijack in progress...

murphy_p_t wrote:

Ad Orientem wrote:
Actually I've seen quite a few people making those and related points. Russia is not an enlightened democratic state as evidenced by its cleptocratic government and abusive policies towards political dissent and gay people. But in this case they are mostly right.

Regards homosexual activists, I guess your statement implies the definition of "enlightened democratic state" requires celebration of sexually libertine behavior and propaganda.

From what I've read, my interpretation is that Putin is trying to protect the health and morality of the Russian people in restricting homosexual activism. I fully concede that the values he is promoting seem explicitly Christian and not the secularist agenda reigning in the West.

I think there is a difference between saying you won't allow gay marriage and jailing people for mentioning homosexuality in anything other than a critical context, or even mentioning it at all in print or online if it's possible a minor could read the word. And then we have the fact that various people and groups seem to have interpreted the law as giving a green light to violent attacks against homosexuals. Sadly the available evidence suggests that this may not be an unreasonable assumption as there are many reports of public beatings being inflicted while bystanders and police either stood by in amusement, or joined in.

For the record, I am no fan of the gay fascists that have made it an offense against society, and in some cases the law, here in the US to resist or criticize the lavender mafia's agenda. As an Orthodox Christian I have very definite views on the subject of homosexuality. But I don't see that I have any right to legislate my religious beliefs on other people's lives. In turn though, I expect others to not try and ram their lifestyle down my throat (no double entendre intended).

murphy_p_t wrote:
From what I've read, my interpretation is that Putin is trying to protect the health and morality of the Russian people in restricting homosexual activism. I fully concede that the values he is promoting seem explicitly Christian and not the secularist agenda reigning in the West.

Wait wait....Putin is a defender of religious morality and beacon of virtue?  Ha ha ha...

Thanks, I needed a good laugh. Found out I get a week TLO this month. Mining industry needs to get their shit together.

Ad Orientem wrote: As an Orthodox Christian I have very definite views on the subject of homosexuality. But I don't see that I have any right to legislate my religious beliefs on other people's lives. In turn though, I expect others to not try and ram their lifestyle down my throat (no double entendre intended).

If only more were like you!

Do as we say or we'll bomb your ass.
Anywhere.
That exceptionalism ?

I'm enjoying Putin's jabs !

Putin has a lot of blood on his hands.

This is one sociopath writing a letter to stick it in the eye of another sociopath. Just because it sounds very reasonable no one should pretend this is a reasonable guy.

He's a ganster, and running a scam. It just so happens his scam sheds light on another gangster's scam.

It's funny because I enjoy seeing Obamanation exposed but it's too bad it isn't coming from someone credible.

Personally, I feel very grateful to Putin. First he makes Snowden promise to stop releasing secrets about the NSA and now he bails us out of an unnecessary war in Syria. Thank you, Vlad!

Reub wrote: Personally, I feel very grateful to Putin. First he makes Snowden promise to stop releasing secrets about the NSA and now he bails us out of an unnecessary war in Syria. Thank you, Vlad!

I think that Putin keeping Snowden out of a U.S. Supermax facility for the rest of his life was a kind and generous thing to do (even if he did it for less than humanitarian reasons).

He's a kind and reasonable murderer.

MediumTex wrote:

Reub wrote: Personally, I feel very grateful to Putin. First he makes Snowden promise to stop releasing secrets about the NSA and now he bails us out of an unnecessary war in Syria. Thank you, Vlad!

I think that Putin keeping Snowden out of a U.S. Supermax facility for the rest of his life was a kind and generous thing to do (even if he did it for less than humanitarian reasons).

Think of how much that Supermax prison would have cost American taxpayers!

Kshartle wrote: He's a kind and reasonable murderer.

I'm sure that Snowden would say it didn't matter to him at all that Putin was mostly a narcissistic thug. 

I have written about Putin's thug-ness more or less constantly for a long time.  In the case of Snowden, though, I was just glad that he found a seemingly safe place to land.