McCain Was Right About Putin

[Kevin]

By Jack Kelly

It was March of 1939, and British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain was shocked that a man he trusted had gone back on his word.

Chamberlain, German dictator Adolf Hitler and French Prime Minister Edouard Daladier had met in Munich the previous September. There the British and French leaders assented to the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia in exchange for Hitler's promise his territorial ambitions would be satisfied with the acquisition of the Sudetenland.

Chamberlain had told his Cabinet Hitler "would not deliberately deceive a man whom he respected and with whom he had been in negotiation." But now Hitler had marched his troops into the rest of Czechoslovakia.

Chamberlain was as mistaken about Hitler's opinion of him as he was of Hitler's geopolitical intentions. "Our enemies are little worms," the German dictator told his aides. "I saw them at Munich."

Turning points in history usually are hard to detect when they are occurring. Most Americans were too absorbed with the Olympics and the John Edwards sex scandal to pay much attention to the Russian invasion of Georgia over the weekend.

"Historians will come to view August 8, 2008 as a turning point no less significant than Nov. 9, 1989, when the Berlin Wall fell," wrote the military historian Robert Kagan in the Washington Post Monday.

Russia (pop 140.7 million) has immediate, intermediate and long term goals for invading its democratic neighbor (pop 4.6 million), all invidious to our interests.

The immediate goal is to prop up high oil prices, without which Russia's faltering economy might implode. A major oil pipeline (featured in a 1999 James Bond film) runs from the oilfields around the Caspian sea through Georgia to the Turkish port of Ceyhan. A major interruption of supplies (about one percent of the world's oil flows through the BTC pipeline) could reverse the recent decline in oil prices. Russia tried to bomb the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, and an adjacent natural gas pipeline, but missed.

The intermediate goal is to force from office Georgia's democratically elected, pro-Western president, Mikheil Saakashvili, and replace him with a Soviet stooge. This would put the kibosh on the efforts of Georgia and other former Soviet republics to join NATO.

The long term goal of Russian strong man Vladimir Putin, who described the collapse of the Soviet Union as "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the (20th) century," is to force Georgia and the other former Soviet satellites back into the Russian orbit, and thus to give Russia powerful leverage over the economies of Western Europe. The BTC oil pipeline and the BTE natural gas pipeline are the only pipelines to Western Europe not under Russian control.

Whether Mr. Putin achieves these goals depends, in large part, on the extent to which Western leaders imitate Chamberlain and Daladier.

History never repeats itself exactly, but there are frequent echoes, because greed, stupidity, and cowardice are universal human traits, and our capacity for self delusion seems infinite.

Mr. Putin is using the same excuse for invading Georgia (protecting Russian ethnic minorities) that Hitler used for invading Czechoslovakia and Poland (protecting German minorities). French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who has flown to Moscow to head peace negotiations, seems as eager to accept that excuse as Daladier was in 1938.

When Russian tanks rolled into Georgia, President Bush remained in Beijing, swatting the fannies of U.S. Olympic volleyball players, perhaps because, like Neville Chamberlain, he trusted too much in the word of a dictator.

When he met Vladimir Putin in 2001, President Bush said: "I looked the man in the eye. I was able to get a sense of his soul." But in his press statement Monday, Mr. Bush said Moscow's attacks are "inconsistent with assurances we have received from Russia that its objectives were limited to restoring the status quo in South Ossetia that existed before the fighting began on August the 6th."

"Mr. President, did you hold off speaking out and acting because of these assurances?" asked Gordon Chang on Commentary magazine's blog. "Your reliance on Russian promises would explain your inadequate response to a clear act of aggression."

When John McCain looked into Vladimir Putin's eyes, he saw "a K, a G, and a B." He is our Winston Churchill. We will need him soon.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/08/mccain_is_our_churchill.html

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Beet]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[Jacobtm]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

To say we had a high moral ground is rewriting history. We may have been better, but both the USSR and USA were devils in the cold war. We won because we were in every way the more powerful country.

[Beet]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

To say we had a high moral ground is rewriting history. We may have been better, but both the USSR and USA were devils in the cold war. We won because we were in every way the more powerful country.

We had it over the Russians in the '80s. We are in every way more powerful than Cuba; Libya; and North Korea, but those regimes are still around. No, there was something in the basic culture of the European people at that time that prevented men like Honecker and Ceaucescu and the 1991 coup leaders from achieving their ends. There was a real appeal of freedom, capitalism, and democracy, and Western values among the masses; and to a great extent there still is. But the reason why the Putin-Medvedev regime has had so much success in Russia is that those Western values have lost a great deal of its glitter; both because of what happened in Russia in the last two decades and what has happened to the West in the last decade.

[dead0man]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

To say we had a high moral ground is rewriting history. We may have been better, but both the USSR and USA were devils in the cold war. We won because we were in every way the more powerful country.

errrr.  How did we not have the moral high ground during the Cold War?  Do you have any idea how many people the Commies killed?  Neither do we because they killed so farking many and did so as secretly as possible.  How many people did we shoot in the back trying to flee the west?  What was our version of the Iron Curtain called?  Somebody is rewriting history here and it's you.  Yeah I know we did some things that were wrong, but if you can't see the moral difference between the West and Soviets during the Cold War then you're blind and probably support the Palestinians.

And did you ever wonder WHY we were more powerfull?  That wasn't an accident of nature.  Free markets are better than state controlled markets.  That's why we were more powerfull, we had the free market on our side.  It's amazing how little people know about the Cold War and how/why it ended.

[12th Doctor]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

To say we had a high moral ground is rewriting history. We may have been better, but both the USSR and USA were devils in the cold war. We won because we were in every way the more powerful country.

We had it over the Russians in the '80s. We are in every way more powerful than Cuba; Libya; and North Korea, but those regimes are still around. No, there was something in the basic culture of the European people at that time that prevented men like Honecker and Ceaucescu and the 1991 coup leaders from achieving their ends. There was a real appeal of freedom, capitalism, and democracy, and Western values among the masses; and to a great extent there still is. But the reason why the Putin-Medvedev regime has had so much success in Russia is that those Western values have lost a great deal of its glitter; both because of what happened in Russia in the last two decades and what has happened to the West in the last decade.

No, I would say that its what has happened in Russia, mainly.  Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and the Baltic states have had no trouble moving ahead.  The countries that have had a rough time were the ones directly affected by Russian corruption, like Ukraine, Belarus, the Central Asian states and, of course, Russia herself.

[12th Doctor]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

To say we had a high moral ground is rewriting history. We may have been better, but both the USSR and USA were devils in the cold war. We won because we were in every way the more powerful country.

errrr.  How did we not have the moral high ground during the Cold War?  Do you have any idea how many people the Commies killed?  Neither do we because they killed so farking many and did so as secretly as possible.  How many people did we shoot in the back trying to flee the west?  What was our version of the Iron Curtain called?  Somebody is rewriting history here and it's you.  Yeah I know we did some things that were wrong, but if you can't see the moral difference between the West and Soviets during the Cold War then you're blind and probably support the Palestinians.

And did you ever wonder WHY we were more powerfull?  That wasn't an accident of nature.  Free markets are better than state controlled markets.  That's why we were more powerfull, we had the free market on our side.  It's amazing how little people know about the Cold War and how/why it ended.

Indeed, some of the thing the West did weren't pretty, but the absolutely pale in comparison to the destruction the communists reaped on the world.  We are talking in the millions.  And the over-all might of the Soviet military was better than the United States, even if ours was more efficient.  Not to mention that the Soviet nuclear arsenal was, by 1987, over twice as large as that of the US.

[Kevin]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I think another Cold War is likely ether way, regardless of who is elected in November.

[Jacobtm]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

To say we had a high moral ground is rewriting history. We may have been better, but both the USSR and USA were devils in the cold war. We won because we were in every way the more powerful country.

We had it over the Russians in the '80s. We are in every way more powerful than Cuba; Libya; and North Korea, but those regimes are still around. No, there was something in the basic culture of the European people at that time that prevented men like Honecker and Ceaucescu and the 1991 coup leaders from achieving their ends. There was a real appeal of freedom, capitalism, and democracy, and Western values among the masses; and to a great extent there still is. But the reason why the Putin-Medvedev regime has had so much success in Russia is that those Western values have lost a great deal of its glitter; both because of what happened in Russia in the last two decades and what has happened to the West in the last decade.

To say we had the better advertising campaign is yet another thing.

[Beet]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

To say we had a high moral ground is rewriting history. We may have been better, but both the USSR and USA were devils in the cold war. We won because we were in every way the more powerful country.

We had it over the Russians in the '80s. We are in every way more powerful than Cuba; Libya; and North Korea, but those regimes are still around. No, there was something in the basic culture of the European people at that time that prevented men like Honecker and Ceaucescu and the 1991 coup leaders from achieving their ends. There was a real appeal of freedom, capitalism, and democracy, and Western values among the masses; and to a great extent there still is. But the reason why the Putin-Medvedev regime has had so much success in Russia is that those Western values have lost a great deal of its glitter; both because of what happened in Russia in the last two decades and what has happened to the West in the last decade.

No, I would say that its what has happened in Russia, mainly.  Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and the Baltic states have had no trouble moving ahead.  The countries that have had a rough time were the ones directly affected by Russian corruption, like Ukraine, Belarus, the Central Asian states and, of course, Russia herself.

Russia was more affected because Russia was poorer and more distant from the center of Europe, and suffered worse politically and economically. 2000 was the turning point for Russia and 2001 showed what the US response would be; withdrawing from the ABM treaty unilaterally, while turning an essentially blind eye to human rights abuses. The message to Putin was that treaties don't pay, but nationalism does.

[Beet]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

To say we had a high moral ground is rewriting history. We may have been better, but both the USSR and USA were devils in the cold war. We won because we were in every way the more powerful country.

We had it over the Russians in the '80s. We are in every way more powerful than Cuba; Libya; and North Korea, but those regimes are still around. No, there was something in the basic culture of the European people at that time that prevented men like Honecker and Ceaucescu and the 1991 coup leaders from achieving their ends. There was a real appeal of freedom, capitalism, and democracy, and Western values among the masses; and to a great extent there still is. But the reason why the Putin-Medvedev regime has had so much success in Russia is that those Western values have lost a great deal of its glitter; both because of what happened in Russia in the last two decades and what has happened to the West in the last decade.

To say we had the better advertising campaign is yet another thing.

What other thing? It was the thing.

[Beet]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I think another Cold War is likely ether way, regardless of who is elected in November.

The question is, how does something like that get resolved? There is only one example of resolving a Cold war with a nuclear power successfully, and that is why I bring up what the decisive factors there were.

[12th Doctor]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

To say we had a high moral ground is rewriting history. We may have been better, but both the USSR and USA were devils in the cold war. We won because we were in every way the more powerful country.

We had it over the Russians in the '80s. We are in every way more powerful than Cuba; Libya; and North Korea, but those regimes are still around. No, there was something in the basic culture of the European people at that time that prevented men like Honecker and Ceaucescu and the 1991 coup leaders from achieving their ends. There was a real appeal of freedom, capitalism, and democracy, and Western values among the masses; and to a great extent there still is. But the reason why the Putin-Medvedev regime has had so much success in Russia is that those Western values have lost a great deal of its glitter; both because of what happened in Russia in the last two decades and what has happened to the West in the last decade.

No, I would say that its what has happened in Russia, mainly.  Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and the Baltic states have had no trouble moving ahead.  The countries that have had a rough time were the ones directly affected by Russian corruption, like Ukraine, Belarus, the Central Asian states and, of course, Russia herself.

Russia was more affected because Russia was poorer and more distant from the center of Europe, and suffered worse politically and economically. 2000 was the turning point for Russia and 2001 showed what the US response would be; withdrawing from the ABM treaty unilaterally, while turning an essentially blind eye to human rights abuses. The message to Putin was that treaties don't pay, but nationalism does.

Of course, because Putin was an angel before the US did such things.  And man, we were mean to him...

"I looked into his eyes and saw his soul"

[Keystone Phil]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's nice. I think the topic was about McCain though. Keep grasping, strawman.

[Beet]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

To say we had a high moral ground is rewriting history. We may have been better, but both the USSR and USA were devils in the cold war. We won because we were in every way the more powerful country.

We had it over the Russians in the '80s. We are in every way more powerful than Cuba; Libya; and North Korea, but those regimes are still around. No, there was something in the basic culture of the European people at that time that prevented men like Honecker and Ceaucescu and the 1991 coup leaders from achieving their ends. There was a real appeal of freedom, capitalism, and democracy, and Western values among the masses; and to a great extent there still is. But the reason why the Putin-Medvedev regime has had so much success in Russia is that those Western values have lost a great deal of its glitter; both because of what happened in Russia in the last two decades and what has happened to the West in the last decade.

No, I would say that its what has happened in Russia, mainly.  Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and the Baltic states have had no trouble moving ahead.  The countries that have had a rough time were the ones directly affected by Russian corruption, like Ukraine, Belarus, the Central Asian states and, of course, Russia herself.

Russia was more affected because Russia was poorer and more distant from the center of Europe, and suffered worse politically and economically. 2000 was the turning point for Russia and 2001 showed what the US response would be; withdrawing from the ABM treaty unilaterally, while turning an essentially blind eye to human rights abuses. The message to Putin was that treaties don't pay, but nationalism does.

Of course, because Putin was an angel before the US did such things.  And man, we were mean to him...

"I looked into his eyes and saw his soul"

You're oversimplifying things. The US has limited influence over such things, but where we do have influence we can either use it wisely or unwisely...

[12th Doctor]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

To say we had a high moral ground is rewriting history. We may have been better, but both the USSR and USA were devils in the cold war. We won because we were in every way the more powerful country.

We had it over the Russians in the '80s. We are in every way more powerful than Cuba; Libya; and North Korea, but those regimes are still around. No, there was something in the basic culture of the European people at that time that prevented men like Honecker and Ceaucescu and the 1991 coup leaders from achieving their ends. There was a real appeal of freedom, capitalism, and democracy, and Western values among the masses; and to a great extent there still is. But the reason why the Putin-Medvedev regime has had so much success in Russia is that those Western values have lost a great deal of its glitter; both because of what happened in Russia in the last two decades and what has happened to the West in the last decade.

No, I would say that its what has happened in Russia, mainly.  Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and the Baltic states have had no trouble moving ahead.  The countries that have had a rough time were the ones directly affected by Russian corruption, like Ukraine, Belarus, the Central Asian states and, of course, Russia herself.

Russia was more affected because Russia was poorer and more distant from the center of Europe, and suffered worse politically and economically. 2000 was the turning point for Russia and 2001 showed what the US response would be; withdrawing from the ABM treaty unilaterally, while turning an essentially blind eye to human rights abuses. The message to Putin was that treaties don't pay, but nationalism does.

Of course, because Putin was an angel before the US did such things.  And man, we were mean to him...

"I looked into his eyes and saw his soul"

You're oversimplifying things. The US has limited influence over such things, but where we do have influence we can either use it wisely or unwisely...

It wasn't our job to pull Russia out of the gutter.

[12th Doctor]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's nice. I think the topic was about McCain though. Keep grasping, strawman.

Phil, their big chance in this election is to convince people the McCain is Bush.  If they do that then they don't worry about the inadequacies of their own candidate.  It doesn't matter how insincere their effort is.  They do because they must.

[Fmr. Pres. Duke]

I think the point about this thread is that McCain was right about Putin. Bush has nothing to do with it. It shows another difference between McCain and Bush.

[Jacobtm]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The U.S. wasn't killing it's own citizens the way the USSR was, though we certainly helped establish many governments throughout the world who did slaughter their own citizens, often overthrowing democratic governments in the process. Chile, Iran and Brazil are just a few glaring examples. We could get into all the covert action taken by the U.S. to help set up terribly repressive governments throughout the world, but I assume with all your knowledge of the cold war, you're well aware of the details.

To say there was a "moral difference" is just naive, life was as expendable to those in the U.S. government as it was in the USSR was, we had no problem setting up and funding governments that killed their own citizens en masse, our system just wouldn't allow our leaders to slaughter U.S. citizens, but other humans were fair game.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course the U.S. economy was better than the Soviet economy, of course liberty and capitalism are the best paths, it doesn't mean that the U.S. government didn't aid the mass slaughter of people throughout the world.

[dead0man]

Add 'em up.  The numbers aren't even close.  I'm not saying what we did was right, I'm saying it's not in the same league as the wrong committed by Russians.

[Beet]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

To say we had a high moral ground is rewriting history. We may have been better, but both the USSR and USA were devils in the cold war. We won because we were in every way the more powerful country.

We had it over the Russians in the '80s. We are in every way more powerful than Cuba; Libya; and North Korea, but those regimes are still around. No, there was something in the basic culture of the European people at that time that prevented men like Honecker and Ceaucescu and the 1991 coup leaders from achieving their ends. There was a real appeal of freedom, capitalism, and democracy, and Western values among the masses; and to a great extent there still is. But the reason why the Putin-Medvedev regime has had so much success in Russia is that those Western values have lost a great deal of its glitter; both because of what happened in Russia in the last two decades and what has happened to the West in the last decade.

No, I would say that its what has happened in Russia, mainly.  Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and the Baltic states have had no trouble moving ahead.  The countries that have had a rough time were the ones directly affected by Russian corruption, like Ukraine, Belarus, the Central Asian states and, of course, Russia herself.

Russia was more affected because Russia was poorer and more distant from the center of Europe, and suffered worse politically and economically. 2000 was the turning point for Russia and 2001 showed what the US response would be; withdrawing from the ABM treaty unilaterally, while turning an essentially blind eye to human rights abuses. The message to Putin was that treaties don't pay, but nationalism does.

Of course, because Putin was an angel before the US did such things.  And man, we were mean to him...

"I looked into his eyes and saw his soul"

You're oversimplifying things. The US has limited influence over such things, but where we do have influence we can either use it wisely or unwisely...

It wasn't our job to pull Russia out of the gutter.

No, but we live in the same world as a Russia that has pulled itself out of the gutter by following Putin, hence his government's popularity and grip on the country.

[12th Doctor]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

To say we had a high moral ground is rewriting history. We may have been better, but both the USSR and USA were devils in the cold war. We won because we were in every way the more powerful country.

We had it over the Russians in the '80s. We are in every way more powerful than Cuba; Libya; and North Korea, but those regimes are still around. No, there was something in the basic culture of the European people at that time that prevented men like Honecker and Ceaucescu and the 1991 coup leaders from achieving their ends. There was a real appeal of freedom, capitalism, and democracy, and Western values among the masses; and to a great extent there still is. But the reason why the Putin-Medvedev regime has had so much success in Russia is that those Western values have lost a great deal of its glitter; both because of what happened in Russia in the last two decades and what has happened to the West in the last decade.

No, I would say that its what has happened in Russia, mainly.  Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and the Baltic states have had no trouble moving ahead.  The countries that have had a rough time were the ones directly affected by Russian corruption, like Ukraine, Belarus, the Central Asian states and, of course, Russia herself.

Russia was more affected because Russia was poorer and more distant from the center of Europe, and suffered worse politically and economically. 2000 was the turning point for Russia and 2001 showed what the US response would be; withdrawing from the ABM treaty unilaterally, while turning an essentially blind eye to human rights abuses. The message to Putin was that treaties don't pay, but nationalism does.

Of course, because Putin was an angel before the US did such things.  And man, we were mean to him...

"I looked into his eyes and saw his soul"

You're oversimplifying things. The US has limited influence over such things, but where we do have influence we can either use it wisely or unwisely...

It wasn't our job to pull Russia out of the gutter.

No, but we live in the same world as a Russia that has pulled itself out of the gutter by following Putin, hence his government's popularity and grip on the country.

Ummm... okay.  Did this debate have a point, because I know I didn't start off by arguing against you on that bit of obviousness.

[dead0man]

No, but we live in the same world as a Russia that has pulled itself out of the gutter by following Putin, hence his government's popularity and grip on the country.

Well, that's what the Russians think at least.  The price of oil has done a lot more to help Russians than Putin ever could.

[Beet]

The best McCain can do is start another Cold War with Russia. Seriously, I am no Putin fan, but there were factors in Russia in the past 20 years that explain why he is supported. We won in the 1980's because we had the moral high ground as well as military, and that is where we need to stay; not get into a Cold War with Russia while still tied down in Iraq and Afghanistan.

To say we had a high moral ground is rewriting history. We may have been better, but both the USSR and USA were devils in the cold war. We won because we were in every way the more powerful country.

We had it over the Russians in the '80s. We are in every way more powerful than Cuba; Libya; and North Korea, but those regimes are still around. No, there was something in the basic culture of the European people at that time that prevented men like Honecker and Ceaucescu and the 1991 coup leaders from achieving their ends. There was a real appeal of freedom, capitalism, and democracy, and Western values among the masses; and to a great extent there still is. But the reason why the Putin-Medvedev regime has had so much success in Russia is that those Western values have lost a great deal of its glitter; both because of what happened in Russia in the last two decades and what has happened to the West in the last decade.

No, I would say that its what has happened in Russia, mainly.  Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and the Baltic states have had no trouble moving ahead.  The countries that have had a rough time were the ones directly affected by Russian corruption, like Ukraine, Belarus, the Central Asian states and, of course, Russia herself.

Russia was more affected because Russia was poorer and more distant from the center of Europe, and suffered worse politically and economically. 2000 was the turning point for Russia and 2001 showed what the US response would be; withdrawing from the ABM treaty unilaterally, while turning an essentially blind eye to human rights abuses. The message to Putin was that treaties don't pay, but nationalism does.

Of course, because Putin was an angel before the US did such things.  And man, we were mean to him...

"I looked into his eyes and saw his soul"

You're oversimplifying things. The US has limited influence over such things, but where we do have influence we can either use it wisely or unwisely...

It wasn't our job to pull Russia out of the gutter.

No, but we live in the same world as a Russia that has pulled itself out of the gutter by following Putin, hence his government's popularity and grip on the country.

Ummm... okay.  Did this debate have a point, because I know I didn't start off by arguing against you on that bit of obviousness.

Reading the thread, it looks like you started by saying that what happened in Russia was unaffected by the US because the Eastern European countries had different experiences, and I argued where US policy might have had some influence. Then you turned it around into "it's not our job/not our fault" which is something entirely different. It's certainly not our fault, but that doesn't mean we can't analyze our actions critically.