The New York Times editorial board appears to take its readers for fools who can't follow even recent history. NATO has reneged on commitments and threatened Russia since the fall of the USSR. Why would the Times continue to publish such rubbish as these editorials? Whose work is being done here?
30
There should be a limit to espousing nonsense even in a biased column at the NYT!
21
Unlike Trump, who wishes to make America Great again (speaking of which, just how far back in American History do we have to go, Herr Drumpf, to get a good example of what you mean by "again"? Pre-Vietnam? Pre-Korean War? Pre-WWII? 1930s? [aka The Great Depression] 1920s? [Ah! Al Capone!] WWI? Pre-abolition? [of slavery, not alcohol, Donald] Pre-Columbus?
You've got competition! Putin! You're buddy! And we know Mr. Putin doesn't play fair! but then neither do you. Anyway, we learn here that he has embarked on a similarly "obsessive quest to make Russia great again" NYT, not me. And he can go back as far as Ivan the Terrible! Maybe...Montezuma? Oh. Sorry. He's on the wrong side of The Wall.
You've got competition! Putin! You're buddy! And we know Mr. Putin doesn't play fair! but then neither do you. Anyway, we learn here that he has embarked on a similarly "obsessive quest to make Russia great again" NYT, not me. And he can go back as far as Ivan the Terrible! Maybe...Montezuma? Oh. Sorry. He's on the wrong side of The Wall.
11
I can’t believe it, you can’t trust Putin. How can that be, President Obama & Kerry depended on Putin to stop the Syrian Civil war. Putin was also instrumental in getting Iran to suspend producing nuclear weapons. We trusted Putin to take control of Iran’s nuclear fuel which was sent to Russia.True, because of Putin Assad is still in power, his only crime is the murder of almost 500,000 Syrian men, Women & Children, where is the indignation of the Palestine college marchers ?I’m afraid our President made a mistake by getting into bed with Putin & the Mullahs, well so what, he will leave that problem to his replacement.I’m so glad I voted for him
5
... diversified his country’s economy and worked constructively with the West?
You mean as in kow-tow to American business interests by allowing an invasion by our Corpocracy to take advantage of cheap Russian labor and resources? Dream on! Our foreign policy is rife with CIA subversive activity wherever we can get a foothold for American interests which are all about making a fast buck for some slimy monetizing sleazeball.
You mean as in kow-tow to American business interests by allowing an invasion by our Corpocracy to take advantage of cheap Russian labor and resources? Dream on! Our foreign policy is rife with CIA subversive activity wherever we can get a foothold for American interests which are all about making a fast buck for some slimy monetizing sleazeball.
32
I am no fan of President Putin. At the same time, this editorial makes the mistake of evaluating Putin's actions from a U.S./Western perspective. He has said time and again that all the forces opposing Syria's President Assad are terrorists. What Secretary Kerry and other Western leaders have done is to make a deal with Putin to oppose terrorism and either naively assume we define it the same way, or ignore his definition of it. Granted, if Kerry were to force that issue, he and Putin would part ways. But what they've agreed on has accomplished very little...and given Putin significant cover.
Since the end of the Cold War NATO has pledged that it was no longer fixated on the Russian threat. At the same time, it has gone about rolling right up to Russia's borders. Russia's poor relations with most of its neighbors is not NATO's fault, much as he proclaims that it is. Most of them simply see more to be gained by joining Europe, or at the very least keeping their options open. The real prize here would be to turn it into a win-win situation. Granted, NATO cannot do that without at least some cooperation from Russia. I've watched and studied Russia/The Soviet Union for more than 45 years now and know that it's possible - yes it will take delicate handling, but that's what diplomats are for.
Since the end of the Cold War NATO has pledged that it was no longer fixated on the Russian threat. At the same time, it has gone about rolling right up to Russia's borders. Russia's poor relations with most of its neighbors is not NATO's fault, much as he proclaims that it is. Most of them simply see more to be gained by joining Europe, or at the very least keeping their options open. The real prize here would be to turn it into a win-win situation. Granted, NATO cannot do that without at least some cooperation from Russia. I've watched and studied Russia/The Soviet Union for more than 45 years now and know that it's possible - yes it will take delicate handling, but that's what diplomats are for.
29
Discounting or ignoring Putin's obsession, as Obama has done for the past seven-and-a-half years is a recipe for disaster.
It is interesting the it has take this long for the esteemed Editorial Board to to figure this out.
Shame on you, Editorial Board, shame on you.
It is interesting the it has take this long for the esteemed Editorial Board to to figure this out.
Shame on you, Editorial Board, shame on you.
3
So Putin wants to make Russia great again! Does this sound familiar?
13
Quote from the article:
"Syria is just one arena where Mr. Putin’s obsessive quest to make Russia great again has fueled instability and reawakened political suspicions and animosities that faded after the fall of the Soviet Union."
How exactly can this be presented in a negative light?! I mean, is it not a politician job to try to make his country great again? Or... is it only admissible for American politicians to do so? What is this: a double standard, hypocrisy or both ?
So you basically mad at Putin and call him dangerous , because he...wants to make Russian great again? Because he behaves like...oh horror...like a regular American politician? I mean, how he, a Russian president, dares to put Russia's interests first !!! Outrageous. After so much effort that the West had put in in breaking Soviet Union and stalling Russian economic recovery, they actually try to come back and restore their influence!? What a gall of bloody Russians, right ? How dare they not accept their new role , which the US magnanimously assigned them, of being a gas station for Europe, right !!! They should learn their place.
"Syria is just one arena where Mr. Putin’s obsessive quest to make Russia great again has fueled instability and reawakened political suspicions and animosities that faded after the fall of the Soviet Union."
How exactly can this be presented in a negative light?! I mean, is it not a politician job to try to make his country great again? Or... is it only admissible for American politicians to do so? What is this: a double standard, hypocrisy or both ?
So you basically mad at Putin and call him dangerous , because he...wants to make Russian great again? Because he behaves like...oh horror...like a regular American politician? I mean, how he, a Russian president, dares to put Russia's interests first !!! Outrageous. After so much effort that the West had put in in breaking Soviet Union and stalling Russian economic recovery, they actually try to come back and restore their influence!? What a gall of bloody Russians, right ? How dare they not accept their new role , which the US magnanimously assigned them, of being a gas station for Europe, right !!! They should learn their place.
33
In case you not aware, the Cold War ended in December 25 1991...
5
Putin's discomfort with NATO is one thing, Syria another!
I am afraid the assertion that what happens in Syria is simply yet another Russia's attempt to regain its greatness is rooted in a flawed understanding of Assad's detractors in Syria as democratic "opposition forces", leaving out the nefarious elephant in the room - Saudi Arabia!
I don't think anyone can rightfully blame Putin for resisting a Wahhabi Saudi takeover of one of its closest allies in the Middle East - Syria. Just look what the Saudis did to Pakistan!
Besides, Putin is not just imagining the destructive reach of Wahhabism. We need to remember the Islamic terrorist attacks that shook Moscow to its core not so long ago!
I am afraid the assertion that what happens in Syria is simply yet another Russia's attempt to regain its greatness is rooted in a flawed understanding of Assad's detractors in Syria as democratic "opposition forces", leaving out the nefarious elephant in the room - Saudi Arabia!
I don't think anyone can rightfully blame Putin for resisting a Wahhabi Saudi takeover of one of its closest allies in the Middle East - Syria. Just look what the Saudis did to Pakistan!
Besides, Putin is not just imagining the destructive reach of Wahhabism. We need to remember the Islamic terrorist attacks that shook Moscow to its core not so long ago!
17
The New York Times rants about Assad / Putin not allowing food , a humanitarian gesture , to be delivered to captured enemy territory in Syria . I don't remember the N.Y. Times editorializing about the U.S. / Brit boycott of food , medication , spare parts for water purification plants that were destroyed by our Weapons of Mass Destruction in 1990 . Because of the 10 year boycott , according to Lancet a British Medical Journal , over 500,000 Iraqi children died . And that is not counting the frail and elderly . Isn't Democracy wonderful.
20
I know, I know, I know, I KNOW! It would be TOTALLY DANGEROUS.
But, could you imagine Trump v. Putin in an "anatomy size" contest? What a spectacle!
Does anyone happen to know which one is bigger...in terms of net worth?
If the Russians and Americans could both start laughing really hard, we might be able to shake off the world funk we are in.
But, could you imagine Trump v. Putin in an "anatomy size" contest? What a spectacle!
Does anyone happen to know which one is bigger...in terms of net worth?
If the Russians and Americans could both start laughing really hard, we might be able to shake off the world funk we are in.
4
This editorial, today's oped on Russia's intention to "wipe out the Tatars", and a countless anti Russian banter in the NYT are perfect examples of why two thirds of Democrats are vehemently opposed to the establishment's view of the world and are prepared to either vote for Bernie, or Trump, or neither but certainly not Hillary. Is this anti Russian bigotry doing anything for a calmer world? Has the editorial board not had enough of the constant war drums emanating from the establishment and the millions of dead in the Middle East? While it unapologetically blames the Russians, it neglects to place blame on Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2. What about Libya? Did the Russians bomb Gaddafi?
28
The Editorial Board seems to have a strangely one-eyed view of Mr. Putin's dangerous obsession and fails to focus its other eye on Mr. Obama and his dangerous obsession as he strengthens bases around the world and brandishes NATO forces on Russia's borders. Obsessions are not only suffered by Mr. Putin when Mr. Obama is around.
15
So we have fighter jets and at least one destroyer in the Baltic. Does Russia have fighter jets and a destroyer in the Gulf of Mexico? So Russia uses military force against Ukraine. Did we use military force against Grenada and Panama? The hypocrisy here is sickening.
28
Have you all once thought about it is not Russia fault why they are gearing up have you look at how many bases are near the Russian border now explain to me how they are the aggressor. America needs to look in the mirror because a lot of the problems in the world was caused by our imperialistic mentality that we need to get out of it. We need to stop trying to conquer the world when America is crumbling around us.
25
Not Dangerous Obsession, but reasonable reaction.
21
Why are the comments here so much more thoughtful than the US centric op ed? Putin's Russia was easily predictable 25 years ago given Russian history and US behavior.
13
"Controversy over using Russian rocket engines to launch Pentagon satellites has spilled over to potentially threaten the financial viability of certain U.S. civil space programs, according to some aerospace-industry officials."
-----------------
So we are sanctioning them even while using their rockets?
And I will bet ten to one that it was not the Russians who just blew up the Egyptian airliner.
It is the NYT's dangerous obsession which really worries me.
-----------------
So we are sanctioning them even while using their rockets?
And I will bet ten to one that it was not the Russians who just blew up the Egyptian airliner.
It is the NYT's dangerous obsession which really worries me.
19
I find it hard to understand what Red blooded American men see in Trump who wants to play kissy face with the shrimp Putin.
4
Yep - and there's John Kerry just aw-shucksing it along, once again playing follow the leader to the malevolent intentions of Vladimir Putin. Vladimir Putin has consistently eaten Barack Obama's lunch every time they have tangled.
I am sure some snarky Progressive will reply that George W Bush claimed to have looked into Putin's soul (as if this is an excuse for the Obama administration's serial weakness), but let's be clear: this was at the very beginning of W's term. By the end he had no illusions of what an international villain Putin is.
I am sure some snarky Progressive will reply that George W Bush claimed to have looked into Putin's soul (as if this is an excuse for the Obama administration's serial weakness), but let's be clear: this was at the very beginning of W's term. By the end he had no illusions of what an international villain Putin is.
1
What possible alternative government could be in place of Assad's if he is removed from power. Forget the he is a Soviet client. The alternative is as bad or worse. The Syria Civil War is a two sided coin. On either side the options are bad. If this situation was happening in Israel or Saudi Arabia would the United States actions be any different than Russia's?
6
Yes, Putin’s Russia is irresponsible. Russians often say that they want a multi-polar world. It’s fine, who can disagree with that. But what Mr. Putin doesn’t accept and allow is that people themselves can decide their own fate.
I don’t think that people in the west would choose a ”managed and guided” democracy like they have in Russia and its satellites.
Anyway, Russia brought this on, not the west.
I don’t think that people in the west would choose a ”managed and guided” democracy like they have in Russia and its satellites.
Anyway, Russia brought this on, not the west.
7
I lived in Berlin, Germany when there was a Wall. There is no reason to doubt Mr. Putin's "Dangerous Obsession", because he is playing straight out of the old Cold War KGB Handbook which calls for Russia's territorial dominance.
His moves to annex the Crimea, and enter the conflict in Syria were of strategic military importance, and no mere whim -- And recent aerial encounters over the former Soviet Baltic States were no less so.
Oddly enough, the concept of an air-drop to Syria would be nothing short of a historical repeat of what happened in Berlin in 1948-1949, when Russian forces cut off all railway, road and canal access; forcing the Western Allies to airlift food and other humanitarian supplies to the West-half of the city.
The concerns of Eastern Europe about keeping NATO up and operational are very real and substantiated.
Mr. Putin may not like the idea of it operating so closely to his country, but his recent actions have shown that an "ounce of protection" might possibly be a "cure" at some later date.
His moves to annex the Crimea, and enter the conflict in Syria were of strategic military importance, and no mere whim -- And recent aerial encounters over the former Soviet Baltic States were no less so.
Oddly enough, the concept of an air-drop to Syria would be nothing short of a historical repeat of what happened in Berlin in 1948-1949, when Russian forces cut off all railway, road and canal access; forcing the Western Allies to airlift food and other humanitarian supplies to the West-half of the city.
The concerns of Eastern Europe about keeping NATO up and operational are very real and substantiated.
Mr. Putin may not like the idea of it operating so closely to his country, but his recent actions have shown that an "ounce of protection" might possibly be a "cure" at some later date.
5
Putin continues to emulate his idol: Joseph Stalin. He's at the forefront of a "movement" (read propaganda campaign) to resurrect a positive view of one of Russia's most violent and repressive dictators. Attempting to rewrite history seems to be one of his passions.
Beyond the issue of Syria, I'm wondering how his relations are with China, as both nations' militaries seem to be engaged in ratcheting up the proximity and danger of recent confrontations at sea and in the air.
Beyond the issue of Syria, I'm wondering how his relations are with China, as both nations' militaries seem to be engaged in ratcheting up the proximity and danger of recent confrontations at sea and in the air.
4
We have no interest in being Russia's enemy, but ultimately it's Russia's choice. Putin needs the American Boogeyman to deflect attention from his failures. NATO's expansion was prompted not by American imperial ambition, but by the well founded fear Russia's neighbors have for it. It is unfortunate that Putin's aggressive bluster plays so well with the Russian public. We don't blame Russia for our problems. Hopefully they'll realize that we're not responsible for theirs.
6
As always, the reader's comments were far more enlightening than the Wall Street Journal's editorial demonizing Putin. It gives heart that there are enough sane, knowledgeable people out there who see through the attempts at obfuscation. Putin is no angel, and the brutal assassinations of his enemies underscores this. However, our actions since the collapse of the Soviet Union have destabilized the world in profound ways. It is disheartening that Obama has continued baiting the bear, and I blame Susan Rice, Samantha Powers, and Hillary earlier, for leading this wannabe amped-up testosterone charge. The blame, though, lies entirely with the POTUS. I am grateful that he didn't take us into yet another unwinnable war in the ME, but his support for the Islamists there was a major blunder. Putin, on the other hand, has a far clearer vision for what is required to stabilize that part of the world. Not the Europeans, and most certainly not the US.
11
I want to know who is paying for the construction of the new bases which WE do not need -- I don;t want the US to spend a penny on them - the countries in which they are situated must foot the bill.
I am sick of the US having to carry almost the full burden of the expense of NATO. NATO is nothing but an excuse the US uses to bully and threaten Russia - the members have no realy capability to fight alongside the US. The only heavy lift capacity is that of the US. We need to tell these "allies" that they should spend their 2% on defense as required by the Treaty they signed. If they don't pay - punish them.
We have to stop being the policeman of the world. It is way too expensive. All we are doing is spending money we don't have to give a few European countries a warm, fuzzy, feeling. We should eliminate the spending on the ERI from the budget.
and insist the EU carry more of the expense of NATO and let them know that they are front lines for their own defense.
I will be glad when Ash Carter is no longer Sec. of Defense. He creates threat just so Congress will vote for bigger Defense bill.
I am sick of the US having to carry almost the full burden of the expense of NATO. NATO is nothing but an excuse the US uses to bully and threaten Russia - the members have no realy capability to fight alongside the US. The only heavy lift capacity is that of the US. We need to tell these "allies" that they should spend their 2% on defense as required by the Treaty they signed. If they don't pay - punish them.
We have to stop being the policeman of the world. It is way too expensive. All we are doing is spending money we don't have to give a few European countries a warm, fuzzy, feeling. We should eliminate the spending on the ERI from the budget.
and insist the EU carry more of the expense of NATO and let them know that they are front lines for their own defense.
I will be glad when Ash Carter is no longer Sec. of Defense. He creates threat just so Congress will vote for bigger Defense bill.
18
We already spend more on "defense" than the next 9 countries in the world COMBINED. The last thing we can afford (take a look at our crumbling highways and rail systems) is an even greater defense budget. Eliminate "private contractors" from our military bases and we'll save 25% of that expenditure. Eliminate the preposterously over-budget F-35 fighter program, the unnecessary "next generation" of nuclear submarines, and we have a fighting chance of bringing things into balance, despite Citizens United. I am a veteran.
3
You live in great hiking country. The world is complicated and dangerous. Things do not work out for the best in the best of all possible worlds (Candide). You are right that we have bloated military, though.
You should apply to be donald trumps' secratary of state.
2
The New York Times is again presenting us with a very one sided story just as they did in the leadup to the Iraq war. You expect Russia to control their allies when our allies Turkey and Saudi Arabia have actually been helping ISIS.
We are putting missles all around Russia and you think they should not react. We financed the overthrow of the Ukraine government on their border. Russia's role in Syria has been effective against Al Nusra and ISIS. They got Assad to give up his chemical weapons.
Is the NYT joining wth the neo-cons to advocate war?
We are putting missles all around Russia and you think they should not react. We financed the overthrow of the Ukraine government on their border. Russia's role in Syria has been effective against Al Nusra and ISIS. They got Assad to give up his chemical weapons.
Is the NYT joining wth the neo-cons to advocate war?
37
I smell cookies baking
1
This is a typical US-centric view. Do you honestly believe the US has had no part in pushing Russia to more extreme actions? For example, the US likely supported separatists in Chechnya, prompted Georgia to take a disastrous stand against Russia, and then boldly stood up to say, “We support you,” in Ukraine. The US policy to contain Russia since the USSR has resulted in thousands of deaths and hundreds of thousands of ruined lives.
You keep pushing someone, they will eventually push back, as a proud Russia has done with Crimea. What in god’s name do you expect?
Give Russia a little respect and watch the world get along better. This is fundamental to human relations. Yes, Russia was interested in preserving al-Assad to maintain a military presence in the region, and yes they have been disingenuous about it. But this is nothing compared to the destruction the US has unleashed in the Middle East.
Russia wants a multi-polar world, not a US dominated world. It has many countries agreeing with this approach. The US needs to get along better and work more carefully through the UN.
Wake up.
You keep pushing someone, they will eventually push back, as a proud Russia has done with Crimea. What in god’s name do you expect?
Give Russia a little respect and watch the world get along better. This is fundamental to human relations. Yes, Russia was interested in preserving al-Assad to maintain a military presence in the region, and yes they have been disingenuous about it. But this is nothing compared to the destruction the US has unleashed in the Middle East.
Russia wants a multi-polar world, not a US dominated world. It has many countries agreeing with this approach. The US needs to get along better and work more carefully through the UN.
Wake up.
64
Utter silliness, and so is the comment above it. Talk about a need to wake up? The US and even more so EU desire after the "end" of the Cold War was for a de-escalation so they could spend more money on other things - mostly domestic social spending. Russia has made that impossible, and the reason was that Putin needs an ever-present enemy to help control its people. Russia's desire isn't for a broader diffusion of power - it's to preserve its own. Or just as accurately, for Putin to preserve and grow his own. "...as a proud Russia has done with Crimea" indeed. Have you checked this so-intelligent view with the Ukranians?
3
in a February 5, 1997 (at age 95) New York Times Op-Ed piece, George Kennan (the father of the "Cold War" and "containment" strategies) stated the following:
"expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-cold war era."
"Such a decision may be expected to inflame the nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion; to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking,"
Our chickens have now come home to roost. Putin's rise to power and increasing anti-Western slant are largely a result of our own actions. More of the same will not change the situation. We need a major shift in our approach to Russia, the only country that poses as real existential threat to the US. We had such an opportunity in the 1990s, and we chose creeping empire instead.
We can only hope that if we have another chance, we will prioritize global survival and partnership over Cold War grudges.
"expanding NATO would be the most fateful error of American policy in the entire post-cold war era."
"Such a decision may be expected to inflame the nationalistic, anti-Western and militaristic tendencies in Russian opinion; to have an adverse effect on the development of Russian democracy; to restore the atmosphere of the cold war to East-West relations, and to impel Russian foreign policy in directions decidedly not to our liking,"
Our chickens have now come home to roost. Putin's rise to power and increasing anti-Western slant are largely a result of our own actions. More of the same will not change the situation. We need a major shift in our approach to Russia, the only country that poses as real existential threat to the US. We had such an opportunity in the 1990s, and we chose creeping empire instead.
We can only hope that if we have another chance, we will prioritize global survival and partnership over Cold War grudges.
19
The President once referred to Russia as a 'regional power', and mocked Mitt Romney for calling them our 'geopolitical foe'. The President and his Secretary of State said Russia 'would fail' in Syria. Russia and Assad's forces have decimated the U.S. backed 'rebels'. driven ISIS out of Palmyra, and Russia has a firm footprint now in Syria (as well as Ukraine).
Someone needs to remind the President and Ben Rhodes Russia has proven to be more than a 'regional power', and be dealt with accordingly.
Someone needs to remind the President and Ben Rhodes Russia has proven to be more than a 'regional power', and be dealt with accordingly.
9
"The President once referred to Russia as a 'regional power', and mocked Mitt Romney for calling them our 'geopolitical foe'. "
Forgot about that one.
Well at least high school restroom facilities are safe for democracy.
Forgot about that one.
Well at least high school restroom facilities are safe for democracy.
1
Now, now, Mr. House. It is unfair to point out realities that Obama and his administration tell us are but figments of our imaginations.
You'll have to turn in your Obama Obsession Card.
You'll have to turn in your Obama Obsession Card.
I think it's high time that the United States flexed it's own muscle and decided not to show restraint but strength. Our enemies assume restraint, the military needs to show their other side and put the world on notice that we will not be bullied.
No nation in the world believes they can win a direct confrontation with United States and its allies. World is asking for us to show them an example of our modern military hardware, I think it's time that we accommodate them.
No nation in the world believes they can win a direct confrontation with United States and its allies. World is asking for us to show them an example of our modern military hardware, I think it's time that we accommodate them.
3
You really believe we've been showing restraint? We've invaded more nations than anyone else. It's not even close.
12
but look at the rules of engagement that American personnel work under. Were they given the freedom to conduct their mission and do so to win rather than to not lose, we could see a very different battlefield.
Actually, when we've come to Russian actions recently, we have been on our knees begging for their assistance.
3
This is an editorial written by the neocon ilk of Victoria Nuland or Ted Cruz. Among other absurdities: “NATO is also proceeding with a European missile defense system intended to protect against Iranian missiles.” Such lies. The Times is certainly aware that the missile defense is intended to neutralize any Russian nuclear missiles that remain after a NATO nuclear first strike. Thus it is promoting a first strike and a nuclear war. Will the Times in its propaganda efforts on behalf of psychotic delusion start denying the second existential threat to civilization - the scorching of the climate?
And “American military forces have gone out of their way to exercise restraint.” The Times editorial board promotes such tripe. The European arm of the Pentagon, otherwise known as NATO, continues its “restrained” military exercises in all the nations surrounding Russia’s borders. Some restraint!
Whatever drives Putin he is not amnesiac over invasions of Russia from the west, nor ignorant of long term US policy of violently overthrowing foreign governments and invading one country after another. One has to be blind not to recognize that for the imperial West Russia and China are the big prizes. The Russians and Chinese might just fight back. If so, none of us will be around for the TImes to throw the blame at them.
And “American military forces have gone out of their way to exercise restraint.” The Times editorial board promotes such tripe. The European arm of the Pentagon, otherwise known as NATO, continues its “restrained” military exercises in all the nations surrounding Russia’s borders. Some restraint!
Whatever drives Putin he is not amnesiac over invasions of Russia from the west, nor ignorant of long term US policy of violently overthrowing foreign governments and invading one country after another. One has to be blind not to recognize that for the imperial West Russia and China are the big prizes. The Russians and Chinese might just fight back. If so, none of us will be around for the TImes to throw the blame at them.
21
While I largely agree with the Times that an increased military presence in the Baltics and Poland is necessary for NATO and for the safety of the people in those countries, it is also important for NATO and other Western institutions to avoid a knee-jerk expansion into areas near or on Russia's borders simply because opportunities present themselves. NATO and the EU were formed in order to defend and preserve democratic, open societies where the rule of law prevails. Those conditions should exist before a country is considered for membership. Turkey a a NATO member is already problematic in that regard, and so would be places like the Ukraine and Georgia in their present state. The West needs to show strength, but also restraint and an awareness of what it's supposed to be standing for.
2
We plant destroyers near his borders, he send a helicopter to photograph, and we call him the bully?
We send our Army to destroy Iraq and our war planes to bomb the Middle East, and we call him a bully?
We send our navy to harass the Chinese in their waters, and we call Putin a bully?
We give immunity to our CIA personnel to murder kidnap and kill at will, and we call him a bully?
Isn't it time to look at our actions, before condemning others?
We send our Army to destroy Iraq and our war planes to bomb the Middle East, and we call him a bully?
We send our navy to harass the Chinese in their waters, and we call Putin a bully?
We give immunity to our CIA personnel to murder kidnap and kill at will, and we call him a bully?
Isn't it time to look at our actions, before condemning others?
52
A holy man once said:
"How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while there is still a beam in your own eye?"
That was 2000 years ago! Nothing has changed in all these years.
"How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ while there is still a beam in your own eye?"
That was 2000 years ago! Nothing has changed in all these years.
4
Not only does Putin not respect us, thanks to Obama's weak foreign policy Putin no longer fears us. Putin still maintains the old USSR/KGB mentality that seems to be forgotten by many Americans. If he is not countered with muscle he will continue to operate unimpeded. Nobody wants to restart the cold war, but unless we counter Putin with strength and determination now a new cold war may be inevitable.
A good start would be to build the missle shield in Eastern Europe that Obama acquiesced on.
We have two choices in November. A Clinton style reset or peace through strength. I choose the latter. Putin will only laugh at and mock the former.
A good start would be to build the missle shield in Eastern Europe that Obama acquiesced on.
We have two choices in November. A Clinton style reset or peace through strength. I choose the latter. Putin will only laugh at and mock the former.
3
A new high intensity cold war is not likely given the state of the Russian economy, its population level and its state of public health.
Since we outspend the next 9 countries in the world combined on "defense", just how, exactly , do you propose we show "strength"? Unilateral attacks? Yelling at Putin?
No substance in the argument means no argument. The falling global price of oil continues to wreak the most havoc on Russia's weak economy. More so than any "reality show" infotainment message delivered by some "politician".
We have the big stick. We don't need to be waving it in the air. That's for immature types.
No substance in the argument means no argument. The falling global price of oil continues to wreak the most havoc on Russia's weak economy. More so than any "reality show" infotainment message delivered by some "politician".
We have the big stick. We don't need to be waving it in the air. That's for immature types.
Through recent months US military ships and planes have been absolutely everywhere in both the Black and Baltic seas yet the NYT tells us " Russia is also engaging in aggressive and dangerous behavior in the air and on the high seas ". Oh please! How dare those Russians get upset when we buzz their borders.
Get back to us when the Russian navy starts conducting exercises in the Gulf of Mexico.
Get back to us when the Russian navy starts conducting exercises in the Gulf of Mexico.
54
'Get back to us when the Russian navy starts conducting exercises in the Gulf of Mexico.'
The rub is that no other country has the means (or probably even the desire) to 'conducting exercises in the Gulf of Mexico.'.
Russia came close and we came close to a nuclear war!
The rub is that no other country has the means (or probably even the desire) to 'conducting exercises in the Gulf of Mexico.'.
Russia came close and we came close to a nuclear war!
3
I agree. We may not like Russia but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't treat them with respect.
2
This opinion is consistent with the desire to maintain a unipolar world order favorable to an undeterred superpower given to violent, destructive and stupid military adventures.
32
ALL a Lie !
The Puppet as POTUS and the rest of the Neo-Cons in DC instigate turmoil throughout the world including Ukraine via a coup de etat financed as admitted by Victoria Nuland for $5 Billion.
"American military forces have gone out of their way to exercise restraint"
The opposite is true especially in the middles east - Libya / Yemen / Iraq / Afghanistan / Syria with military and / or covert actions constantly instigated, supplied or engineered by the USA in the trillions of dollars with dead people the result everywhere.
Assad is the duly elected leader in a sovereign country which the US has supplied weapons to the alphabet soup of rebels / terrorists / anarchists of the day including Al Qaeda. Leave him and Russia alone.
Take NATO off the Russian border and stop threatening WWIII !
The Puppet as POTUS and the rest of the Neo-Cons in DC instigate turmoil throughout the world including Ukraine via a coup de etat financed as admitted by Victoria Nuland for $5 Billion.
"American military forces have gone out of their way to exercise restraint"
The opposite is true especially in the middles east - Libya / Yemen / Iraq / Afghanistan / Syria with military and / or covert actions constantly instigated, supplied or engineered by the USA in the trillions of dollars with dead people the result everywhere.
Assad is the duly elected leader in a sovereign country which the US has supplied weapons to the alphabet soup of rebels / terrorists / anarchists of the day including Al Qaeda. Leave him and Russia alone.
Take NATO off the Russian border and stop threatening WWIII !
40
Whose "puppet" do you think Mr. Obama is? Or are you just a racist? Go ahead, vote for Trump and cause us to become the Fifth Reich without knowing where THAT will lead. If anyone seems to be Putin's puppet, it was W, when he was sweet-talked with a private yacht at the Sochi Olympics, or Trump, who'll take money from anyone to put his meaningless name on edifices from surface-glitzy buildings to the United States.
2
Kleptocracy thugocracy = today's Russia. Another comment elsewhere has aptly chronicled an impressive account of Putin's grim legacy, the darkest of which is his active military participation in the 21st Century's most heinous crime to date against humanity: Bashar al-Assad's brutalization of his own citizens with nearly a half million killed and a whole country displaced.
Then, there's Ukraine, Georgia, threats against the Baltics, the serial baldfaced lying, Politkovskaya, Litvinenko, Nemtsov, two anti-doping officials, and on ... and gruesomely on.
This article is right. Before long, one of Russia's "Wild East" displays of aggression in the air will go awry and the consequences could be catastrophic, especially if the predictably unpredictable Donald Trump occupies the White House.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
Then, there's Ukraine, Georgia, threats against the Baltics, the serial baldfaced lying, Politkovskaya, Litvinenko, Nemtsov, two anti-doping officials, and on ... and gruesomely on.
This article is right. Before long, one of Russia's "Wild East" displays of aggression in the air will go awry and the consequences could be catastrophic, especially if the predictably unpredictable Donald Trump occupies the White House.
www.endthemadnessnow.org
13
With Congressional approval Obama has committed crimes to support our allies, terrorists and insurgents to overthrow the Syrian government. This is a direct violation of international law, so why should Assad and Putin trust Obama? I wouldn't!
Obama signed a legal agreement with the UN that no weapons were to go in or out of Libya. Obama and Hillary covertly used our Consulate in Benghazi, Libya to gather up and ship weapons, including surface to air missiles, to terrorists. Even have knowledge of weapons leaving Libya without telling the UN was a violation of UN law. How could any of another country or the American people trust Obama or Hillary. It is because so much money has been used by the powerbrokers on the media that we the people have been duped.
Obama signed a legal agreement with the UN that no weapons were to go in or out of Libya. Obama and Hillary covertly used our Consulate in Benghazi, Libya to gather up and ship weapons, including surface to air missiles, to terrorists. Even have knowledge of weapons leaving Libya without telling the UN was a violation of UN law. How could any of another country or the American people trust Obama or Hillary. It is because so much money has been used by the powerbrokers on the media that we the people have been duped.
14
What are your sources? Fox "News"? Your governor, who'd rather scapegoat a small minority of people than live in the 21st Century?
Are Putin's moves for Russian domestic consumption, much like North Korea, or is he really trying to spur the western powers to retaliate and start war? He would then call the western powers out for making the first blow, a strategy used throughout American history. I have a hard time believing the latter, but I am no expert on Russian affairs.
3
Poor, tired Russia with its centuries-old machismo identity problem. A pity that it plays poorly in the new era.
Look at little Comrade Putin prancing around shirtless, hanging out with his rat pack, the Night Wolves. He's doped up, lives in a Cossack dream.
Someone should tell Putin that relying on high prices for stuff you dig from the ground doesn't cut it any longer. You have innovate.
Poor Russia, wasting decade after decade living in the mists of time.
Time for another revolution, Russia.
Look at little Comrade Putin prancing around shirtless, hanging out with his rat pack, the Night Wolves. He's doped up, lives in a Cossack dream.
Someone should tell Putin that relying on high prices for stuff you dig from the ground doesn't cut it any longer. You have innovate.
Poor Russia, wasting decade after decade living in the mists of time.
Time for another revolution, Russia.
4
Wasn't that really smart, the gloating over the West 'winning the Cold War', the triumphalism of the US Right, the expansion of NATO? What did we think the Russian people would think, that they would decide to accept lowered status in the world stage? What would a Trump supporter think of the USA being a second class power? I think maybe the Russian people support Putin for the same reasons Trump is doing well and nationalism always sells. Russian sabre rattling is a great way for Putin to take people's minds off a lower oil price and the damage that does to Russia's economy. This is exactly what the result of the rhetoric about 'winning the Cold War' has brought to us. Thanks. Hope it felt good at the time.
11
Kosovo taught Putin and Russia one valuable lesson, the US and NATO respect power, and nothing else. Russia was incapable of helping fellow Slavs and the US/NATO blasted Serbia. Russian wishes were utterly ignored. Since then Russia has rebuilt it's military and is ignoring the West. Putin has embarked on a policy that would be approved not only by Stalin, but by every Russian nationalist from Peter the Great to Soszilytzen sp?. Reagan, Bush, Thatcher and Kohl won the Cold War. The leaders who followed them started a new one.
11
It is a mystery to me why the United States thinks it has some kind of legitimate interest in either the Crimea or the endlessly corrupt regime in Ukraine. Jimmy Carter used to say "don't poke a pole cat" which the U.S is clearly doing by moving missiles closer and closer to the Russian border.
The idea such such missiles are for protection against Iran is a transparent cover story.
The overwhelming need in Syria is for the slaughter to end. Innocent civilians are being killed by all parties. Making Syria a place for a U.S.-Russian cold war contest is an appalling development. The U.S. has made a mistake in thinking there is anything to be gained (except Israeli applause) by overthrowing Assad. Stop the slaughter!!
The idea such such missiles are for protection against Iran is a transparent cover story.
The overwhelming need in Syria is for the slaughter to end. Innocent civilians are being killed by all parties. Making Syria a place for a U.S.-Russian cold war contest is an appalling development. The U.S. has made a mistake in thinking there is anything to be gained (except Israeli applause) by overthrowing Assad. Stop the slaughter!!
19
The US was part of a group lead by Turkey that tried to topple Assad. This editorial could have been written about President Obama who encouraged the overthrow of Assad using the CIA and arming and training insurgents many of whom are now part of ISIS.
How did that work out?
After winning the cold war the US strategy of encircling Russia by expanding NATO has had it's intended impact. An arms race that inevitably leads to war.
How did that work out?
After winning the cold war the US strategy of encircling Russia by expanding NATO has had it's intended impact. An arms race that inevitably leads to war.
8
"Anxieties about Russia among NATO members in Eastern Europe had forced the alliance to make plans to deploy four combat battalions"....had 'forced' them....really? They dream up a scenario that would suit them as they try to provoke a war and thus are 'forced' to do provocative things. Come on New York Times, the rest of the world can see through this, how America is determined to defeat Putin at any cost. I had thought better of you than promoting this line.
We do not want another American war of intervention.
We do not want another American war of intervention.
5
Russia's Putin, though unpredictable in appearance, seems to have a plan, that of restoring ancient glories of empire; unfortunately, at the cost of his own people's well-being, and destabilizing an already upside-down world; bellicose at the cost of thousands of lives, instead of contributing to peace and order. The curse of a country rich in oil is that of allowing dictators to cheat on their own folks, remove freedom of information, and participate in a climate of corruption as a matter of course. Russia's moves are dangerous, irrational and on the wrong side of history. And Putin knows that.
3
NYTimes doing its job as White House's mouthpiece, an American Pravda, if you will.
Two points here. One is, NATO is a threat to Russia. A military alliance sets up bases at or near your borders, tightening the noose every year, how else can you view this but a threat as a sovereign country? How would the Americans react, if using Trump's hostility to Mexico as a pretense, Russia were to set up a full-fledged military base, with planes that can take off in 3-minutes' notice, at Tijuana? We know how the Americans got their panties in a bunch when the USSR armed Cuba with missiles in 1961.
Secondly, every time an American mouthpiece mentions Syria, it has to remember that this horrible, amazingly tragic civil war would not have reached this stage if the Americans, through the Saudis and Turks, or the Saudis and Turks through Americans, had not decided to fan the flames of war by giving Jihadi mercenaries outrageous amounts of aid, mostly in the form of advanced weapons. One can easily see Youtube videos of TOW weapons used by jihadis destroying Syrian tanks. Where did those $70k a pop weapons come from? Well, the Saudis bought 15 thousand of them for 1.05 billion dollars from the USA in 2012 and shipped them through Turkey to the jihadis. Never mind the American law that says the American weapons cannot be reexported in this manner.
Americans are in no position to blame anyone in the world for atrocities agains civilians.
Two points here. One is, NATO is a threat to Russia. A military alliance sets up bases at or near your borders, tightening the noose every year, how else can you view this but a threat as a sovereign country? How would the Americans react, if using Trump's hostility to Mexico as a pretense, Russia were to set up a full-fledged military base, with planes that can take off in 3-minutes' notice, at Tijuana? We know how the Americans got their panties in a bunch when the USSR armed Cuba with missiles in 1961.
Secondly, every time an American mouthpiece mentions Syria, it has to remember that this horrible, amazingly tragic civil war would not have reached this stage if the Americans, through the Saudis and Turks, or the Saudis and Turks through Americans, had not decided to fan the flames of war by giving Jihadi mercenaries outrageous amounts of aid, mostly in the form of advanced weapons. One can easily see Youtube videos of TOW weapons used by jihadis destroying Syrian tanks. Where did those $70k a pop weapons come from? Well, the Saudis bought 15 thousand of them for 1.05 billion dollars from the USA in 2012 and shipped them through Turkey to the jihadis. Never mind the American law that says the American weapons cannot be reexported in this manner.
Americans are in no position to blame anyone in the world for atrocities agains civilians.
6
The deeply disturbing ties between Donald Trump and Putin were alluded to in the following line from this op-ed: "Mr. Putin’s obsessive quest to make Russia great again has fueled instability and reawakened political suspicions and animosities that faded after the fall of the Soviet Union."
It's not just that Trump has brayed about his admiration for Putin.
By my count, there are far fewer than six degrees of separation between these demagogues (or, in the case of Trump, a demagogue wannabe): Paul Manafort, one of Trump's campaign managers, is a thoroughly amoral political operative, who took on the former president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, as a client.
Manafort should have become a persona non grata, in Western democratic circles, for the work he performed on Yanukovych's last presidential campaign. By gleefully taking Yanukovych's filthy lucre--money that was stolen from the Ukrainian people and salted with countless more Russian rubles--Manafort proved himself to be a suck-up to tyrants. Really, is it any surprise that Trump hired him?
It's not just that Trump has brayed about his admiration for Putin.
By my count, there are far fewer than six degrees of separation between these demagogues (or, in the case of Trump, a demagogue wannabe): Paul Manafort, one of Trump's campaign managers, is a thoroughly amoral political operative, who took on the former president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, as a client.
Manafort should have become a persona non grata, in Western democratic circles, for the work he performed on Yanukovych's last presidential campaign. By gleefully taking Yanukovych's filthy lucre--money that was stolen from the Ukrainian people and salted with countless more Russian rubles--Manafort proved himself to be a suck-up to tyrants. Really, is it any surprise that Trump hired him?
3
Easing up sanctions?... You gotta be kidding.
You can not trust Russia ever!
These people will never change.
Only thing they respect is a POWER...
I lived in Russia for a long time and I know what I'm talking about.
I watch their news channels.
Putin and his KGB brainwashing people 24/7.
And scariest part is that Russian people seems to be liking this.
I haven't seen this amount of hatred against West and all its neighbors even in Cold War.
Our only option is to tighten up sanctions until this fascist country collapses like its evil predecessor USSR.
We cannot have another Hitler in our human history .
PS... We need to make sure that Krimea goes back to Ukraine. And no talks before that happens.
You can not trust Russia ever!
These people will never change.
Only thing they respect is a POWER...
I lived in Russia for a long time and I know what I'm talking about.
I watch their news channels.
Putin and his KGB brainwashing people 24/7.
And scariest part is that Russian people seems to be liking this.
I haven't seen this amount of hatred against West and all its neighbors even in Cold War.
Our only option is to tighten up sanctions until this fascist country collapses like its evil predecessor USSR.
We cannot have another Hitler in our human history .
PS... We need to make sure that Krimea goes back to Ukraine. And no talks before that happens.
4
You lived in Russia for a long time? More information, please.
1
What an outstanding bunch of lies!!! And how do you know what Russian people like? As you are no longer there? And I feel a lot of hatred in your message. And what do you mean by "this fascist country"??? And learn some proper spelling before you write, make sure you do it! And then you can visit Crimea peninsula if you are granted your entry visa.
1
....Gotta tell yah ....I expect a better effort of challenging power from the biggest paper in America...I don't suppose if Russia had a force in norther Mexico , or on the Canadian border , there would be no concern?...the last time someone closed in on the Russian border it ended up losing 20 some million people....and you folks wonder why he's flexing his muscle?...America ....after the fall of the Soviet Union....just could stand pushing for control....800 bases in the world....and you call out Putin????
11
MANPADS and TOWs to the rebels...let's see how our advanced weapons systems work against the Su25's and 31's and the T-72's. That might give Putin pause for thought.
Give me a break - it is the US which has been needling Russia ever since Mr. Putin gave refuge to Snowden.
Expanding NATO, trying to recruit Ukraine into NATO, saying "Assad must go" knowing full well that he is Russia's ally have been dangerous forms of mischief.
And what about forcing the Bolivian president's plane down into Austria because Snowden "might" be there? Isn't Bolivia a sovereign country, or is Mr. Obama practicing the Monroe doctrine even into Austrian airspace?
The NYT cannot restrain Mr. Putin. But you might try to restrain Mr. Obama and suggest that he remove the sanctions on Russia.
Work out differences in an amicable manner and not with confrontation.
Personally I think Russia would be better off with another, milder president who would still defend Russia's interests with the same vigor that Putin is doing. But that is not OUR choice.
Also, since I see Mr. Kerry "working" with the Russians over Syria, maybe its is the NYT board which needs to be restrained. Mr. Obama has already learned what is good and what is not. It is YOUR jingoism which bothers me.
Expanding NATO, trying to recruit Ukraine into NATO, saying "Assad must go" knowing full well that he is Russia's ally have been dangerous forms of mischief.
And what about forcing the Bolivian president's plane down into Austria because Snowden "might" be there? Isn't Bolivia a sovereign country, or is Mr. Obama practicing the Monroe doctrine even into Austrian airspace?
The NYT cannot restrain Mr. Putin. But you might try to restrain Mr. Obama and suggest that he remove the sanctions on Russia.
Work out differences in an amicable manner and not with confrontation.
Personally I think Russia would be better off with another, milder president who would still defend Russia's interests with the same vigor that Putin is doing. But that is not OUR choice.
Also, since I see Mr. Kerry "working" with the Russians over Syria, maybe its is the NYT board which needs to be restrained. Mr. Obama has already learned what is good and what is not. It is YOUR jingoism which bothers me.
11
A better understanding of Russian history is lacking in this editorial, along with any reference to Western moves that have brought out the worst instincts in Vladimir Putin.
1990: The Conventional Forces in Europe treaty is signed as part of the German reunification process. US and German negotiators give clear verbal commitment that eastward expansion of NATO would not occur.
1994: Russia removes its last troops from Germany.
1997: Poland, Hungary & Czech Republic join NATO.
1999: Kosovo War features showdown between NATO & Russian troops on an airstrip.
2001: George W. Bush announces U.S. is unilaterally leaving the ABM Treaty.
2004: NATO invites Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and the Baltic States into the alliance.
2008: As he did in 1996, Mikhail Gorbachev accuses the West of breaking its word in continually expanding eastward, says this proves the West ultimately cannot be trusted.
Now, if you're a Russian leader, and the West says it wants to help and cooperate, but it rejects the idea of formal alliance, tears up a groundbreaking treaty, and lets all your neighbors join, wouldn't you feel upset? Concerned? Worried? Russia has been invaded by France (once), Germany (twice), and fought the British in the Crimean War, plus the Cold War. They're scared of us, and paranoid because of their history. I don't excuse their military retaliation, but I do understand it. The NYT board would do well to read their history before writing about this.
1990: The Conventional Forces in Europe treaty is signed as part of the German reunification process. US and German negotiators give clear verbal commitment that eastward expansion of NATO would not occur.
1994: Russia removes its last troops from Germany.
1997: Poland, Hungary & Czech Republic join NATO.
1999: Kosovo War features showdown between NATO & Russian troops on an airstrip.
2001: George W. Bush announces U.S. is unilaterally leaving the ABM Treaty.
2004: NATO invites Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and the Baltic States into the alliance.
2008: As he did in 1996, Mikhail Gorbachev accuses the West of breaking its word in continually expanding eastward, says this proves the West ultimately cannot be trusted.
Now, if you're a Russian leader, and the West says it wants to help and cooperate, but it rejects the idea of formal alliance, tears up a groundbreaking treaty, and lets all your neighbors join, wouldn't you feel upset? Concerned? Worried? Russia has been invaded by France (once), Germany (twice), and fought the British in the Crimean War, plus the Cold War. They're scared of us, and paranoid because of their history. I don't excuse their military retaliation, but I do understand it. The NYT board would do well to read their history before writing about this.
10
"Mr. Putin’s obsessive quest to make Russia great again" - sounds vaguely familiar. I guess like minds do think and act alike.
1
Bullies target those whom they perceive as weak. Putin appears to believe that our nation's current leaders are weak because he continues to test us with aggressive confrontations, just as Iran did when it kidnapped our embassy personnel. When Assad crossed our President's "red line" and Russia invaded Ukraine without consequences that reinforced Putin's perception our nation's weakness and lack of commitment or follow-through.
3
I suppose it's worth reminding readers of the Times here that much of the reader commentary which appears after this article will have been written by agents of the Russian government working from propaganda factories which have already been reported on elsewhere over the last couple of years. That they think they will have any impact on public opinion here when their world view is so lost in obsolete cold war mentalities is pathetic but instructive about the nature of Putin and his regime...
4
Oh, those Russians! And so many thanks to the NYT editorial board for warning us of the evilness of the former "Evil Empire." We always need some one to hate/fear. One question: what would our reaction be if a Russian naval fleet appeared 12 miles off the coast of New Jersey or Long island? Do you think our Air Force might take a few passes checking them out? Just wondering.
9
I just read at RT that NATO is carrying out military drills in Estonia right up to the Russian border — only the latest in a relentless series of sabre-rattling provocations.
Washington has been pressing Russia militarily all along its European perimeter for the entirety of Obama's presidency. This trend will continue and intensify if uber-neocon Hillary Clinton is elected.
This engineered crisis is undoubtedly providing a lease on life to our run-amok military-industrial complex. It is also intended to shackle (at any cost to them) Western Europe to Washington's global hegemonistic ambitions.
Which means we may actually live to see the unthinkable: Another large devastating war, possibly even nuclear, in Europe.
Washington has been pressing Russia militarily all along its European perimeter for the entirety of Obama's presidency. This trend will continue and intensify if uber-neocon Hillary Clinton is elected.
This engineered crisis is undoubtedly providing a lease on life to our run-amok military-industrial complex. It is also intended to shackle (at any cost to them) Western Europe to Washington's global hegemonistic ambitions.
Which means we may actually live to see the unthinkable: Another large devastating war, possibly even nuclear, in Europe.
11
You do know that RT is Kremlin propaganda, right? (And that there is no independent media left in Russia?) And not an actual news outlet?
1
The editors would be wise not to conflate Syria's civil war with Russia's designs on E Europe or the Baltics. Two entirely different geo political realities. Conflating them is akin to saying the US policy towards Venezuela or the S China Sea somehow reflects our objectives in Iraq.
Putin's objectives regarding Syria and the Sunni Islamists of the Middle East are pretty straight-forward, although even there it's more of a Venn diagram than one set of congruent goals. Syria represents a port and airbase on the Mediterranean, much as Israel represents same for the US. The Russian response against the Sunnis, which include ISIS, is easy to understand when one thinks of Beslan or the Moscow attacks. If I were Russian, I'd have absolutely no problem with their policy in that region. Heck, if I were French or Belgian, the same.
This is very different from Putin's moves to re-establish hegemony on their western front. Crimea historically had been Russian and, while certainly not playing by post Cold War rules, Russian national interests in the strategic port are not dissimilar from American interests in the Panama Canal. This is Machiavellian foreign policy.
Russian attempts to bully the Baltics, Poland and other East European nations must be met by NATO, and led by European powers, that is if European nations really are sovereign and intent on remaining so. The real danger is if the Europeans expect the US to bear the load once again while they sit on their ... hands.
Putin's objectives regarding Syria and the Sunni Islamists of the Middle East are pretty straight-forward, although even there it's more of a Venn diagram than one set of congruent goals. Syria represents a port and airbase on the Mediterranean, much as Israel represents same for the US. The Russian response against the Sunnis, which include ISIS, is easy to understand when one thinks of Beslan or the Moscow attacks. If I were Russian, I'd have absolutely no problem with their policy in that region. Heck, if I were French or Belgian, the same.
This is very different from Putin's moves to re-establish hegemony on their western front. Crimea historically had been Russian and, while certainly not playing by post Cold War rules, Russian national interests in the strategic port are not dissimilar from American interests in the Panama Canal. This is Machiavellian foreign policy.
Russian attempts to bully the Baltics, Poland and other East European nations must be met by NATO, and led by European powers, that is if European nations really are sovereign and intent on remaining so. The real danger is if the Europeans expect the US to bear the load once again while they sit on their ... hands.
5
Chicken or egg. Fear and greed are the only truths.
2
If Russia put military ships off of the coast of America (or Mexico/Canada) would we consider that military aggression? Yep. So why can we be EVERYWHERE in the world, putting OUR military in their face and not expect consequences? We don't own the world as much as we like to think we do. I think it's us that need to show some respect and restraint. We are not innocents and haven't been since the end of WW2. We've done a lot of messing around in this world of ours, destabilizing countries and bringing down governments (Ukraine is the latest). What if we hadn't messed with Ukraine? Would Putin have felt the need to invade to take back land that he felt was rightfully Russia's? I don't know. He's not a good man, I get that. But our policies are difficult to defend. If I were Putin, I'd push back, too.
36
As many of the independent minded Times' readers have pointed out, this article is simply newspeak. On the other hand, it is also humorous. Much like Michael Moore's animated Americans shooting weapons at whatever scares them in Bowling for Columbine. I suggest the illustrious Board take up arms an invade Russia. They'll have plenty of help from the NATO forces who have gotten closer to Russia's border as the Great Bear has extended its muscle into Europe...or have I gotten that backwards?
10
The US has imposed sanctions on Russia, not the other way around.
This creates an atmosphere of hostility between the two countries that hurts both the US and Russia and also the EU.
The US economy is composed of several sectors, like industry, agriculture, services which can then be subdivided by specialization into sub sectors.
Among all the sectors and sub sectors only one benefits from the sanctions, the weapons industry, to the detriment of all the others. Because of the sanctions we can not sell Russia cars, trucks, machinery, technology, corn, wheat,vegetables, wine, construction equipment and materials, processed foods, commercial airplanes nor a thousand other products but because of them our military can justify spending billions in weapons we better never use, for the sake of humanity.
We do not need to love Putin, but we can not allow the IMC to use it as an excuse to make billions. Its time to clip the wings of their lobby.
This creates an atmosphere of hostility between the two countries that hurts both the US and Russia and also the EU.
The US economy is composed of several sectors, like industry, agriculture, services which can then be subdivided by specialization into sub sectors.
Among all the sectors and sub sectors only one benefits from the sanctions, the weapons industry, to the detriment of all the others. Because of the sanctions we can not sell Russia cars, trucks, machinery, technology, corn, wheat,vegetables, wine, construction equipment and materials, processed foods, commercial airplanes nor a thousand other products but because of them our military can justify spending billions in weapons we better never use, for the sake of humanity.
We do not need to love Putin, but we can not allow the IMC to use it as an excuse to make billions. Its time to clip the wings of their lobby.
36
Why were sanctions imposed? Because Russia invaded Europes, not the other way around. This creates an atmosphere of hostility between the two countries that hurts both the US and Russia and also the EU...
Putin does not need to love NATO, but we can not allow Russia to use it as an excuse to justify invading Eastern Ukraine, Crimea, and Georgia, and arresting and deporting ethnic minorities. It's time to clip the wings of his lobby.
Putin does not need to love NATO, but we can not allow Russia to use it as an excuse to justify invading Eastern Ukraine, Crimea, and Georgia, and arresting and deporting ethnic minorities. It's time to clip the wings of his lobby.
3
Arm chair liberal generals should lecture Putin even more:
Then, maybe someday, after he reestablishes USSR 2.0, he might listen.
Then, maybe someday, after he reestablishes USSR 2.0, he might listen.
2
Who are the arm chair liberal generals and what has been their advice? What is your advice you hard charging arm chair general?
- Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it -
Karl Marx:
"...Replacing the names and dates, see that the policy of Ivan III and politics of modern Moscow empire are not just similar but identical...
Russia came up in adverse and humiliated school of Mongolian slavery and gained the strength by perfecting skillfulness of serfdom.
Even when Russia became independent, it further remains the country of slaves. ... Russia's policy - is unchanged. Russian methods and tactics may change, but the main goal of Russian politics - world dominance - is and will be the same.
1960s - KGB, Andropov - Putin's mentor:
"The objective of violence is to create chaos and anarchy, to impose additional strains on ruling democratic parties, to eliminate their ablest leaders, to force them to resort to undemocratic measures, and to demonstrate to the public their inability to maintain law and order, leaving the field open to the legal communist party to present itself as the only effective alternative force.
Karl Marx:
"...Replacing the names and dates, see that the policy of Ivan III and politics of modern Moscow empire are not just similar but identical...
Russia came up in adverse and humiliated school of Mongolian slavery and gained the strength by perfecting skillfulness of serfdom.
Even when Russia became independent, it further remains the country of slaves. ... Russia's policy - is unchanged. Russian methods and tactics may change, but the main goal of Russian politics - world dominance - is and will be the same.
1960s - KGB, Andropov - Putin's mentor:
"The objective of violence is to create chaos and anarchy, to impose additional strains on ruling democratic parties, to eliminate their ablest leaders, to force them to resort to undemocratic measures, and to demonstrate to the public their inability to maintain law and order, leaving the field open to the legal communist party to present itself as the only effective alternative force.
Is it Putin's or past and present president's dangerous obsession.
Our government past, and present under Obama, has supported the Saudis and Pakistan in its alliance with terrorists. We supported housing, educating, training and arming over 100,000 Taliban to invade Russia and commit acts of terrorism. Putin considers that a real threat to Russia. What if Russia had done the same in Cuba, would we not consider it a dangerous threat.
Obama has support Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey in its attempts to hire, arm and train Mercenary Terrorists to support Syrian insurgents against Syria. Many of these terrorists ended up joining ISIS, making it what it could have never become on its own. Obama then started selective bombing ISIL, while with Congressional approval continuing to train terrorists to overthrow Assad's government.
The Obama obsession with Syria has grown from illegally taking weapons out of Libya to arm these terrorists. This was in direct violation of UN Law that Obama signed. To accusing Russia of upsetting the balance of power in the ME.
What Obama represents to the American People and the media is riddled with lies, half-truths and circular reasoning. The real danger is this obsession with greed and corruption demonstrated by our leaders/presidents from both Parties.
Our government past, and present under Obama, has supported the Saudis and Pakistan in its alliance with terrorists. We supported housing, educating, training and arming over 100,000 Taliban to invade Russia and commit acts of terrorism. Putin considers that a real threat to Russia. What if Russia had done the same in Cuba, would we not consider it a dangerous threat.
Obama has support Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey in its attempts to hire, arm and train Mercenary Terrorists to support Syrian insurgents against Syria. Many of these terrorists ended up joining ISIS, making it what it could have never become on its own. Obama then started selective bombing ISIL, while with Congressional approval continuing to train terrorists to overthrow Assad's government.
The Obama obsession with Syria has grown from illegally taking weapons out of Libya to arm these terrorists. This was in direct violation of UN Law that Obama signed. To accusing Russia of upsetting the balance of power in the ME.
What Obama represents to the American People and the media is riddled with lies, half-truths and circular reasoning. The real danger is this obsession with greed and corruption demonstrated by our leaders/presidents from both Parties.
44
Indeed, the hypocrisy and double standard of the NYT knows no boundaries. The foreign policy of our government has been far more aggressive than Russia's under Putin; moreover, with far worse results (Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria). With allies like the Saudis and Erdogan, who are we to condemn the Russians and Assad? At least the latter are not killing Yemenis and Kurds under the guise of combatting ISIS. And now we can look forward to even a more hawkish foreign policy under the Times favoured President-in-waiting, Hillary Clinton.
4
What a pile of utter nonsense, Savushkina street 55 troll factory meaningless rant.
"WE", Ivan, supported housing, educating, training and arming over 100,000 Taliban to invade Russia ???
To invade Russia that has 30 MILLION Muslims or Moscow with 4 MILLION Muslims?
"WE", Ivan, supported housing, educating, training and arming over 100,000 Taliban to invade Russia ???
To invade Russia that has 30 MILLION Muslims or Moscow with 4 MILLION Muslims?
Great piece, but I think it would have served your readers even better to publish a more thorough list of Putin's recent accomplishments.
You forgot about Russia's direct involvement in the downing of a civilian airliner, killing 283 civilians.
There was the complete and utter decimation of Chechnya at Putin's hands.
There is the issue of Russia's brutal detainment and sexual violence against female prisoners in Ukraine.
There's it's ban on foreign adoptions as some sort of quid pro quo for sanctions against it.
Then there are Putin's comments against homosexuality and his encouragement of intolerance and discrimination.
What about the time he killed an enemy of the state by sending an agent to London with Polonium?
There's his connection to billions of dollars stolen, laundered and hidden in the Panama Papers scandal.
There's the ongoing Russian olympic doping scandal, which seems to have been done with heavy state involvement.
You might want to mention his total crack down on civil society, NGOS, lawyers, and the media inside the country.
Don't forget the Russian military jet violating Turkish airspace getting shot down.
Oh, and to close this short comment with, don't forget how Putin just arrested and deported ethnic Tartars in Crimea, exactly like his role model Stalin.
This guy is THE ADOLF HITLER of our time. He's upset. He feels humiliated, and he's ready to get revenge on behalf of his people. The US, Europe, and NATO need to be ready
You forgot about Russia's direct involvement in the downing of a civilian airliner, killing 283 civilians.
There was the complete and utter decimation of Chechnya at Putin's hands.
There is the issue of Russia's brutal detainment and sexual violence against female prisoners in Ukraine.
There's it's ban on foreign adoptions as some sort of quid pro quo for sanctions against it.
Then there are Putin's comments against homosexuality and his encouragement of intolerance and discrimination.
What about the time he killed an enemy of the state by sending an agent to London with Polonium?
There's his connection to billions of dollars stolen, laundered and hidden in the Panama Papers scandal.
There's the ongoing Russian olympic doping scandal, which seems to have been done with heavy state involvement.
You might want to mention his total crack down on civil society, NGOS, lawyers, and the media inside the country.
Don't forget the Russian military jet violating Turkish airspace getting shot down.
Oh, and to close this short comment with, don't forget how Putin just arrested and deported ethnic Tartars in Crimea, exactly like his role model Stalin.
This guy is THE ADOLF HITLER of our time. He's upset. He feels humiliated, and he's ready to get revenge on behalf of his people. The US, Europe, and NATO need to be ready
24
When you can't deal with the truth you label it, call it names, and file it away in your brain as evil or what every name you attach to it. The violation of Turkey air-space, was not as such. The flight plan was filed by the Russians and was to be a coordinated effort through the US Military. The shooting down of the Russia plane was a cold blood calculation by the US Government/Turkey to discredit Russia/Putin with their involvement in the ME/Syria.
Meanwhile, the whole purpose of supporting our ME allies was to overthrow Assad's government for a pipeline to EU from Qatar instead of Iran. Assad's government at the time was considered moderate compared or our Allies, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
All of this has to do with oil and gas and most importantly supporting countries that would use US Dollars to buy and sell their energy. Those that were opposed, we sanctioned, used terrorists against them, bombed or invaded.
America supports terrorists helping to train and arm them. We have trained terrorists in Afghanistan, some 100,000 Taliban to invade Russia. We have trained in the ME and even here on US soil. Covertly supported by Hillary and Obama our CIA have illegally gathered up weapons in Benghazi, Libya and shipped them to terrorists to overthrow the Syrian government. Our allies have spent billions to hire Mercenary Terrorists to overthrow the Syrian government and the EU it is search for a new source of energy encouraged riots in Ukraine to discredit Russia.
Meanwhile, the whole purpose of supporting our ME allies was to overthrow Assad's government for a pipeline to EU from Qatar instead of Iran. Assad's government at the time was considered moderate compared or our Allies, Saudi Arabia and Qatar.
All of this has to do with oil and gas and most importantly supporting countries that would use US Dollars to buy and sell their energy. Those that were opposed, we sanctioned, used terrorists against them, bombed or invaded.
America supports terrorists helping to train and arm them. We have trained terrorists in Afghanistan, some 100,000 Taliban to invade Russia. We have trained in the ME and even here on US soil. Covertly supported by Hillary and Obama our CIA have illegally gathered up weapons in Benghazi, Libya and shipped them to terrorists to overthrow the Syrian government. Our allies have spent billions to hire Mercenary Terrorists to overthrow the Syrian government and the EU it is search for a new source of energy encouraged riots in Ukraine to discredit Russia.
8
I no admirer of Putin, but the editorial seems to credit him with way too much power to influence Assad's behavior. I think the way to read the supposed agreement on these air drops is that the Russians are simply saying they will not shoot the aircraft down. A minor concession to the west, at best.
3
Considering the objective of Obama to overthrow Assad's government, why would Assad believe that food and arms would not be supplied intentionally to terrorists and insurgents?
Russia is supporting Iran who wants to sell its energy, but not for US Dollars. Iran wants to pipe natural gas through Syria to the EU, selling it for Euros. The US wants Qatar to pipe natural gas through Syria to the EU, selling for US Dollars. At this point EU doesn't care as long as it can make a deal to get its needed energy from anyone, but Russia which has been raping Europe with high costs of oil and gas.
Russia is supporting Iran who wants to sell its energy, but not for US Dollars. Iran wants to pipe natural gas through Syria to the EU, selling it for Euros. The US wants Qatar to pipe natural gas through Syria to the EU, selling for US Dollars. At this point EU doesn't care as long as it can make a deal to get its needed energy from anyone, but Russia which has been raping Europe with high costs of oil and gas.
1
As has been the case through history, despots whose economies are in crisis attempt to rally their disgruntled masses through nationalistic fervor thereby diverting the public's attention from their own failures hoping to transfer populist discontent to a perceived threat from outside.
7
The economy of Russia has been devastated from sanctioned, and right so due to how it has held hostage Europe and the former Soviet States to its energy.
The fighting in Syria is because EU is looking for a new source of energy, which is either piped gas from Qatar or Iran that will go through Syria and Turkey. The US favors Qatar and Russia favors Iran, because of the currency these countries will accept when selling their energy. Like with the pipeline through Afghanistan, Pakistan to India, the source means is of no consequence if no pipeline is built. It is terrorists that stand in the way of these pipelines and it is the US that has supported Taliban and ISIS Terrorists that has made the situation dangerous.
Russia is currently fighting some 100,000 Taliban that the US, the Saudis and Pakistan have trained to invade Russian soil. It seems to me that this could and must be negotiated by one with a better view than we have.
The fighting in Syria is because EU is looking for a new source of energy, which is either piped gas from Qatar or Iran that will go through Syria and Turkey. The US favors Qatar and Russia favors Iran, because of the currency these countries will accept when selling their energy. Like with the pipeline through Afghanistan, Pakistan to India, the source means is of no consequence if no pipeline is built. It is terrorists that stand in the way of these pipelines and it is the US that has supported Taliban and ISIS Terrorists that has made the situation dangerous.
Russia is currently fighting some 100,000 Taliban that the US, the Saudis and Pakistan have trained to invade Russian soil. It seems to me that this could and must be negotiated by one with a better view than we have.
5
Putin respects only power and the willingness to use it. His actions in Georgia, Crimea, Ukraine, Syria and elsewhere resemble Hitler's actions in Austria, Sudetenland, and Poland. The longer we wait to confront his aggressive actions, the higher the cost; and rest assured that just like Hitler, we will eventually have to either surrender or confront Putin.
7
Can't help thinking that if Putin were an American, he would easily have beaten Trump for the nomination on foreign policy alone.
12
Dear Editor,
The NYT is censoring it’s “comments”.
It's either deep-sixing many comments or holding them 'til just before closing comment access to stories so other readers have no opportunity to respond in writing. Thus, no one responds, thereby making it impossible to demonstrate whether the comment has struck an important chord.
Worst, The NYT does not acknowledge that some comments are never printed, leaving the impression EVERY comment is printed, thus creating the illusion that the NYT is inclusive.
Nor does The NYT let the writer of this vanished comment know she/he has been tagged as “unworthy” of being included, NOR (and worse) does it share with the writer just what was written that was “unprintable”.
Given this, how can the “offender" learn and then “rise and be reinstated" to your columns?
This is not freedom of speech. It has more in common with Известия.
Furthermore, when you trash comments, you make zero effort to educate the offending writer. It's like a kid getting slapped by a parent without being told why.
This within the pages of our greatest paper!
You think we don’t know? Reply to me back-channel. I'd be happy to help.
Teach us, oh wise one! What is acceptable, and what is not? Give us a chance to redeem ourselves and/or challenge what we may honestly believe to be an onerous standard in a responsible way.
Sincerely,
Melvyn D Nunes
(Uno de los desaparecidos)
The NYT is censoring it’s “comments”.
It's either deep-sixing many comments or holding them 'til just before closing comment access to stories so other readers have no opportunity to respond in writing. Thus, no one responds, thereby making it impossible to demonstrate whether the comment has struck an important chord.
Worst, The NYT does not acknowledge that some comments are never printed, leaving the impression EVERY comment is printed, thus creating the illusion that the NYT is inclusive.
Nor does The NYT let the writer of this vanished comment know she/he has been tagged as “unworthy” of being included, NOR (and worse) does it share with the writer just what was written that was “unprintable”.
Given this, how can the “offender" learn and then “rise and be reinstated" to your columns?
This is not freedom of speech. It has more in common with Известия.
Furthermore, when you trash comments, you make zero effort to educate the offending writer. It's like a kid getting slapped by a parent without being told why.
This within the pages of our greatest paper!
You think we don’t know? Reply to me back-channel. I'd be happy to help.
Teach us, oh wise one! What is acceptable, and what is not? Give us a chance to redeem ourselves and/or challenge what we may honestly believe to be an onerous standard in a responsible way.
Sincerely,
Melvyn D Nunes
(Uno de los desaparecidos)
16
Wow! What fun! I almost put my phone number down there (glad this wasn't about The Bern)! Have at it, oh fellow desaparecidos! Am I nuts? Or does what I've written really happen to others?
Oh! And by the Way: I REALLY love Putin (just in case He decides to track me down because of my anti-doping chastisements...really, I was just kiddin', Vladi.)
Dear NYT. Let us not forget I DID address my missive to you. I would hope you are hard at work writing a response. Feel free either to post it directly to me (you have my contact info in your system) or simply submit it as a reply to my original comment above.
The problem here is that there is absolutely no other way to reach you without posting questions as comments. Indeed, try as I might, I was unable to reach ANYONE at the NYT who would respond. So, as a last gasp reach, I assumed when I wrote Dear Editor you would know it was you whom I was trying to reach. Indeed, my hope remains that you will post something that responds to my concerns and the concerns of those others who have responded above.
Thank you.
The problem here is that there is absolutely no other way to reach you without posting questions as comments. Indeed, try as I might, I was unable to reach ANYONE at the NYT who would respond. So, as a last gasp reach, I assumed when I wrote Dear Editor you would know it was you whom I was trying to reach. Indeed, my hope remains that you will post something that responds to my concerns and the concerns of those others who have responded above.
Thank you.
All the more worrisome is the possibility of a Drumpf presidency as Drumpf is in Putin's pocket. Note that Drumpf has already made dispariging comments about the NATO alliance.
Drumpf, the Siberian Candidate.
Drumpf, the Siberian Candidate.
6
History will show that Obama stood by playing small ball while Putin aggressively expanded Russian territory and influence. Putin is like any other smart and strong leader. he strikes when he senses weakness. The vacuum left by America's retreat from global leadership is being filled, and that is not a good thing. Putin, Iran, China - they understand one thing very clearly; strength and power. In the Middle East the willingness to use force is everything. Revenge and the projection of power are at the core of social order. The US is the only country in the world who could instantly put an end to Putins aggression, I only hope the next president has the courage to fulfill your obligations. The community organizer just doesn't have it.
4
In response to Mr. Wilson, it is Putin, not Obama, who is playing small ball. The Ukraine was ruled by a Putin puppet. Now Putin fights to regain a small portion of what was once his. Syria was always a Russian ally. Now it is a diminished and costly one. The Russian economy is a mess; the US economy, the world's strongest.
Putin's boasts and howls, while dangerous, are cries of pain and loss. For the most part, Obama has been playing shrewd ball. I hope he continues to do so.
Putin's boasts and howls, while dangerous, are cries of pain and loss. For the most part, Obama has been playing shrewd ball. I hope he continues to do so.
4
Russia with 143 million people is a nation with an aging shrinking ethnic Russian Orthodox majority faced with a growing and youthful non-ethnic Russian Muslim domestic threatening minority and neighboring majority. A domestic Chechen Muslim insurgency plus the foreign Ukrainians and Georgians.
Vladimir Putin is riding a wounded surrounded bear. Syria is Russia's only Arab Muslim ally and the home of a Russian naval base. Syria and Iraq are much closer to Russia than either is to America. Unlike Barack Obama, Vladimir Putin does not have a Nobel Peace Prize nor a military that annually spends 12x what Russia does on arms. Russia's economy is dependent upon domestic mineral and fossil fuel prices. The American 5th Fleet is based in Bahrain where minority Sunni Muslim Arab royal tyrants have oppressed the Shia Muslim Arab majority with the aid of Saudi Arabia and American arms.
There is no military solution to the ethnic sectarian civil war in Syria. And the Alawite Shia Muslim Arab minority of the Assad clan is allied with the Christian and Druze Arab minority. While the opposition to Assad includes some so-called moderates it also includes al Qaeda and ISIS and their affiliates. In a nation of 23 million people about 9.5 million have been internally displaced, 4.7 million are external refugees and 500,000 are dead. America has 14x the population of Syria.
Bashar al-Assad, King Salman, Benjamin Netanyahu and Abdul Fattah al-Sisi are all Putin like leaders.
Vladimir Putin is riding a wounded surrounded bear. Syria is Russia's only Arab Muslim ally and the home of a Russian naval base. Syria and Iraq are much closer to Russia than either is to America. Unlike Barack Obama, Vladimir Putin does not have a Nobel Peace Prize nor a military that annually spends 12x what Russia does on arms. Russia's economy is dependent upon domestic mineral and fossil fuel prices. The American 5th Fleet is based in Bahrain where minority Sunni Muslim Arab royal tyrants have oppressed the Shia Muslim Arab majority with the aid of Saudi Arabia and American arms.
There is no military solution to the ethnic sectarian civil war in Syria. And the Alawite Shia Muslim Arab minority of the Assad clan is allied with the Christian and Druze Arab minority. While the opposition to Assad includes some so-called moderates it also includes al Qaeda and ISIS and their affiliates. In a nation of 23 million people about 9.5 million have been internally displaced, 4.7 million are external refugees and 500,000 are dead. America has 14x the population of Syria.
Bashar al-Assad, King Salman, Benjamin Netanyahu and Abdul Fattah al-Sisi are all Putin like leaders.
4
Putin's sabre rattling has come about for one reason. That is the POTUS.
President Obama has actively sought to reduce the "conceived might" of the US and the willingness to use that might, towards "world good and ultimately stabilization" as it has for 200 years.
As I knew and most conservatives knew, the theory of bringing America into the European mold was failed and has now put the country in a dangerous position along with the rest of the world.
President Obama has actively sought to reduce the "conceived might" of the US and the willingness to use that might, towards "world good and ultimately stabilization" as it has for 200 years.
As I knew and most conservatives knew, the theory of bringing America into the European mold was failed and has now put the country in a dangerous position along with the rest of the world.
1
Obama's at fault for everything that happens in the world. The endless nonsense of conservatives. And check your history, 200 years ago we were hardly a world power. And I am sure you would more than a $500 billion budget for defense and cut taxes as well.
2
Among Boston Red Sox fans, the phrase "Just Manny being Manny" is legend.
But this NYT Editorial would have media-deluded Americans believe that Russia's behavior is "Just Empire being Empire" and explains the behavior of both the country of Russia and its President, Vladimir Putin.
Whereas, the apt term "Just Empire being Empire" actually describes a refined diagnosis of the last Empire standing on earth since the "Evil Empire" collapsed, and a uniquely hidden dual-party Vichy facade of faux-democratic government preparing its next TV 'stage show' election of the 21st century's new Disguised Global Capitalist Empire, which is HQed in, and merely 'poses' as the country previously known as America.
As Zygmunt Bauman hauntingly puts it, “In the case of an ailing social order, the absence of an adequate diagnosis…is a crucial, perhaps decisive, part of the disease.”
Berman, Morris. 2007 "Dark Ages America, The Final Phase of Empire"
But this NYT Editorial would have media-deluded Americans believe that Russia's behavior is "Just Empire being Empire" and explains the behavior of both the country of Russia and its President, Vladimir Putin.
Whereas, the apt term "Just Empire being Empire" actually describes a refined diagnosis of the last Empire standing on earth since the "Evil Empire" collapsed, and a uniquely hidden dual-party Vichy facade of faux-democratic government preparing its next TV 'stage show' election of the 21st century's new Disguised Global Capitalist Empire, which is HQed in, and merely 'poses' as the country previously known as America.
As Zygmunt Bauman hauntingly puts it, “In the case of an ailing social order, the absence of an adequate diagnosis…is a crucial, perhaps decisive, part of the disease.”
Berman, Morris. 2007 "Dark Ages America, The Final Phase of Empire"
6
President Vladimir Putin, ever the romantic, still seems to believe that he--and only he--can take Russia back to the pays of a by-gone Supremacy, of a World Power in every sense of the word. But, this Czarist demagogue has no clothes.
I takes both Guns and Butter to truly rise rise above the fray--guns to enforce the supremacy, the financial resources to fund that unquestioned power, and both to maintain domestic tranquility, by checking the People under the Iron Fist.
The Russian People are proud of their military and that, along with the government's control of the media, has maintained a high favorability for the President. So, while Russia has maintained much of its military power--albeit with questionable advanced technological resources--it is surely lacking the ability to pay the so-called piper. And the Russian People's acquiescence with the lack of necessities, and the quality of life, are quickly unravelling.
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
I takes both Guns and Butter to truly rise rise above the fray--guns to enforce the supremacy, the financial resources to fund that unquestioned power, and both to maintain domestic tranquility, by checking the People under the Iron Fist.
The Russian People are proud of their military and that, along with the government's control of the media, has maintained a high favorability for the President. So, while Russia has maintained much of its military power--albeit with questionable advanced technological resources--it is surely lacking the ability to pay the so-called piper. And the Russian People's acquiescence with the lack of necessities, and the quality of life, are quickly unravelling.
https://thetruthoncommonsense.com
3
I have nothing but disgust when I read this article. Is it Russia that started this entire conflict in the middle east? IS IT?
The fact is that this entire situation exists because of the United States and its allies going all over and bombing those countries into wastelands. Who has absolutely destroyed Iraq, Afghanistan? Who has provided arms to these so called "rebels"? It is the US allies, Saudis, Emirates, etc.
It would have been better if Russia had entered the arena sooner and TOLD you SICK AMERICANS that stop doing this or we are going to make it difficult for you, by supplying defensive and offensive weapons to the people you are killing carte blanche.
We need to see things for what they are. It is WE who have created this mess everywhere and it is WE who are going to ultimately pay for it. Do you think all those refugees from Syria are going to be nice in the years to come? You will see. In Australia we brought over a lot of Lebanese in the 70s and guess what, their children are a plague for our country. This is coming your way from the Syrians and others, just wait and see.
The fact is that this entire situation exists because of the United States and its allies going all over and bombing those countries into wastelands. Who has absolutely destroyed Iraq, Afghanistan? Who has provided arms to these so called "rebels"? It is the US allies, Saudis, Emirates, etc.
It would have been better if Russia had entered the arena sooner and TOLD you SICK AMERICANS that stop doing this or we are going to make it difficult for you, by supplying defensive and offensive weapons to the people you are killing carte blanche.
We need to see things for what they are. It is WE who have created this mess everywhere and it is WE who are going to ultimately pay for it. Do you think all those refugees from Syria are going to be nice in the years to come? You will see. In Australia we brought over a lot of Lebanese in the 70s and guess what, their children are a plague for our country. This is coming your way from the Syrians and others, just wait and see.
38
Syria has been backed by Russia for decades. Russians invaded Afghanistan long before WE were involved. Russia continually invades its former Soviet countries, Chechnya, Ukraine etc. I am sure its the US fault as well. I suppose the years of Stalin with 25 Million dead was our fault. Meanwhile what has Australia done? The few asylum seeking immigrants trying to reach your shores are housed on prison islands forever.
1
ANM, yes. And yet, there is never any discussion of Thomas Barnett's 2004 Naval War College strategy and book, "The Pentagon's New Map" (which could have been more accurately titled, "The Global Empire's New Map") that exactly promulgated the war plans of attacking the 'GAP' countries of the Greater Middle East, across a 5000 mile swath from Mauritania to the very borders of China and Russia (i.e. Ukraine) with what amounts to an undiagnosed and hidden version of PNAC on steroids --- and even featuring Mrs. Victoria 'Kagan/PNAC' Nuland in the roll of 'cookie feeder' to fascists (but, of course, the NYT does not want anyone to assume that the current neoliberal-con 'D' Vichy party's Presidential candidate had any intelligence that her Deputy of Eastern European Affairs was married to Mr. Robert 'PNAC-founder' Kagan, neocon leader of the band, eh?
4
This editorial is not surprising given the faction of the Foreign Affairs community that the Times represents. But some facts are worth noting for the readers.
US policy toward Russia has been aggressive and dangerous. Under Bush we unilaterally withdrew from the ABM treaty. Most analyst saw this as a signal of our intent to deploy spaced based weapons. What followed was the placement of antimissile defense systems in Europe, ostensibly to thwart an attack against Europe from Iran. But it was obvious that it was designed to change the strategic nuclear balance between the US and Russia and limit Russia's potential for retaliation in the event of a US first strike. Most readers should be aware that the US has never disavowed a nuclear first strike, though other nations have and under the Bush Doctrine this position has become even more ominous.
Then we added county's adjacent to Russia to our European military alliance. Finally our destabilizations efforts in Ukraine produced a coup and Russia predictably reacted by seizing the Crimea and preserving its only warm water naval base.
Obama has added to this mix by initiating a trillion dollar overall of US nuclear weapons. The goal isn't to destroy old weapons, but to miniaturize them turning their enormous destructive capacity into new tactical systems. It seems that the dangerous obsession with continuing the cold war lies with us. The board would serve readers and the nation better if it seriously examined this policy.
US policy toward Russia has been aggressive and dangerous. Under Bush we unilaterally withdrew from the ABM treaty. Most analyst saw this as a signal of our intent to deploy spaced based weapons. What followed was the placement of antimissile defense systems in Europe, ostensibly to thwart an attack against Europe from Iran. But it was obvious that it was designed to change the strategic nuclear balance between the US and Russia and limit Russia's potential for retaliation in the event of a US first strike. Most readers should be aware that the US has never disavowed a nuclear first strike, though other nations have and under the Bush Doctrine this position has become even more ominous.
Then we added county's adjacent to Russia to our European military alliance. Finally our destabilizations efforts in Ukraine produced a coup and Russia predictably reacted by seizing the Crimea and preserving its only warm water naval base.
Obama has added to this mix by initiating a trillion dollar overall of US nuclear weapons. The goal isn't to destroy old weapons, but to miniaturize them turning their enormous destructive capacity into new tactical systems. It seems that the dangerous obsession with continuing the cold war lies with us. The board would serve readers and the nation better if it seriously examined this policy.
103
If you were Putin what would you do? You are facing a US govt that is cannibalizing itself between Democrats and Republicans, has over 700 military bases world wide, attacked while unprovoked Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and is consistently expanding NATO. while originally calling out it wouldn't do so originally. Would he feel he can trust the US? Putin is no star, but then neither is Trump or Hilary Clinton... Doesn't seem like things will get better with this cast of characters.
53
Fools & Knaves
Prime Minister Abe sees Russia as a potential ally. Mr. Trump sees Russia as a potential ally.
See “Is Russia Our Enemy?” under ...
http://nationonfire.com/category/government/foreign-relations/ .
Similar to that which Bush the First did with Iraq, Obama has been doing with Russia. The problem for these United States of America is that Russia is not Iraq, and President Putin is not Saddam Hussein.
As for Syria? Some say, “Let them kill each other.” Others say, “Russia wants the headache? Let Russia feel the pain.”
Yes, the Allies, after WWI, created the context. Who lit the match for the current mess?
See “Did Bush Burn The Koran?” under ...
http://nationonfire.com/category/government/foreign-relations/.
Prime Minister Abe sees Russia as a potential ally. Mr. Trump sees Russia as a potential ally.
See “Is Russia Our Enemy?” under ...
http://nationonfire.com/category/government/foreign-relations/ .
Similar to that which Bush the First did with Iraq, Obama has been doing with Russia. The problem for these United States of America is that Russia is not Iraq, and President Putin is not Saddam Hussein.
As for Syria? Some say, “Let them kill each other.” Others say, “Russia wants the headache? Let Russia feel the pain.”
Yes, the Allies, after WWI, created the context. Who lit the match for the current mess?
See “Did Bush Burn The Koran?” under ...
http://nationonfire.com/category/government/foreign-relations/.
The USAF should haved fired on Russian belligerent warplanes. Turkey did. Russians didn't retaliate
2
Not to defend Putin, which I am not doing, but escalation of military tensions is something for which the USA should also be held accountable. The military buildup in the South China Sea is not being orchestrated by China. It is not only Putin who suffers under the syndrome of might makes us right.
21
It should be clear to everyone by now that Putin's and the Russians strategy is one of maskirovka - the hallmark of Russian warfare and a word which translates as "something masked". For the Russians point of departure is that "all human history can be portrayed as the history of deception." The problem is that today, with their deliberate actions and weak, puerile explanations that defy diplomatic logic, the Russians aren't even trying any more to "maskirov" their deliberately provocative and deceptive actions. Even the Soviets came up with "plausible" explanations, and thought about things (somewhat more) before acting whereas Putin is simply reckless and acts as he does because that's how he's used to doing things, because he figures that no one will stand up to him and there will be no repercussions. And that emboldens the old KGB meister. Who wasn't really a master, simply a lower-level aparatchik who ran the city then known as "Lenningrad" so poorly and corruptly that it's amazing he's made it as far as he has.
6
Dear Matty,
You should learn Russian better before you use it. The infinitive is not to "maskirov" but to "maskirovat". The same apply to your political knowledge, not to mention impolite, hosile and inaccurate presentation of your point of vew.
You should learn Russian better before you use it. The infinitive is not to "maskirov" but to "maskirovat". The same apply to your political knowledge, not to mention impolite, hosile and inaccurate presentation of your point of vew.
3
Pani Svetlana, govrayou po Russki. Spaciba. Go lecture someone else. Like the BBC, whom I quoted.
There's not a thing either hostile or inaccurate in my comment, however, mislabeling my opinion(s) as such is typical of the very things highlighted in my comment above, namely, the deliberate misdefinition of something.
You might find it hostile and inaccurate, however, it's not. The USSR took great pride in officially explaining their actions with a modicum of plausibility. Today, Russians and Russian diplomats don't even try. Just watch five minutes of RT, the Russian counterpart of The FAUX network.
And you might want to proofread your own English before you hit the submit button. Touche! (that's French, tbw).
There's not a thing either hostile or inaccurate in my comment, however, mislabeling my opinion(s) as such is typical of the very things highlighted in my comment above, namely, the deliberate misdefinition of something.
You might find it hostile and inaccurate, however, it's not. The USSR took great pride in officially explaining their actions with a modicum of plausibility. Today, Russians and Russian diplomats don't even try. Just watch five minutes of RT, the Russian counterpart of The FAUX network.
And you might want to proofread your own English before you hit the submit button. Touche! (that's French, tbw).
1
I strongly suggest that the NY Times editors stop obsessing with Vladmire Putin and worry about the U.S. government's tacit support for Al Qaeda and ISIS in Syria and Libya. The Times was gung ho for invading and destroying Libya too. Now is an anarchist disaster where ISIS, Al Qaeda, and other terrorists find safe haven. As Colin Powell said, "when you break it, you own it." We are horrible at regime change so focus on rebuilding Libya and give up on the Saudi terrorist extremist dream of taking over and destroying Syria because Putin isn't having it.
66
I could not agree more with this commentator. I should like to know the purpose of the US Governement to negate everything that Russia and Mr. Putin is doing. Why the US government is blatantly lying to the world with the help of American media about the "very wicked" Russia and her leader. We do read other media in Europe and know perfectly well that NATO is pursueing an agressive agenda towards Russia. We also know that Ukraine's problems were brought about by the US government, as with the Islamic state and Syria. Is the aim of Washington to weaken Europe with the flood of "refugees/migrants" that it has organized to send us with the help of pseudo help organizations?
2
Clearly, Putin has to throw his military around internationally to compensate for the fact that, as a result of his corrupt, kleptocratic, authoritarian dictatorship, the Russian economy is going straight into the toilet.
On a related note, I continue to find the comments from the swarm of Putin-paid trolls amusing. They're so utterly dismissive of facts and reality, only furthering the perception that Putin's delusional.
On a related note, I continue to find the comments from the swarm of Putin-paid trolls amusing. They're so utterly dismissive of facts and reality, only furthering the perception that Putin's delusional.
4
Vladimir Putin's main obsession, since he first appeared on the rostrum beside Boris Yeltsin, was and still is, the "danger" of seeing even the vaguest desire for or movement toward secession arise, again, among any of the ethnically, linguistically and religiously diverse peoples (NOT Russians) who inhabit the Western or Northern Caucasus regions (thus, INSIDE the Russian Federation).
...Notably Dagestanis, Ingushetians, Ossetians; it would be easy to run through several other names and locales. ...But ESPECIALLY, the Chechnyans!
After that comes his despisal of all things Turkish, or Turco-Mongolian. This is not confined to the state called Turkey (though he would clearly make incursions there, were it not for Nato). It extends right round the rim of South Central Asia to former S.S.R's, whose peoples “hold” that cultural persuasion: Kazakhs, Turkmens, Uzbeks, Kyrgyz.
The Tajiks are Persian-, not Turkish-language speakers. Still, given an occasion to bring these people too back under Soviet, oops, I mean Russian control—of forcing the “Golden Horde” to pay tribute to imperial Moscow, like in the too-short lived good old days—he would probably prove himself "equal opportunity".
Third, likely comes Kiev (first capital of "Rus"), and Slavic Ukraine.
The hatred of NATO? Probably as much fomented by Cheney's and Rumsfeld's overbearing arrogance—"anti-Iran" missile bases (my eye!); "black" prisons; "private" airlines (other eye!)—as by Vlad’s paranoid reaction.
...Notably Dagestanis, Ingushetians, Ossetians; it would be easy to run through several other names and locales. ...But ESPECIALLY, the Chechnyans!
After that comes his despisal of all things Turkish, or Turco-Mongolian. This is not confined to the state called Turkey (though he would clearly make incursions there, were it not for Nato). It extends right round the rim of South Central Asia to former S.S.R's, whose peoples “hold” that cultural persuasion: Kazakhs, Turkmens, Uzbeks, Kyrgyz.
The Tajiks are Persian-, not Turkish-language speakers. Still, given an occasion to bring these people too back under Soviet, oops, I mean Russian control—of forcing the “Golden Horde” to pay tribute to imperial Moscow, like in the too-short lived good old days—he would probably prove himself "equal opportunity".
Third, likely comes Kiev (first capital of "Rus"), and Slavic Ukraine.
The hatred of NATO? Probably as much fomented by Cheney's and Rumsfeld's overbearing arrogance—"anti-Iran" missile bases (my eye!); "black" prisons; "private" airlines (other eye!)—as by Vlad’s paranoid reaction.
2
Putin is always looking over his shoulder to see if anyone is laughing at him behind his back. He is that insecure. He fears humiliation and disrespect. That is why so many of his critics are murdered, disappear or flee for their lives.
Putin feels psychologically cornered and therefore has become even more dangerous. With all his stolen billions he wants more. He wants to regain the lost USSR. Without question he is building up nerve to test NATO. It will happen. Probably in the Baltics. Two battalions isn't going to stop him. He is praying Trump wins. Then he will test him and NATO. Anything can happen. My bet is Putin will at least get a piece of Latvia back, a province called Latgale. Nobody in the West will risk nuclear war to get it back.
But the Baltics only have themselves to blame. Latvia's army is underfunded, they have no draft and will not fight to defend their land. They always claim
that it is better to surrender than die in a hopeless fight. Of course, if NATO does the dirty work then it's OK.
Putin feels psychologically cornered and therefore has become even more dangerous. With all his stolen billions he wants more. He wants to regain the lost USSR. Without question he is building up nerve to test NATO. It will happen. Probably in the Baltics. Two battalions isn't going to stop him. He is praying Trump wins. Then he will test him and NATO. Anything can happen. My bet is Putin will at least get a piece of Latvia back, a province called Latgale. Nobody in the West will risk nuclear war to get it back.
But the Baltics only have themselves to blame. Latvia's army is underfunded, they have no draft and will not fight to defend their land. They always claim
that it is better to surrender than die in a hopeless fight. Of course, if NATO does the dirty work then it's OK.
4
Vladimir Putin is a very rich, dishonest, untrustworthy, power-mad man who is a military interventionist. In his speeches, he panders to the people he is speaking to.
He is the Russian equivalent of one of our candidates for President.
5/19 @ 7:17 am
He is the Russian equivalent of one of our candidates for President.
5/19 @ 7:17 am
3
Hillary?
1
Huh? Is the NYT sure that America is not at fault?
21
It's embarrassing to read such full-throated propaganda from the Times, and to witness the Editorial Board's utter disregard for well-documented historical facts. Firstly, to call what is happening in Syria a "civil war" completely ignores the role the U.S. and its "allies," in particular, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, have played in fomenting, prolonging, and intensifying the conflict. Given American culpability in destabilizing the entire Mideast region, to blame the "instability" of Syria on Putin's "obsessive quest to make Russia great again" is an absurdity worthy of Donald Trump.
Secondly, Russia did not "invade" Ukraine, and the Editorial Board's thumbnail history of the conflict there thoroughly misrepresents the actual story of the U.S.'s covert regime-change operation in Kiev, via neo-Nazi instigated coup. Nor does "annexation" truthfully describe what happened in Crimea -- ask the Crimeans, who in poll after poll have declared their satisfaction in being free of the anti-Russian neo-Nazis in Kiev.
Secondly, Russia did not "invade" Ukraine, and the Editorial Board's thumbnail history of the conflict there thoroughly misrepresents the actual story of the U.S.'s covert regime-change operation in Kiev, via neo-Nazi instigated coup. Nor does "annexation" truthfully describe what happened in Crimea -- ask the Crimeans, who in poll after poll have declared their satisfaction in being free of the anti-Russian neo-Nazis in Kiev.
51
There is another obsession on display here. It is the American neocon obsession with regime change in Russia.
It has troubled the world for a long time now. It let to the Georgia War, for example, a true neocon lunacy.
Putin is a challenge. The American response dreams of a return to Yeltsin-like collapse of Russia, which is the exact fear that propels Putin in Russian politics.
Yes, Russia wants to rise. It is also true that American neocons dream Cold War leftover dreams of crushing Russia. Those far too influential Americans do not really want constructive relations with Russia, and they sabotage them.
Those sorts of Americans will react to this comment as Putin-loving. I don't love Putin. I would not want to live under his system. The thing is, I don't want to fight with Putin either, nor crush Russia. American conglomerate access to Russian natural resources a la Yeltsin days is simply not worth it.
Nixon went to Mao's China and drank tea with Mao, not because he loved Mao. He did it to balance a far more powerful Soviet Union with helpf of a far less powerful China than we see today. Now we can work with Russia in the same ways. We can do that without loving Putin.
It has troubled the world for a long time now. It let to the Georgia War, for example, a true neocon lunacy.
Putin is a challenge. The American response dreams of a return to Yeltsin-like collapse of Russia, which is the exact fear that propels Putin in Russian politics.
Yes, Russia wants to rise. It is also true that American neocons dream Cold War leftover dreams of crushing Russia. Those far too influential Americans do not really want constructive relations with Russia, and they sabotage them.
Those sorts of Americans will react to this comment as Putin-loving. I don't love Putin. I would not want to live under his system. The thing is, I don't want to fight with Putin either, nor crush Russia. American conglomerate access to Russian natural resources a la Yeltsin days is simply not worth it.
Nixon went to Mao's China and drank tea with Mao, not because he loved Mao. He did it to balance a far more powerful Soviet Union with helpf of a far less powerful China than we see today. Now we can work with Russia in the same ways. We can do that without loving Putin.
44
try to be objective. For humanitarian aid, there is no need to make dangerous food launches. We need to help the regular Assad government to fight the rebels sponsored by the creator of the Isis, the same people who caused the 9/11.
As concerns the alleged obsession of Putin, I would say that the obsession is that the Pentagon has decided to lay a base, missile on the border of Russia. This is the real challenge for peace. Let's stop making unnecessary demagoguery and abolish once and for all OTAN anachronistic structure that only serves to justify unnecessary deployments of weapons. It is not Russia the danger and in Europe we all know.
As concerns the alleged obsession of Putin, I would say that the obsession is that the Pentagon has decided to lay a base, missile on the border of Russia. This is the real challenge for peace. Let's stop making unnecessary demagoguery and abolish once and for all OTAN anachronistic structure that only serves to justify unnecessary deployments of weapons. It is not Russia the danger and in Europe we all know.
28
Russia and China are taking advantage of the fact that we do not have a proper leader or Commander in Chief in President Obama and are pushing us around. They will continue to do that until we get a strong President who is not full of crap. They know there is a pretty good chance that Donald Trump will be President and they fear what his reaction will be so they are trying to make as many inroads as possible now.
"All this [activity in the Baltic] risks direct confrontation with the United States."
Er, that's his neighborhood, not ours. Would we be happy to see Chinese or Russian aircraft in the Gulf of Mexico or buzzing Ontario?
Er, that's his neighborhood, not ours. Would we be happy to see Chinese or Russian aircraft in the Gulf of Mexico or buzzing Ontario?
75
A more dangerous North Korea, anyone?
1
The really dangerous obsession is the obsession of the US to stay the world's only superpower and to behave as if it is above the rules.
If Russia has a military exercise a few kilometers from its borders it is called a threat to the Baltics. If the US is exercising a few meters from Russia's borders it is "defense". Unfortunately the Russians don't understand that logic.
Can you blame Russia for "simulating an attack" (with clearly unarmed planes) on an American ship when that ship doing an exercise on wiping out the Russian submarine fleet in the Baltics?
What is so difficult about understanding that the US is supporting terrorism in Syria? Mr. Kerry is openly asking Russia not to attack Al Qaeda subsidiary Al Nusra. The truce in Syria broke down because the US and its allies resupplied the rebels and gave them the green light to attack near Aleppo. And to cover them, the US is trying to shift the blame to Russia and the Syrian government.
In Ukraine the government and the Eastern rebels have been accusing each other of violating the truce for a long time. Given that several times the government has proudly celebrated some conquest it certainly isn't without fault. Even more problematic is that it still hasn't enacted the autonomy for the Donbass that is at the heart of the Minsk agreement.
If Russia has a military exercise a few kilometers from its borders it is called a threat to the Baltics. If the US is exercising a few meters from Russia's borders it is "defense". Unfortunately the Russians don't understand that logic.
Can you blame Russia for "simulating an attack" (with clearly unarmed planes) on an American ship when that ship doing an exercise on wiping out the Russian submarine fleet in the Baltics?
What is so difficult about understanding that the US is supporting terrorism in Syria? Mr. Kerry is openly asking Russia not to attack Al Qaeda subsidiary Al Nusra. The truce in Syria broke down because the US and its allies resupplied the rebels and gave them the green light to attack near Aleppo. And to cover them, the US is trying to shift the blame to Russia and the Syrian government.
In Ukraine the government and the Eastern rebels have been accusing each other of violating the truce for a long time. Given that several times the government has proudly celebrated some conquest it certainly isn't without fault. Even more problematic is that it still hasn't enacted the autonomy for the Donbass that is at the heart of the Minsk agreement.
43
Germany invaded Russia twice in the last century. As the Cold War was coming to an end, Gorbachev was told that NATO, the West, put it however you like, would not expand to the east to the borders of Russia. Today the Baltic States and Poland are in NATO. There are two distinct and mutually exclusive narratives that lead to the current situation in Ukraine. Look at the history of Crimea as part of Russia and of the USSR before you condemn Russian actions out of hand. We, the USA, NATO, the EU, the West, poked a sleeping bear and now we pretend surprise that the bear reacted. Put your foreign policy in the hands of Neo-Cons and this is the result you get.
41
Vladimir Putin's Dangerous Obsession.....
Is just as Dangerous as
Donald J. Trump's Dangerous Obsession....
could destroy many many lives....
Thank About this Editors.....and this is an easy parallel for your august
Editors to ...parse.....megalomaniacs in tandem...and more tabloid on a
much larger scale....Avoid This ...and take a detour....to responsible reporting
once more.
Is just as Dangerous as
Donald J. Trump's Dangerous Obsession....
could destroy many many lives....
Thank About this Editors.....and this is an easy parallel for your august
Editors to ...parse.....megalomaniacs in tandem...and more tabloid on a
much larger scale....Avoid This ...and take a detour....to responsible reporting
once more.
7
Nice allusion: "Mr. Putin's obsessive quest to make Russia great again". Where do we buy the red ball caps?
9
This article is the continuation of decades old cold war mongering, It never mentions any deeds by the US, that resulted as far as the Middle East is concerned in an unadulterated catastrophe with the dead counted in increments of hundred thousand.
Assad is fighting the cancer of Islamism. We supported al Quaida affiliates intent of introducing strict Sharia, the US gave these people that we fight for years elsewhere at a cost of trillions of dollars weapons and training. But then by Israel's veto we gave no anti air-craft weapons which caused the whole revolution to fade out into a blood bath. Russia's air power had easy pickings. Plus they terminated one of those morsels of US policies. Syria has a little bit of oil, in the North which was controlled by the Islamists. They sold the crude to Turkey via tanker trucks, making Erdogan's kid, the energy minister, filthy rich. We bombed ISIS, but we never saw that the source of their income was the oil they sold in Turkey, our ally?
We supplied weapons to the Syrian opposition from Libya after we turned it into a failed state. The CIA managed the transfer in Benghazi, getting our ambassador killed.
And whether Kharkiv is part of Russia or part of Ukraine is none of our business. The last forces that tried subdue Russia, namely Germany and France, were wiped out by doing so.
Why would the editorial board give such a skewed view of the world and stoke the always latent russo-phobia in the US? Cui bono?
Assad is fighting the cancer of Islamism. We supported al Quaida affiliates intent of introducing strict Sharia, the US gave these people that we fight for years elsewhere at a cost of trillions of dollars weapons and training. But then by Israel's veto we gave no anti air-craft weapons which caused the whole revolution to fade out into a blood bath. Russia's air power had easy pickings. Plus they terminated one of those morsels of US policies. Syria has a little bit of oil, in the North which was controlled by the Islamists. They sold the crude to Turkey via tanker trucks, making Erdogan's kid, the energy minister, filthy rich. We bombed ISIS, but we never saw that the source of their income was the oil they sold in Turkey, our ally?
We supplied weapons to the Syrian opposition from Libya after we turned it into a failed state. The CIA managed the transfer in Benghazi, getting our ambassador killed.
And whether Kharkiv is part of Russia or part of Ukraine is none of our business. The last forces that tried subdue Russia, namely Germany and France, were wiped out by doing so.
Why would the editorial board give such a skewed view of the world and stoke the always latent russo-phobia in the US? Cui bono?
80
We return to the duplicity of Vladimir Putin relative to the principles the most Kumbaya among us would project on him; yet we never dissect the TRUE drivers of his actions, which are his perceptions of his own and Russia’s interests.
Clearly, he regards Syria as heaven-sent. When he sought to kill Islamist extremists in Russian enclaves, he had a Russian school taken hostage in retaliation, with horrific consequences. There is no consequence when he kills Islamist extremists in Syria, or when Assad shells them or gasses them with his help and protected by Russian warplanes.
Why would he want cities that largely serve as the chattels and supporters of Islamist extremist tribal entities to be fed? His purpose is to kill them, and, since Syria is a magnet for such extremists from all over the region, eventually lessen the disruptive independence pressures from within Russia and its majority-Islamic clients.
This isn’t going to change so long as Syria’s war persists. If, in the end, we want Syrians to be fed, airdrops won’t do it. What will do it is some confederation of tribes with defined spheres of territorial influence, that can live with one another sufficiently peacefully to remove the pretext for Russian bombs.
As to his other provocations, he wins space to pursue his interests when he tests us and we are found wanting in effective response. But don’t expect effective response from a Europe that would need to redirect massive resources from butter to guns … and won’t.
Clearly, he regards Syria as heaven-sent. When he sought to kill Islamist extremists in Russian enclaves, he had a Russian school taken hostage in retaliation, with horrific consequences. There is no consequence when he kills Islamist extremists in Syria, or when Assad shells them or gasses them with his help and protected by Russian warplanes.
Why would he want cities that largely serve as the chattels and supporters of Islamist extremist tribal entities to be fed? His purpose is to kill them, and, since Syria is a magnet for such extremists from all over the region, eventually lessen the disruptive independence pressures from within Russia and its majority-Islamic clients.
This isn’t going to change so long as Syria’s war persists. If, in the end, we want Syrians to be fed, airdrops won’t do it. What will do it is some confederation of tribes with defined spheres of territorial influence, that can live with one another sufficiently peacefully to remove the pretext for Russian bombs.
As to his other provocations, he wins space to pursue his interests when he tests us and we are found wanting in effective response. But don’t expect effective response from a Europe that would need to redirect massive resources from butter to guns … and won’t.
1
Besides the examples you listed you are perhaps forgetting one - the Snowden Snow-job. Putin's agents recruited Snowden to steal NSA documents then they modified them. Some of the slides are genuine but others are fake, designed to exaggerate what the NSA is doing and sow tension and discord both between people and their governments, and between governments ( NATO governments in particular).
One of these days someone with access to his files will take a look at the meta-data in the ppt files.
One of these days someone with access to his files will take a look at the meta-data in the ppt files.
--Putin's agents recruited Snowden to steal NSA documents then they modified them.--
There is absolutely no evidence of any of that, not the slightest.
There is absolutely no evidence of any of that, not the slightest.
5
"The 1980's are now calling to ask for their for their foreign policy back"
- Barack Obama to Mitt Romney, 2008 debate after Romney suggested Russia is a geopolitical threat.
- Barack Obama to Mitt Romney, 2008 debate after Romney suggested Russia is a geopolitical threat.
1
Ask any Russian about why there is tension between our countries and they will tell you it is due to NATO bombing Serbia and expansion into eastern Europe. Their view is that NATO was an organization to counter communist threats in western Europe. With the end of communism, it should have been disbanded. They will also tell you that this turn of opinion about our intentions with Russia started before Putin, so it's not product of Putin controlled media.
15
But it's just hunky dory for us to use our military might against a country that had nothing to do with attacking us, Iraq?
Visions of "pots calling kettles black" dance before my eyes.
Visions of "pots calling kettles black" dance before my eyes.
17
This is all about reversing the course of history that left the former Soviet Union a smoldering ruin 25 years ago. The western reaches of the former Russian Empire now effectively belong to the West, and bringing Poland and the Baltic states into NATO effectively slammed the door on Russian influence by any means short of war. Ukraine is too far East, and too lacking in both resources and political stability to meaningfully provide for its own defense without outside help, and NATO is not about to let them join. Long time NATO members Greece and Turkey are putting a heavily strain on the alliance because of their internal instabilities brought about by the political collapse of Sunni-dominated governments in the Middle East. Putin may be fishing in troubled waters, but his regime, to use an historical parallel, occupies about the same level of comparative strength as did the former Ottoman Empire in 1914. Putin can start a war, but he can't win it on his own. No longer an international leader, he's now been reduced to just another tribal chieftain looking to recover his tribe's faded glory.
9
The Editorial seems less concerned about the plight of the Syrians or seeking negotiated political transition in Syria than about maligning the Russian President Putin for his recent misadventures in Europe and the Middle East, and accordingly asks him to behave as per the US' wishes,or else risk retaliation through NATO's further militarisation and the eastward expansion.
56
Putin not only suffers from short guy syndrome he seems to be taking foreign policy lessons from the North Koreans. That is, when slighted, or not getting enough attention threaten war.
And, he's trying to be a player with an economy smaller than California's. And, that economy continues to shrink due to low oil prices, endemic Kremlin corruption and western sanctions.
And, he's trying to be a player with an economy smaller than California's. And, that economy continues to shrink due to low oil prices, endemic Kremlin corruption and western sanctions.
79
California has neither a military not nuclear weapons. It represents a menace to only these United States of America.
Craig, I see you are introducing the Donald vs. Marco debate tactic into American foreign policy analysis: it's all about comparative size. Nice, that'll work as well now as it did then.
1
What is the difference between maligning someone because he is short and maligning someone because he is black? Your bigotry is showing.
5
Mr. Putin does not take advice from the NYT editorial board, nor is his policy based on what is good for the US or what the US perceives as good for Russia.
It might perhaps be more beneficial to actually try and understand Mr. Putin's head and actions, albeit which often seem to be more of madness than of method, but a method there undoubtedly is. Only then will it be possible to counter and perhaps influence.
Editorials such as these are appropriate for the US or West and not for Mr. Putin.
Understand his head and then make viable suggestions.
It might perhaps be more beneficial to actually try and understand Mr. Putin's head and actions, albeit which often seem to be more of madness than of method, but a method there undoubtedly is. Only then will it be possible to counter and perhaps influence.
Editorials such as these are appropriate for the US or West and not for Mr. Putin.
Understand his head and then make viable suggestions.
62
What IS there to "understand" other than: 1) He's RUSSIAN. 2) He's EX-KGB.
That's all one needs to know.
And this editorial wasn't written for Putin. If you understood that you might have posted a "viable" comment.
That's all one needs to know.
And this editorial wasn't written for Putin. If you understood that you might have posted a "viable" comment.
3
So just what are his policies based on? Walk us through what would justify making 11 attack passes of ship in the Baltic Sea, or invading and annexing territory from neighboring states. Explain why suggesting that the leader of a country that is being extremely belicose is not a viable suggestion?
7
To Matty and Garth,
There are actually people in universities who study this and write on it. They read Russian and understand Russian culture and politics. I am not one of them (thus, Garth I cannot walk you through it, but suggest that experts be consulted beyond the editorial board), but I know of their existence, including in the US, in spite of the recent lack of interest in Russian studies. And for Matty, just who was it written for if it is all so simple. What do you see as the purpose of this editorial?
Putin is quite complex, far beyond simplistic platitudes.
There are actually people in universities who study this and write on it. They read Russian and understand Russian culture and politics. I am not one of them (thus, Garth I cannot walk you through it, but suggest that experts be consulted beyond the editorial board), but I know of their existence, including in the US, in spite of the recent lack of interest in Russian studies. And for Matty, just who was it written for if it is all so simple. What do you see as the purpose of this editorial?
Putin is quite complex, far beyond simplistic platitudes.
2
This Op Ed is standard pot boiler propaganda with “The Usual Suspects”
“Mr. Assad remains in power largely because of Russian military assistance.”
• Mr. Assad remains in power because he commands the loyalty of the Syrian Army – a predominantly Sunni Organisation – which has lost many thousands of soldiers fighting USA backed terrorists (including ISIS) in Syria. Russia provided air support at a crucial stage in the Army’s battles. (This air support, incidentally noticed huge columns of ISIS oil transporting tankers to Turkey which had survived totally unnoticed by American Coalition airplanes.)
“A temporary cease-fire that raised hopes for a more durable peace has now largely collapsed,”
• This is due solely to the withdrawal of the American backed Al Qaeda ‘Opposition’
“A year after invading Ukraine…”
• Russia did not invade Ukraine. There is currently a Civil War in Ukraine between a fascist Government in Kiev and Anti Kiev forces primarily in Eastern Ukraine. Russia is providing support to the Anti-Kiev forces for obvious reasons of common ethnicity and shared anti-fascist history.
“Mr. Putin has long misread NATO, which was significantly demilitarized after the Cold War”,
• NATO has expanded its mission significantly since the demise of the Soviet Union. Its recent role in destroying the LIBYAN State is a demonstration of a vicious and bellicose militarized Organisation
“Mr. Assad remains in power largely because of Russian military assistance.”
• Mr. Assad remains in power because he commands the loyalty of the Syrian Army – a predominantly Sunni Organisation – which has lost many thousands of soldiers fighting USA backed terrorists (including ISIS) in Syria. Russia provided air support at a crucial stage in the Army’s battles. (This air support, incidentally noticed huge columns of ISIS oil transporting tankers to Turkey which had survived totally unnoticed by American Coalition airplanes.)
“A temporary cease-fire that raised hopes for a more durable peace has now largely collapsed,”
• This is due solely to the withdrawal of the American backed Al Qaeda ‘Opposition’
“A year after invading Ukraine…”
• Russia did not invade Ukraine. There is currently a Civil War in Ukraine between a fascist Government in Kiev and Anti Kiev forces primarily in Eastern Ukraine. Russia is providing support to the Anti-Kiev forces for obvious reasons of common ethnicity and shared anti-fascist history.
“Mr. Putin has long misread NATO, which was significantly demilitarized after the Cold War”,
• NATO has expanded its mission significantly since the demise of the Soviet Union. Its recent role in destroying the LIBYAN State is a demonstration of a vicious and bellicose militarized Organisation
143
Your take on history is just so interesting and factually incorrect that, well, it's just painful to have read.
I'll just take the last two of your bullets for you.
YES, Russia did invade Ukraine. There isn't any debate about that. A fact is just a fact. The evidence overwhelming. Just like Russia invaded Georgia.
NO, the government in Kiev is not fascist. That's just a fact. That is such a smear, and it betrays your lack of objectivity.
Suggesting that Ukrainians and Russians have common ethnicity is insulting and ignorant.
NATO may have taken on new roles and increased overall membership, but I think currently only 3 of it's 28 members actually manage to meet their commitment of spending 2 percent of GDP on military and security. The fact that Russia and Russian sympathisers can't understand why all the various Eastern European countries it invaded and brutalized after WWII would want to enter the alliance and gain some protection from arguably the most bellicose country in Europe in the last century boggles my mind.
NATO arrived in Libya AFTER the state had collapsed.
Your comment filled with dodgy facts, illogical conclusions, and such spin, frankly speaking, reads like, what did you call this article ... oh yeah, "standard boiler plate propoganda." It makes me wonder if Russia has some John Baron's and John Miller's out there in the comment sections for these articles.
I'll just take the last two of your bullets for you.
YES, Russia did invade Ukraine. There isn't any debate about that. A fact is just a fact. The evidence overwhelming. Just like Russia invaded Georgia.
NO, the government in Kiev is not fascist. That's just a fact. That is such a smear, and it betrays your lack of objectivity.
Suggesting that Ukrainians and Russians have common ethnicity is insulting and ignorant.
NATO may have taken on new roles and increased overall membership, but I think currently only 3 of it's 28 members actually manage to meet their commitment of spending 2 percent of GDP on military and security. The fact that Russia and Russian sympathisers can't understand why all the various Eastern European countries it invaded and brutalized after WWII would want to enter the alliance and gain some protection from arguably the most bellicose country in Europe in the last century boggles my mind.
NATO arrived in Libya AFTER the state had collapsed.
Your comment filled with dodgy facts, illogical conclusions, and such spin, frankly speaking, reads like, what did you call this article ... oh yeah, "standard boiler plate propoganda." It makes me wonder if Russia has some John Baron's and John Miller's out there in the comment sections for these articles.
15
Oh common on. Lol. Are you on Ruasian payroll? Just silly. You don't have to agree with US or Euro policy to know what you wrote is demonstrably false.
15
Couldn't agree more with your observations. Americans seem incapable of viewing world events from the perspective of "other" countries. Its always only about us.
This is one of the NYT stock stories, the others being about North Korea or Iran's "threat" to the world. These stories conveniently distract America's ADHD culture from focusing on the country's own threats to the world,,past and present, like Vietnam, Iraq, and the rise of its own brand of demagogue named Donald Trump.
This is one of the NYT stock stories, the others being about North Korea or Iran's "threat" to the world. These stories conveniently distract America's ADHD culture from focusing on the country's own threats to the world,,past and present, like Vietnam, Iraq, and the rise of its own brand of demagogue named Donald Trump.
4