Vladimir Putin

24567…15

Comments

  • hedonist
    hedonist Posts: 24,524
    If my husband didn't like cats (animals in general), I'd not be with him.

    People who make fun of people, Putin or otherwise, who like cats, can stuff their explanations.

    (ever so gently!)
  • ldent42
    ldent42 NYC Posts: 7,859
    PJfanwillneverleave1 said:

    .

    WHY'D YOU DELETE THE PICTURE THAT KITTY WAS A DORABLE BRING ITBAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACK :dizzy:
    NYC 06/24/08-Auckland 11/27/09-Chch 11/29/09-Newark 05/18/10-Atlanta 09/22/12-Chicago 07/19/13-Brooklyn 10/18/13 & 10/19/13-Hartford 10/25/13-Baltimore 10/27/13-Auckland 1/17/14-GC 1/19/14-Melbourne 1/24/14-Sydney 1/26/14-Amsterdam 6/16/14 & 6/17/14-Milan 6/20/14-Berlin 6/26/14-Leeds 7/8/14-Milton Keynes 7/11/14-St. Louis 10/3/14-NYC 9/26/15
    LIVEFOOTSTEPS.ORG/USER/?USR=435
  • PJfanwillneverleave1
    PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 12,885
    edited December 2015
    .
    Post edited by PJfanwillneverleave1 on
  • kce8
    kce8 Posts: 1,636
    Damnit... this man is the hell of a dangerous man... you will not find one f...g thing he does what is not just and only good for his own power!!!! And he will lie the blue out of heaven to get what he wants!!!
    He is only danger for everyone!
  • davidtrios
    davidtrios Posts: 9,732
    ldent42 said:

    I've literally never met a Russian man who didn't like cats.
    I've never even realized that till now.

    My parents are from Belarus, both hate cats, one of my best friends is from St Petersburg, hates them too. I don't mind them at all.

  • PJfanwillneverleave1
    PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 12,885
    edited August 2016
    i2.cdn.turner.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/150904201041-putin-holds-a-cat-exlarge-169.jpg

    Post edited by Kat on
  • InHiding80
    InHiding80 Upland,CA Posts: 7,623
    Gotta love that con logic of calling Obama a commie while worshipping an actual commie because black guy left of Hitler.
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,759
    edited January 2016
    josevolution said:

    oh boy talk about delusional they guy is a prick to his people fuck him ....

    Totally agree with this. I can't believe a single person here is actually admiring this motherfucker (predictably, almost all the rest of us have a lot more sense!). He's an absolute creep. Demented and narcissistic beyond belief, a megalomaniac, a rabid homophobe, and perfectly happy to stomp all over the freedom of his people (you people know journalists have been executed because he wanted them killed for what they wrote, right??? God knows how many others he's had murdered. Plenty though.)............ Or is this thread just a joke? Surely....
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,396
    sadly not a joke. people really like this guy.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • InHiding80
    InHiding80 Upland,CA Posts: 7,623
    gimmesometruth27 said:

    sadly not a joke. people really like this guy.

    Hell, I searched on Twitter recently out curiosity to see that that are people who still like Cheney and call him a hero and patriot. Sadly, many of them still do because black democrat.
  • BS44325
    BS44325 Posts: 6,124
    Putin has allegedly hacked the DNC and the Clinton campaign. He is making moves against US interests in Syria.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/01/as-obama-dithers-syrian-rebels-in-aleppo-brace-for-putin-s-onslaught.html

    The American foreign policy establisment seems to agree on this. Is this news relevant to the current administration or is this something just to be used to score political points against Trump? Is Obama a lame duck or does he have a plan to deal with this? If the above is true then these are the questions people should be asking. Last I checked Obama is still President and his administration has the responsibility to respond. What is his response? Does he have one? Or is he going to just ride this out for the next President to deal with? This will be his legacy.
  • mrussel1
    mrussel1 Posts: 30,918
    What is the solution? This is such a Hobbsean (sp?) choice. The rebels are full of Islamic state fighters who have no interest in al-Assad directly. They know that if the regime topples, there will be a power vacuum and a new base for ISIS to operate. The real rebels likely don't have the people or infrastructure to manage the country. It will be another Libya, Iraq, etc.

    On the other hand, Assad is a butcher. There's no two ways to mince words on this one. He is a despicable human being and it's no wonder he is aligned with Russia. I really don't know the right answer, but it's certainly for this administration and Kerry to figure out how to get a cease fire in place.
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,759
    What are the US's interests that are being threatened in Syria? Are they interests that we should get behind?
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • mrussel1
    mrussel1 Posts: 30,918
    PJ_Soul said:

    What are the US's interests that are being threatened in Syria? Are they interests that we should get behind?

    Well, we have a humanitarian interest in al-Assad being removed from office. He is a brutal dictator who tortures and gasses his own people. At the same time, if he is removed, the Iraq and Libya scenario will play out yet again. When a strongman is removed from these culturally disparate nations (nations that have no business being nations, only formed after the WWs to advance financial interests of the winners, but I digress)... the countries fall apart and devolve into chaos. That's breeding ground for ISIL and other radical terrorists groups.
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,759
    edited August 2016
    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    What are the US's interests that are being threatened in Syria? Are they interests that we should get behind?

    Well, we have a humanitarian interest in al-Assad being removed from office. He is a brutal dictator who tortures and gasses his own people. At the same time, if he is removed, the Iraq and Libya scenario will play out yet again. When a strongman is removed from these culturally disparate nations (nations that have no business being nations, only formed after the WWs to advance financial interests of the winners, but I digress)... the countries fall apart and devolve into chaos. That's breeding ground for ISIL and other radical terrorists groups.
    Yes, but I'm just wondering what people think will happen if Russia deals with this shit instead of the US? I gather everyone is fully in favour of the US getting right in there and further embedding in the Middle East, and increasing it's involvement in all the stuff you just mentioned? I was under the impression that most Americans were sick of all that, and considered it to be a catalyst for all these terrorist attacks on the US. I suppose people are more in favour of more war for the US in the middle east than they are of letting Russia extend its power into the middle east? Why? If Russia does that is the US going to go to war with them or what?
    Post edited by PJ_Soul on
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • mrussel1
    mrussel1 Posts: 30,918
    PJ_Soul said:

    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    What are the US's interests that are being threatened in Syria? Are they interests that we should get behind?

    Well, we have a humanitarian interest in al-Assad being removed from office. He is a brutal dictator who tortures and gasses his own people. At the same time, if he is removed, the Iraq and Libya scenario will play out yet again. When a strongman is removed from these culturally disparate nations (nations that have no business being nations, only formed after the WWs to advance financial interests of the winners, but I digress)... the countries fall apart and devolve into chaos. That's breeding ground for ISIL and other radical terrorists groups.
    Yes, but I'm just wondering what people think will happen if Russia deals with this shit instead of the US? I gather everyone is fully in favour of the US getting right in there and further embedding in the Middle East, and extending it's involvement in all the stuff you just mentioned?
    No, I'm saying it's a terrible choice with no clear answers. If we 'stay out of it', then al-Assad will crush the rebellion with brutal force. This will be done with Russia's help who has the strategic interests in that state. Crushing the rebellion will include leveling of Aleppo (ala Grozny) and massive civilian casualties. If we get involved and back the rebels, then we are just fighting another proxy war, like Afghanistan or Vietnam. And if we win? What then? Another failed state.
  • PJ_Soul
    PJ_Soul Vancouver, BC Posts: 50,759
    edited August 2016
    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    What are the US's interests that are being threatened in Syria? Are they interests that we should get behind?

    Well, we have a humanitarian interest in al-Assad being removed from office. He is a brutal dictator who tortures and gasses his own people. At the same time, if he is removed, the Iraq and Libya scenario will play out yet again. When a strongman is removed from these culturally disparate nations (nations that have no business being nations, only formed after the WWs to advance financial interests of the winners, but I digress)... the countries fall apart and devolve into chaos. That's breeding ground for ISIL and other radical terrorists groups.
    Yes, but I'm just wondering what people think will happen if Russia deals with this shit instead of the US? I gather everyone is fully in favour of the US getting right in there and further embedding in the Middle East, and extending it's involvement in all the stuff you just mentioned?
    No, I'm saying it's a terrible choice with no clear answers. If we 'stay out of it', then al-Assad will crush the rebellion with brutal force. This will be done with Russia's help who has the strategic interests in that state. Crushing the rebellion will include leveling of Aleppo (ala Grozny) and massive civilian casualties. If we get involved and back the rebels, then we are just fighting another proxy war, like Afghanistan or Vietnam. And if we win? What then? Another failed state.
    Kay, well where no option really wins, I'm just wondering why people wouldn't go with the one that lessens US involvement and doesn't place them in another middle eastern war that probably can't be won any more than it could be before. I think this is more me wondering about the US/Russia issue, since that seems to more be what this is about.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • mrussel1
    mrussel1 Posts: 30,918
    PJ_Soul said:

    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    What are the US's interests that are being threatened in Syria? Are they interests that we should get behind?

    Well, we have a humanitarian interest in al-Assad being removed from office. He is a brutal dictator who tortures and gasses his own people. At the same time, if he is removed, the Iraq and Libya scenario will play out yet again. When a strongman is removed from these culturally disparate nations (nations that have no business being nations, only formed after the WWs to advance financial interests of the winners, but I digress)... the countries fall apart and devolve into chaos. That's breeding ground for ISIL and other radical terrorists groups.
    Yes, but I'm just wondering what people think will happen if Russia deals with this shit instead of the US? I gather everyone is fully in favour of the US getting right in there and further embedding in the Middle East, and extending it's involvement in all the stuff you just mentioned?
    No, I'm saying it's a terrible choice with no clear answers. If we 'stay out of it', then al-Assad will crush the rebellion with brutal force. This will be done with Russia's help who has the strategic interests in that state. Crushing the rebellion will include leveling of Aleppo (ala Grozny) and massive civilian casualties. If we get involved and back the rebels, then we are just fighting another proxy war, like Afghanistan or Vietnam. And if we win? What then? Another failed state.
    Kay, well where no option really wins, I'm just wondering why people wouldn't go with the one that lessens US involvement and doesn't place them in another middle eastern war that probably can't be won any more than it could be before. I think this is more me wondering about the US/Russia issue, since that seems to more be what this is about.
    I actually don't think it's a proxy war exactly. But I don't pretend to know what the right answer is on such a difficult subject. Are we the world's police? Do we have a moral obligation to provide military support to rebels fighting a brutal dictator?
    From a coldly analytical perspective, ignoring the human casualties, the play is to let Russia and Syria crush the rebellion which eliminates a front on the war against ISIL. al-Assad won't let them operate in Syria. But to do this would be a death sentence to tens of thousands, certainly a big chunk of the 250k holed up in Aleppo.
  • PJfanwillneverleave1
    PJfanwillneverleave1 Posts: 12,885
    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    What are the US's interests that are being threatened in Syria? Are they interests that we should get behind?

    Well, we have a humanitarian interest in al-Assad being removed from office. He is a brutal dictator who tortures and gasses his own people. At the same time, if he is removed, the Iraq and Libya scenario will play out yet again. When a strongman is removed from these culturally disparate nations (nations that have no business being nations, only formed after the WWs to advance financial interests of the winners, but I digress)... the countries fall apart and devolve into chaos. That's breeding ground for ISIL and other radical terrorists groups.
    Yes, but I'm just wondering what people think will happen if Russia deals with this shit instead of the US? I gather everyone is fully in favour of the US getting right in there and further embedding in the Middle East, and extending it's involvement in all the stuff you just mentioned?
    No, I'm saying it's a terrible choice with no clear answers. If we 'stay out of it', then al-Assad will crush the rebellion with brutal force. This will be done with Russia's help who has the strategic interests in that state. Crushing the rebellion will include leveling of Aleppo (ala Grozny) and massive civilian casualties. If we get involved and back the rebels, then we are just fighting another proxy war, like Afghanistan or Vietnam. And if we win? What then? Another failed state.
    Kay, well where no option really wins, I'm just wondering why people wouldn't go with the one that lessens US involvement and doesn't place them in another middle eastern war that probably can't be won any more than it could be before. I think this is more me wondering about the US/Russia issue, since that seems to more be what this is about.
    I actually don't think it's a proxy war exactly. But I don't pretend to know what the right answer is on such a difficult subject. Are we the world's police? Do we have a moral obligation to provide military support to rebels fighting a brutal dictator?
    From a coldly analytical perspective, ignoring the human casualties, the play is to let Russia and Syria crush the rebellion which eliminates a front on the war against ISIL. al-Assad won't let them operate in Syria. But to do this would be a death sentence to tens of thousands, certainly a big chunk of the 250k holed up in Aleppo.
    Oh those Russians.
  • unsung
    unsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    edited August 2016
    BS44325 said:

    Putin has allegedly hacked the DNC and the Clinton campaign. He is making moves against US interests in Syria.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/08/01/as-obama-dithers-syrian-rebels-in-aleppo-brace-for-putin-s-onslaught.html

    The American foreign policy establisment seems to agree on this. Is this news relevant to the current administration or is this something just to be used to score political points against Trump? Is Obama a lame duck or does he have a plan to deal with this? If the above is true then these are the questions people should be asking. Last I checked Obama is still President and his administration has the responsibility to respond. What is his response? Does he have one? Or is he going to just ride this out for the next President to deal with? This will be his legacy.

    Putin is moving against ISIS in Syria?

Categories