Is russia moving back to communism?

[storm1977 0]

Looks like Pres. Putin wants to be DICTATOR Putin
pretty soon.


http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/09/14/russia.putin.ap/index.html

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[PhillyKev 0]

Monkey see monkey do.

Bush: We retain the right to pre-emptively attack any nation we perceive as a threat.

Putin: Ditto.

*********************

Bush: We are setting up government agencies and consolidating federal powers under the executive branch to combat terrorism.

Putin: Ditto.

[Sinkster 0]

Good for them. I don't think they can back that shit up like we can though.

[billvon 3,131]

>I don't think they can back that shit up like we can though.

Although with nuclear weapons and ICBM's, no one's going to push back.

[Sinkster 0]

Quote

>I don't think they can back that shit up like we can though.

Although with nuclear weapons and ICBM's, no one's going to push back.

Really? They aren't the only ones with nukes, and I don't see the Chechens having any problems with it. The Afghans for that matter either. Nukes didn't help em much there.

[storm1977 0]

Quote

Monkey see monkey do.

Bush: We retain the right to pre-emptively attack any nation we perceive as a threat.

Putin: Ditto.

*********************

Bush: We are setting up government agencies and consolidating federal powers under the executive branch to combat terrorism.

Putin: Ditto.

When Bush tries to change the electoral laws of senators and Represenatives then we'll talk. I don't exactly think you can say Putin and Bush are on the same page.

Funny though isn't it. I ask a question about Russia and the liberals in here push it back on Bush.....

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Monkey see monkey do.

Bush: We retain the right to pre-emptively attack any nation we perceive as a threat.

Putin: Ditto.

*********************

Bush: We are setting up government agencies and consolidating federal powers under the executive branch to combat terrorism.

Putin: Ditto.

When Bush tries to change the electoral laws of senators and Represenatives then we'll talk. I don't exactly think you can say Putin and Bush are on the same page.

Funny though isn't it. I ask a question about Russia and the liberals in here push it back on Bush.....

......that surprises you????

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Frenchy68 0]

Looks like Pres. Putin wants to be DICTATOR Putin
pretty soon.
***
He was already 1/2 way there. But I doubt Putin will head towards communism though.

"For once you have tasted Absinthe you will walk the earth with your eyes turned towards the gutter, for there you have been and there you will long to return."

[gjhdiver 0]

Quote

Quote

>I don't think they can back that shit up like we can though.

Although with nuclear weapons and ICBM's, no one's going to push back.

Really? They aren't the only ones with nukes, and I don't see the Chechens having any problems with it. The Afghans for that matter either. Nukes didn't help em much there.

That's becuase people who quite willingly accept suicide missions are not prone to normal forms of deterrence. The arms buildup of the 80's wasn't to apply deterrent force to the Taliban. The elder Bush was too busy selling them weapons as part of that system, along with the good old then ally of the US, Saddam Hussein.

Nope, all that juicy defense spending was aimed at keeping parity with the Soviets. Although the USSR doesn't exist as a political entity in the same way, the military hardware and command structures it still posesses could quite easily reduce the civilised world to rubble pretty quickly. The US also needs their support globally in a way that it didn't before. I doubt the US is going to make waves with them just because Putin is taking a page out of W's playbook.

I wonder what "Patriot Act" is in Russian ?

[billvon 3,131]

>and I don't see the Chechens having any problems with it.

Well, nukes aren't much use against your own cities.

>The Afghans for that matter either. Nukes didn't help em much there.

Afghanistan never invaded the USSR, did they? Big difference between failing in an attempt to invade another country, and being attacked by another country. Russia is still a formidable nuclear power, and we would do well to remember that when we decide where to expend diplomatic effort.

[CanuckInUSA 0]

If Russian society wants communism, then what's the problem? Why must the entire world live the same way America lives? Now if Russia attempts to conquer the world and impose their way of life on everyone, then that is a totally different can of worms. Hmmm ... do you see the irony here?

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[storm1977 0]

What's wrong with that?????

Do you not see what is going on?
Based on what I have read, Putin is taking the voting power away from the public and instead appointing officials which favor his party to elected positions. Also, he is intentioally keeping info from the media local and global on the number of people killed in recent attacks etc.....

How can you say " If Russian society wants communism, then what's the problem?" When no one knows what Russian society wants if thay are not allowed to vote for what or who they want?

Chris

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[CanuckInUSA 0]

With the except of the Russia mafia, there are many people in Russia who were happier under the communist regime. I'm not saying communism is good, nor am I saying dictatorship is good. But if they (the people) don't want this, let them revolt. If they (the people) want it, let them be. Why must America impose it's way of life on the entire world? Must there be a McDonalds on every street corner?

Try not to worry about the things you have no control over

[gjhdiver 0]

Quote

What's wrong with that?????

Based on what I have read, Putin is taking the voting power away from the public and instead appointing officials which favor his party to elected positions. Also, he is intentioally keeping info from the media local and global on the number of people killed in recent attacks etc.....

Hmmm. You could almost replace "Bush" for "Putin" in that sentence and not have it lose any veracity.

[christelsabine 1]

Quote

How can you say " If Russian society wants communism, then what's the problem?" When no one knows what Russian society wants if thay are not allowed to vote for what or who they want?

Ooooh!
There were other societies, in which the "will of folks" has been disregarded, right? And figures were forged, right? Why do you ruffle your feathers?

dudeist skydiver # 3105

[billvon 3,131]

>When no one knows what Russian society wants if thay are not allowed to
>vote for what or who they want?

If the Russians did vote, and wanted an authoritarian communist government, would you be OK with that? How about the Iraqis? If they voted for a fundamentalist Islamic government, with al-Sadr as their leader, would you accept that as the will of the Iraqi people?

[jazzjumper 0]

Quote

Russia is still a formidable nuclear power, and we would do well to remember that when we decide where to expend diplomatic effort.

Not certain I agree with that statement. Russian still has potentially formidable nuclear weapons, there status of upkeep and flyability is GREATLY in question.

No matter how good she looks, someone, somewhere is
sick of her shit!

[storm1977 0]

Quote

>When no one knows what Russian society wants if thay are not allowed to
>vote for what or who they want?

If the Russians did vote, and wanted an authoritarian communist government, would you be OK with that? How about the Iraqis? If they voted for a fundamentalist Islamic government, with al-Sadr as their leader, would you accept that as the will of the Iraqi people?

As to the Russian vote question ...YES. If the people voted for a authoritarian Government give it to them.

Iraq.... No. Currently we are in iraq, and we now have a say in the governmental development of that nation. We will probably have a role in that nation for many years to come.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[storm1977 0]

Quote

With the except of the Russia mafia, there are many people in Russia who were happier under the communist regime. I'm not saying communism is good, nor am I saying dictatorship is good. But if they (the people) don't want this, let them revolt. If they (the people) want it, let them be. Why must America impose it's way of life on the entire world? Must there be a McDonalds on every street corner?

I never said every country has to be like america... Where did I say that????

Canada and most of Europe are socialists ... So what. I don't happen to agree with that ideology, and hope that never happens to america, but they can do what they want. However, european socialist nations still give a lot of power to the people, and still allow them to vote for their officials.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[storm1977 0]

Quote

Quote

What's wrong with that?????

Based on what I have read, Putin is taking the voting power away from the public and instead appointing officials which favor his party to elected positions. Also, he is intentioally keeping info from the media local and global on the number of people killed in recent attacks etc.....

Hmmm. You could almost replace "Bush" for "Putin" in that sentence and not have it lose any veracity.

Really... If you are going to make a statement like that then BACK it UP!!!!!

Where and when has Pres Bush taken the power to vote away from the people and instead put his own people in place of Senators and Represenitives?????

PLEASE GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE....

The statement you made is about as mature and intelligent as comparing Hitler to bush. It really helps your argument.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[gjhdiver 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

What's wrong with that?????

Based on what I have read, Putin is taking the voting power away from the public and instead appointing officials which favor his party to elected positions. Also, he is intentioally keeping info from the media local and global on the number of people killed in recent attacks etc.....

Hmmm. You could almost replace "Bush" for "Putin" in that sentence and not have it lose any veracity.

Really... If you are going to make a statement like that then BACK it UP!!!!!
.

I'm refering to the loss of habeus corpus in the new anti-terrorism statues, the appointment of federal judges that allow unconstitutional attemps to redraw congessional districts to favor Republicans, and the wholesale management of the news and casualty statistics for forces and civilians in Iraq, along with the shutting down of press outlets critical of US forces in Iraq. That should be enough to get you going.

Enough for you ?

By the way, the argument that Bush=Hitler is your strawman argument, not mine.

Right, I'm off now to a more sane forum. Please feel free to rant in bold text further and have the last word. I know you're dying to.

[billvon 3,131]

>As to the Russian vote question ...YES. If the people voted for a
> authoritarian Government give it to them.

Fair enough. I agree; they should get to decide for themselves.

>Iraq.... No. Currently we are in iraq, and we now have a say in the
> governmental development of that nation. We will probably have a role in
>that nation for many years to come.

So you are against free elections in Iraq for years? (an election where people cannot make certain choices is not a free election.)

[storm1977 0]

Quote

>As to the Russian vote question ...YES. If the people voted for a
> authoritarian Government give it to them.

Fair enough. I agree; they should get to decide for themselves.

>Iraq.... No. Currently we are in iraq, and we now have a say in the
> governmental development of that nation. We will probably have a role in
>that nation for many years to come.

So you are against free elections in Iraq for years? (an election where people cannot make certain choices is not a free election.)

No, I am not totally against free elections in Iraq in the coming years. This is what I would propose if I was in charge.

Have an elections where the canidates were chosen by the occupying forces. The canidates would have to represent the different groups in Iraq (example ...Suni's, kurds etc....)
Now, the occupying force would select these people bacause we would not want radicals voted in in the early stages of governmental development. We would need to have a group of moderate canidates representing the diverse culture of Iraq.


After 5-10yrs of a relitively stable government you slowly release them full sovereignty. They should still have elections monitored by outside parties for several years to follow.

-----------------------------------------------------
Sometimes it is more important to protect LIFE than Liberty

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

...an election where people cannot make certain choices is not a free election.

True. But should current voters have the right to take away future voters right to free elections?

Say everyone in a certain country voted for you as absolute dictator. Twenty years on the populace has changed sufficiently that you wouldn't win that election. Were the voters 20 years ago within their rights to take away the rights of their successors?

Even more interesting: What if 51% of a countries voters vote for a dictatorship? Are they within their rights, by virtue of their majority status, to overrule the 49% who desire to retain future free elections?

The Rule of Law still has to trump the will of the people, in some (perhaps most) situations, or you end up with mob rule.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com