• Trump and Putin speak via Phone: Agree to Improve Relations and fight Terrorism
    25 replies, posted
[url]http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-kremlin-says-in-statement-putin-and-trump-spoke-over-the-phone/[/url] [QUOTE]A statement on the Kremlin’s website (available on the Russian site but as of this posting not on the English version) reads that the two leaders “not only agreed to assess the current very poor state of Russian-American relations, but also spoke in favor of active joint work to their normalization and removal in the direction of constructive cooperation on a wide range of issues.” The statement says Putin congratulated Trump on his victory in a call that mostly focused on strengthening U.S.-Russia relations.[/QUOTE] An excellent step to a lasting peace between the two nations.:smile:
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51370693]An excellent step to a lasting peace between the two nations.:smile:[/QUOTE] Whilst peace is great, if the cost is Putin getting free reign to fuck shit up it doesn't really seem worth it. Then again if we keep up sanctions, their internal propaganda will just paint the west as the enemy and probably spiral further into hostilities. Only way out of this that works for everyone is if Russian corruption ends, which isn't likely.
[QUOTE=Occlusion;51370709]Whilst peace is great, if the cost is Putin getting free reign to fuck shit up it doesn't really seem worth it.[/QUOTE] I don't think it's realistic to have 3 powerful nuclear nations and only one of them gets to have bases across the world and massive economic influence whilst the other two are kept with their backs against the wall. The current system of hegemony is unsustainable and will inevitably be challenged.
I'm hopeful that we can restore relations far enough that we might be able to one day have our soldiers marching together with the Russian Army on May Day to commemorate being allies in the 2nd World War.
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;51370804]I'm hopeful that we can restore relations far enough that we might be able to one day have our soldiers marching together with the Russian Army on May Day to commemorate being allies in the 2nd World War.[/QUOTE] We did in 2010. [img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/Iv6zHey.jpg[/img_thumb]
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;51370804]I'm hopeful that we can restore relations far enough that we might be able to one day have our soldiers marching together with the Russian Army on May Day to commemorate being allies in the 2nd World War.[/QUOTE] I feel that this would be a gross misunderstanding of history to have this happen; American and Russia were allies only because they faced a common enemy. There is a reason why they've been at each other's throats ever since. Do I want that to end? Yes. But not while Putin, of all leaders, is leading Russia. And certainly not having it end by Russia gaining international influence. Both nations should back down. But that won't happen while Russia is aggressive towards Europe, nor will it happen until America stops getting involved in pointless Middle Eastern wars.
[QUOTE=OvB;51370813]We did in 2010.[/QUOTE] Can we do it again, and also have tank games together? Seriously, I like peace.
Putin has already shown us he doesn't give a shit about relations with the West, don't forget that Obama tried for years to improve relations with Russia and Putin just exploited the opportunity, fuck Putin.
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51370693]An excellent step to a lasting peace between the two nations.:downs:[/QUOTE] All the potential good that would result from 'no US-RU proxy wars' will be void once there are SU-35's all over Ukraine.
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51370693][url]http://www.mediaite.com/online/the-kremlin-says-in-statement-putin-and-trump-spoke-over-the-phone/[/url] An excellent step to a lasting peace between the two nations.:smile:[/QUOTE] ya right up until he anexes georgia because thats what happened last time
[QUOTE=JoeSkylynx;51370804]I'm hopeful that we can restore relations far enough that we might be able to one day have our soldiers marching together with the Russian Army on May Day to commemorate being allies in the 2nd World War.[/QUOTE] That would be great, I've seen the photos of the soldiers from both nations meeting on the river Elb river, it was truly moving. What's sad is that even back then big businesses and "anti-communists" were already plotting to undermine the relationship. [QUOTE=BlackMageMari;51370816]I feel that this would be a gross misunderstanding of history to have this happen; American and Russia were allies only because they faced a common enemy. There is a reason why they've been at each other's throats ever since.[/QUOTE] That's not entirely true though. The Americans were greatly inspired by the tireless heroism of the Soviet forces on the Eastern Front in the face of a seemingly unstoppable war machine. Vice President George Henry Wallace felt that there was soon to be a "century of the common man" against the forces of imperialism and exploitation. While he felt the Russian Revolution had went to "excess" he believed that the two nations could create a new world order, free of imperialism and it's successor ideology of fascism. It was the Cold Warriors, many of whom secretly wanted to finish what the Nazis started, who ended that dream.
[QUOTE=OvB;51370813]We did in 2010. [img_thumb]http://i.imgur.com/Iv6zHey.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE] I wonder if they had a Sherman and a T-34/85 rolling track-to-track down the parade path that year.
[QUOTE=Occlusion;51370709]Whilst peace is great, if the cost is Putin getting free reign to fuck shit up it doesn't really seem worth it. Then again if we keep up sanctions, their internal propaganda will just paint the west as the enemy and probably spiral further into hostilities. Only way out of this that works for everyone is if Russian corruption ends, which isn't likely.[/QUOTE] He is a highly popular democratically elected president. If by fucking up you mean the annexations, i think we have seen the last of those by now. he has what he wanted and the sanctions fucked him over pretty bad so i doubt he will want to go back to that even if he keeps spouting strongman words. putin can be controlled by the US, as long as he is not just kept on a leash but also can go out for walkies every so often... if there is nothing in it for him and russia, why would he cooperate?
[QUOTE=Occlusion;51370709]Whilst peace is great, if the cost is Putin getting free reign to fuck shit up it doesn't really seem worth it. Then again if we keep up sanctions, their internal propaganda will just paint the west as the enemy and probably spiral further into hostilities. Only way out of this that works for everyone is if Russian corruption ends, which isn't likely.[/QUOTE] Well it's quite important to understand one thing about Putin here. Note that this is mostly my sorta-kinda educated-uneducated conjecture. The main pretence for Putin's (failed) 'conquest' campaign has been built on the following thesis: USA is an enemy, USA wants to fight, we fight back. They try to take Ukraine, they try push us out of Syria, they try to blahblahblah. That's the entire premise, this idea has been radiated internally and externally. And now propaganda vector has turned very sharply. Russian parliament (Duma) pretty much in its entirety literally applauds the winner of US elections. People like Margo Simonyan (RT) talk about sticking an American red-white-and-blue on their cars. Media just can't seem to shut up about how Trump is potentially the best president of United States there ever was and ever could be, how he represents the nation, how he listens to American people etc, how he's going to fix everything. No shit, people who trashed US yesterday are today saying things like "the most powerful and influential country in the world". And what about Ukraine? Mostly silence. What about Syria? Same. Now, I get it, I've read it all, I see that it looks like "Trump is Putin's marionette! Trump is going to give Putin free reign in Europe", but everyone seems to miss one critical thing here: Russia is bleeding badly, she's bleeding money, she's bleeding brains, our budget on medicine and social care are getting hard cuts all the while there's no noticeable off-the-charts increase in other areas (like, say, military budget), which probably means that the money isn't being redirected: it's simply lacking. Putin doesn't have the resources to do anything in Europe beyond giving some scraps to loyal and friendly politicians here and there. Our military is incapable of launching any kind of offensive without major reorganisation - one that there's not a single shred of evidence for; the army has no reserves and the situation doesn't get better, there's no initiatives to improve the situation. And it also seems there's one thing Putin fears more than anything: casualties of war. That's the main reason why "there's no Russian soldiers in East Ukraine!" - that doesn't fool anyone in UN now does it? Didn't stop the sanctions, did it? It's also the reason why "there's no boots on the ground in Syria!", despite the fact that it wouldn't bring any anger from UN even if were official. For one reason or another Putin just doesn't want to deal with a chance of civil unrest (a very low chance IMO) in case casualties start piling up. Now, those are facts, here's my, probably overly optimistic, take on what's going on: Putin wants to end this clearly failing crusade and save his face, return to the world politics - and there's no better opportunity than a friendly American president - hey look, this guy, yes this guy - he's our friend, he doesn't want to conquer Russia! We don't need to fight back any more, we're buddies! I've been wrong before, many times in fact, giving Putin credit on not being an idiot who doesn't know what he's doing, but I'm very certain that Eastern Europe can sleep safe, Russia doesn't have the resources to invade anyone, our ongoing campaigns have ground to a standstill at best, only leaving Putin with a piece of land we can't kinda figure out what to do with. Might seem delusional, and if it turns out that's the case, well I can't blame myself for not wanting to believe that the whole of my country's leadership consists of crazed paranoid bloodthirsty dumbfucks with not a single rational voice between them to convince them to behave like normal people.
This could work out to everyone's benefit. Russian agrees to some future transition of power in Syria, a future government which will not be a US puppet. The US agrees to end support for the rebels. ISIS is eliminated in Syria as part of the agreement. The Kurds stand down, which allows Turkey to stand down. Humanitarian aid can then flow into Syria safely. Everyone saves face, everyone compromises a bit, everyone can avoid a prolonged war.
[QUOTE=cecilbdemodded;51370942]This could work out to everyone's benefit. Russian agrees to some future transition of power in Syria, a future government which will not be a US puppet. The US agrees to end support for the rebels. ISIS is eliminated in Syria as part of the agreement. The Kurds stand down, which allows Turkey to stand down. Humanitarian aid can then flow into Syria safely. Everyone saves face, everyone compromises a bit, everyone can avoid a prolonged war.[/QUOTE] And maybe the Ukrainian conflict might end with Eastern Ukrainian "separatists" getting some token autonomy for "their" regions and disbanding, hopefully. Because the conflict's not going anywhere, everyone understands that.
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51370799]I don't think it's realistic to have 3 powerful nuclear nations and only one of them gets to have bases across the world and massive economic influence whilst the other two are kept with their backs against the wall. The current system of hegemony is unsustainable and will inevitably be challenged.[/QUOTE] That's all well and good but we're not talking about setting up military bases, we're talking about a nation literally annexing its neighbors
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51370799]I don't think it's realistic to have 3 powerful nuclear nations and only one of them gets to have bases across the world and massive economic influence whilst the other two are kept with their backs against the wall. The current system of hegemony is unsustainable and will inevitably be challenged.[/QUOTE] We created NATO with diplomacy, Russia created the USSR with imperialism. Guess why one stayed together and the other collapsed. Here's a hint: Countries are less likely to stick with you when the only thing holding them to you is a puppet government and secret police. Sure, we could have toned down NATO after the Cold War, and we probably should have. But Russia's wars with their neighbors and continued anti-west propaganda show that nothing much has changed on their end of things.
[QUOTE=Mort Stroodle;51370988]That's all well and good but we're not talking about setting up military bases, we're talking about a nation literally annexing its neighbors[/QUOTE] Parts of it's neighbors. Your own government is not in a position where it has large areas of foreign countries with where a majority of the citizens are Americans who might be subject to persecution if the wrong government comes to power. It's very hard to know what that's like. The USSR fell apart suddenly and a lot of issues were left unresolved. if someone had only proposed a bargain in which the border problems we're seeing now might not have come to pass this could all have been avoided. Instead the US decided to expand it's influence into these countries like this was a game of Victoria 2.
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51371029]if someone had only proposed a bargain in which the border problems we're seeing now might not have come to pass this could all have been avoided. [/QUOTE] Newly formed governments were scrambling to keep their countries from collapsing in on themselves due to Soviet style of dividing a single economy all over the country so that everyone depends on one another. By the time things normalized enough to not be a pressing and threatening issue, it was too late.
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51371029]Parts of it's neighbors.[/QUOTE] That doesn't make it any better in the least, they still invaded another country for territory to achieve what the US has diplomatically. Nobody was ever forced to join or remain in NATO.
[QUOTE=Whoaly;51370799]I don't think it's realistic to have 3 powerful nuclear nations and only one of them gets to have bases across the world and massive economic influence whilst the other two are kept with their backs against the wall. The current system of hegemony is unsustainable and will inevitably be challenged.[/QUOTE] The only reason the US has military bases all over the world is because people realized two things about Communist Russia: One, that it was unsustainable, and two, they were far worse than the United States. We didn't invade countries and set up bases there, we made diplomatic, strategic alliances and bartered for access to sovereign soil. [editline]14th November 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;51371009] Sure, we could have toned down NATO after the Cold War, and we probably should have. But Russia's wars with their neighbors and continued anti-west propaganda show that nothing much has changed on their end of things.[/QUOTE] It's been hinted at in this thread but Obama's Russian Reset was looking good up until Putin went off the rails. There is plenty of impetus in our government to make peaceful, productive relations with Russia. They just are interested in imperialism at the moment.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51371838]The only reason the US has military bases all over the world is because people realized two things about Communist Russia: One, that it was unsustainable, and two, they were far worse than the United States. We didn't invade countries and set up bases there, we made diplomatic, strategic alliances and bartered for access to sovereign soil.[/QUOTE] The US gained most of it's military bases from it's involvement in World War II, particularly in Asia, the Pacific, and western Europe, just like the USSR did in Eastern Europe. It may seem that America's "subjects" were more willing, but there was obviously a lot of shady stuff going on behind the scenes. And that's to say nothing of alliances with dictators in the Third World.
[QUOTE=Marbalo;51371105]That's a completely ridiculous rhetoric and you know it. What are you even trying to say by comparing NATO and the USSR and their own way of handling politics?[/QUOTE] If you think it's ridiculous that sane people prefer a diplomatic approach over starting wars in countries and killing thousands then your moral compass is completely fucked my friend [QUOTE=gudman;51370976]And maybe the Ukrainian conflict might end with Eastern Ukrainian "separatists" getting some token autonomy for "their" regions and disbanding, hopefully. Because the conflict's not going anywhere, everyone understands that.[/QUOTE] The problem with the idea of seperatists having autonomy but Ukraine keeping the regions is that the seperatist autonomous regions will be a complete hemorrhoid for the rest of Ukraine if Ukraine still wants to join the EU and achieve closer ties to western countries.
[QUOTE=Ghost656;51375308] The problem with the idea of seperatists having autonomy but Ukraine keeping the regions is that the seperatist autonomous regions will be a complete hemorrhoid for the rest of Ukraine if Ukraine still wants to join the EU and achieve closer ties to western countries.[/QUOTE] Yeah that's why I said "token autonomy", sort of like Crimea used to be.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.