I made the claim that Putin would not “go into” the Baltic States. I cited Russia expert Stephen Cohen saying there is no evidence whatsoever that Putin wants to “end the independence” of the Baltic States.
You rebut this by saying Putin is in Ukraine and annexed Crimea. All this time I thought we were arguing over Putin’s future intentions. I never considered the fact that you don’t know where the Baltic States are. Ukraine is not a Baltic State.
Crimea was a gift from Russia that never actually traded hands in a meaningful way. It’s now Russian as it always will be. Ukraine’s eastern regions are ethnically Russian and under threat from a government that cuddles with neo-Nazis. There was an attempted ethnic cleansing in the Donbass and Putin stepped in. If you want to side with the ethnic cleansers because an imaginary line separates Russia from eastern Ukraine, I would question your ideology.
I’m not a partisan Republican. I have said several times that I favor a Hillary victory and support Johnson’s campaign. The point being debated is over Russia. Hillary Clinton is terrible on Russia. She instigates war all over, but with Russia she is especially scary, comparing Putin to Hitler.
I also never bought into the idea of an evil country, unlike the brain-washed American media consumer. Governments are evil, not countries.
I know what a Baltic State is. The point, which you and this Cohen dude are trying to obscure, is that all these states are former Soviet territory. It’s irrelevant that some of the former Soviet territories are on the Baltic Sea and some are on the Black Sea.
The proof that Vladimir Putin wants to reacquire the former Soviet Republics for Russia is that Putin is currently attacking and reacquiring the former Soviet Republic territory in Ukraine.
When arguing that Russia has no ideas of aggression, Stephen Cohen’s opinions do not outweigh the actual aggression of using of Russian troops to conquer independent Ukraine.
If it’s irrelevant take that up with the poster who asked me about Latvia and Estonia. I never said anything absurd like “Putin has no ideas of aggression” and neither did Cohen as far as I can tell. I simply said he would not make a move on Latvia and Estonia. I cited an expert who agreed. I have seen nothing from you but speculation based on western hysteria.
It could have been the height of irony if this election put Putin patsy Donald Trump on one side, and Socialist Bernie Sanders on the other. The world’s head would have exploded.
Michael Morell, a 33-year veteran of the CIA and former acting Director of Central Intelligence has endorsed Clinton in today’s New York Times. He writes:
My belief in Vladimir Putin’s aggressive intentions is not shaped by the media but by his own behavior.
My evidence that Putin will act aggressively toward the former Soviet republics is his current aggression toward a former Soviet republic. In light of Putin’s current war of aggression towards Ukraine, I see no reason to take Stephen Cohen’s word for it that Putin has no intention of attacking the Baltic states.
Today (5 Aug) NYT editorial from a former CIA man, Michael J. Morell, stating that Donald is (perhaps unwittingly) working for Vladimir Putin, headlined:
Morell also goes on to point out that Trump’s rampant anti-Muslim comments are likely harming America’s efforts to gain critical cooperation among our Muslim communities.
Michael Morell has years of experience in the CIA. He was the acting director of the CIA from 2010 to 2013. He was heavily involved with Obama and Clinton during the capture of Osama bin Laden. I know it’s an opinion piece, but it’s an informed opinion. Recruiting assets is part of what intelligence agents like Morell and Putin do.
I think it says a lot that an intelligence agent recognizes Trump’s behavior as that of an unwitting recruit by another intelligence agent.
It appears the Putin may now be trying to siphon off Democratic votes by defending Jill Stein.
John Aravosis, of Ameriblog, criticized Stein for her behavior on her trip to Moscow. Trolls criticizing the article started showing up, but with a time delay of 7 hours.
If I was a betting man, I would put 3:1 odds that sometime in the next few days, Paul Manafort will be looking at the top of clouds that are over the Atlantic Ocean, on his way to somewhere, anywhere.
Carter Page, maybe. He’s the guy giving speeches in Moscow about how America’s commitment to democracy is just a hypocritical club for bashing their rivals.
But I guess if the former-KGB man is involved, it’s probably someone we haven’t met.