But, but, but PUTIN...

[mati]

Putin is turning into one of the most influential people in the world.  This has implications for economy, environment, peace.

So far he has invaded Georgia (twice .. Abkhazia and South Ossetia)

Ukraine (twice .. crimea and ukraine proper)
   (to see what's going on: http://liveuamap.com/?ll=48.19557945228399;38.102529296874984&zoom=8)

Moldova (once .. Transnistria)

Syria (ongoing)

and threatening the Baltics, Poland and Germany from Kaliningrad (annexed at the end of WW2 with the entire population expelled/murdered/replaced)

He is quite happy with global warming as he sees it as a positive for Russia.

His environmental policies however have not been visible to many (including me) and hopefully this forum will provide information about what he is doing.

[mati]

Putin likes climate change deniers:

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/03/30/vladimir-putin-russia-trump-us-climate-policy.html

[Herfried]

What's with the Russian Puta? Oh yea Trump, Putin, Erdogan... Its spring, the narcissists are blossoming.

[Neven]

Here are a couple of comments from the Russiagate thread, revolving around the thesis that Russia is undermining western democracies (I'd like to give my thoughts in a following comment):

I know there are some who shrug at Russia's increasing and unprecedented meddling in global politics and say, "Meh. What are you gonna do?". For the record, I think that's a profoundly undemocratic point of view. But it's one unfortunately held by some in the West who have benefited politically from that meddling.

Russia has made no secret of the fact that they want the West to crumble. They need the EU to disintegrate, the US to falter, NATO to be rent asunder. It's in their own best interest to push for Brexit, and to enlist the help of divisive and caustic "useful idiots" like Trump, Le Pen, and Farage to hasten the downfall of democracy everywhere. So they are working overtime to make that happen. It's understandable if not excusable why they do that. But I think it's reprehensible for those enjoying the freedoms of those democracies to turn a blind eye to Putin's accelerated campaign simply because they are getting something from it for the moment.

It seems we freedom-lovers are at a crossroads. Either we surrender to Putin's methods and allow Russia to continue choosing more of  the West's leaders and policies, or we put an immediate end to all that, and start punishing those in the West who tolerate, condone, and encourage the behavior.

I'd go with the latter.

Jim
Your entire second paragraph strikes me as fantasy bordering on paranoia. You state that it is "no secret", yet I studied Russia intensively for ~2 years and found no indication at all of any of this.
If you can't back this up with verifiable quotes I'm afraid Ill be forced to conclude that it's simply anti-Russian, anti-Putin propaganda with no basis in fact.
Should I quote Obama as rebuttal?


Terry

Jim
Your entire second paragraph strikes me as fantasy bordering on paranoia. You state that it is "no secret", yet I studied Russia intensively for ~2 years and found no indication at all of any of this.
If you can't back this up with verifiable quotes I'm afraid Ill be forced to conclude that it's simply anti-Russian, anti-Putin propaganda with no basis in fact.
Should I quote Obama as rebuttal?
Terry

Terry,
For someone who indicates that he is good at research, I am very surprised that you have not found any evidence of Putin's desire to undermine the West for his own benefit, when in 5 seconds I can find an article like the following entitled: "Putin’s Puppet", from the summer before the last election:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/07/vladimir_putin_has_a_plan_for_destroying_the_west_and_it_looks_a_lot_like.html

Extract: "Vladimir Putin has a plan for destroying the West—and that plan looks a lot like Donald Trump. Over the past decade, Russia has boosted right-wing populists across Europe. It loaned money to Marine Le Pen in France, well-documented transfusions of cash to keep her presidential campaign alive. Such largesse also wended its way to the former Italian premier Silvio Berlusconi, who profited “personally and handsomely” from Russian energy deals, as an American ambassador to Rome once put it. (Berlusconi also shared a 240-year-old bottle of Crimean wine with Putin and apparently makes ample use of a bed gifted to him by the Russian president.)

There’s a clear pattern: Putin runs stealth efforts on behalf of politicians who rail against the European Union and want to push away from NATO. He’s been a patron of Golden Dawn in Greece, Ataka in Bulgaria, and Jobbik in Hungary. Joe Biden warned about this effort last year in a speech at the Brookings Institution: “President Putin sees such political forces as useful tools to be manipulated, to create cracks in the European body politic which he can then exploit.” Ruptures that will likely multiply after Brexit—a campaign Russia’s many propaganda organs bombastically promoted.

The destruction of Europe is a grandiose objective; so is the weakening of the United States. Until recently, Putin has only focused glancing attention on American elections. Then along came the presumptive Republican nominee."

Best,
ASLR

Terry,

If you think that my last post linking to an article by Slate is biased to the left, here is a more right-leaning article entitled: “How Russia stumbled into a winning strategy to undermine the West”:

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/03/29/how-russia-stumbled-into-a-winning-strategy-to-undermine-the-west/

Extract: “The tables have turned. The threat from the West that Russia saw in the mid-2000s has now been molded to a seemingly successful counter-strategy. It is targeting the ideological foundation of the West through political, ideological, and informational operations with relative impunity. And it seems to be going well.”

Best,
ASLR

[Neven]

Many things go through my mind when I read all of this:

It's hard to know what is true, as there has been a huge amount of anti-Russia propaganda in the past few years and both mainstream media and intelligence services have given us very little reason to trust them.

But let's assume that it's all true. Why are we so appalled that a foreign entity is applying the same tactics that have been used by US intelligence services for decades? Especially given that none of these actors do it for the good of their people.

Secondly, this tactic may make sense in the short term, weakening Europe, etc. But in the long term, if extreme right-wing populist strong men get powerful enough, they may prove difficult to control at best.  It may also lead to war, and that wouldn't be good for Russia. Neither would a backlash in the US and Europe leading to a second Cold War be. I don't think Russian oligarchs believe that this would be good for business, although I don't know if 'their' military-industrial complex is as powerful as 'ours'.

Thirdly, why is this tactic so seemingly successful? I mean, in the sense that Brexit happened, Trump won, Le Pen's popularity, etc? Is it all because Russia is so brilliant at meddling and none of the western intelligence services are able to stop it? Or is there something there that the stealth propaganda can tap into? And what is it?

Of course, it's the feeling that many people have that they are constantly being screwed over, by all establishment political parties, be they on the right or the left (there is no left, but never mind). And rightly so, there hardly seem to be any politicians who aren't in politics to stuff their pockets and/or ego. Their rhetoric and actions don't match. Corporations and their owners are more important than the people, and people feel this, even if they don't understand how things work exactly.

Fourthly, and this is tied to my second point, the meddling isn't done on behalf of the Russian people, but on behalf of a group of oligarchs that is more tied to that part of the world (although their wealth is connected and overlaps with that of other (groups of) oligarchs). Just like the meddling and the wars initiated by western powers serve the interests of the mega-wealthy and no one else.

So, again, why do we react so vehemently to it? Isn't that exactly what 'our' group of oligarchs want us to do? Why do we have to pick sides which are equally and systemically evil? Wouldn't it be better if we focus our energy on:

1) Supporting politicians with integrity and ideas that serve the people? Demand is high at the moment.
2) Finding ways to prevent oligarchs from controlling the economy, politics and society at large?

Okay, and this is assuming it's all true, even if it looks a bit like Glennbeckian epistemic closure to me. If it isn't true or exaggerated, it's all propaganda that could lead to war, by riling up nations against each other (rather than against the oligarchs). And when Wikileaks or whistleblowers release e-mails or some such that contain really damning information, they can be eliminated without trial (as a deterrent), and the information that is leaked, is simply ignored or labelled 'fake news'.

[AbruptSLR]

Neven,

The information available in the linked article entitled: "Is it fair to call Putin a killer?"; makes it clear that in our current times of chaos caused by job loss associated with the 4th Industrial Revolution that it is easier for a strongman ruled country like Russia with Putin at its helm to be more amoral in undermining 'others' (say by killing those who oppose the regime) to their own benefit.  Thus by your own logic we should all be actively opposing alt-right regimes like Putin's (note that I am not attacking the Russian people); while working to make the 4th Industrial Revolution more equable and more sustainable.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/commentary/ct-putin-kills-enemies-journalists-poison-20170207-story.html

Extract: "The corrupt and often ruthless system Putin has maintained in Russia is clearly a killer, and not just by dint of empowering people like Kadyrov. Since Putin came to power, 25 journalists were killed for work-related reasons. Many of them had been investigating corruption by Putin-appointed officials or exposing injustice by Putin's billionaire friends — like Mikhail Beketov, the editor of a small paper in the Moscow suburbs that opposed a highway project led by Putin crony Arkady Rotenberg. Only three journalists have been murdered in the U.S. in the same period, and two of them were victims of a terror attack.
…
The degree of an authoritarian ruler's personal responsibility is higher than in a state with a working system of checks and balances. Such a country's interests inevitably merge with the ruler's interest in keeping power. So, compared to U.S. leaders, Putin must accept more personal responsibility for the victims of his policies, his adventures and his mistakes. That includes the people killed in terror attacks that followed his harsh actions in Chechnya, as well as the many deaths resulting from his support of Ukrainian separatists and President Bashar al-Assad in Syria.

Best,
ASLR

[TerryM]

Neven
Apologize for my last on Russiagate, didn't notice that the page had turned.
I'll pull it if you'd like.


There we are conflating Russiagate with whoever leaked Macron's e-mail. Perhaps Macron had as many malcontents in his operation as the DNC had when their data was leaked.
Perhaps Macron had someone on team who would disclose his password to a sophomoric phishing pass. Perhaps Putin was horrified and began firing his own cyber-security heads?


I fled in horror when this thread opened. It reminded me of Texas Republicans speaking of Kennedy, before he flew out of Dallas. There is no free speech provision in Canada, we have laws against hate speech & this thread started dangerously close to that line IMO.


Terry

[mati]

putin's rise to power documentary

[mati]

LOL Terry M

There is no free speech provision in Canada, we have laws against hate speech & this thread started dangerously close to that line IMO.

i have no hate against the russian common people.
just those in power?
HATE SPEACH
omg
LOL

[AbruptSLR]

The linked article makes it clear that Putin's regime is interested in suppressing Alexei Navalny's rights to free speech/protest before next year's elections (where Navalny plans to oppose Putin):

The linked NPR article is entitled: "What Russia's Protests Mean For Putin's Opposition"

http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/03/28/521792586/what-russias-protests-mean-for-putins-opposition

Extract: "Russians are still trying to understand exactly what happened over the weekend, when thousands of people — many of them teenagers — turned out for anti-government rallies in dozens of cities across the country.

Sunday's rallies were the biggest public demonstration of discontent with the Kremlin since a wave of protests five winters ago that failed to stop the re-election of Vladimir Putin for an unprecedented third term as president.
…
What brought people out into the streets again this time was a viral YouTube video by Putin challenger Alexei Navalny, 40, who accused Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev of having amassed a real estate empire.
…
Navalny, who was among hundreds arrested on Sunday, provides continuity with Russia's last mass demonstrations. He set those off in December 2011, when he was a relatively unknown anti-corruption blogger, after calling Muscovites to a rally following reports of vote-rigging in parliamentary elections.

Then, as now, he was thrown in jail for two weeks for not obeying the police.
…
"The most surprising thing about Sunday's protest is that Navalny has managed to wed enough of that grass-roots energy to his anti-corruption agenda," said Gabowitsch. "The obvious explanation is the intervening economic downturn."

Navalny's popularity creates a dilemma for Russia's leaders: if they jail him on his corruption conviction, they create a martyr. But by letting him walk free, they run the risk of even more protests.

See also:

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-39789955

Extract: "A retrial was held after an earlier conviction was overturned following a European Court of Human Rights ruling.

Mr Navalny says the case was designed to prevent him standing in next year's presidential election.

He says he has lost 80% of his sight in one eye after having green antiseptic, which he said caused "chemical burns", splashed in his face last week.

It was the second time he has been attacked with zelyonka ("brilliant green" in English) this year. The antiseptic must have been mixed with something else to cause the burns to his right eye, the activist says.

&

http://www.newser.com/story/242211/man-who-wants-to-be-russian-president-blinded-in-attack.html

[AbruptSLR]

The linked 2015 article is entitled: "Karen Dawisha on How Putin Views the West, Interview With Renowned Russia Expert and Author of Putin’s Kleptocracy".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/samuel-ramani/karen-dawisha-on-how-puti_b_8404910.html

Extract: "Karen Dawisha is the Walter E Havighurst Professor of Political Science at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio. She is a world-renowned Russia expert who has written extensively about Soviet foreign policy, Russia-Middle East relations, and contemporary Russian politics. Her most recent book, published in 2014, is Putin’s Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia? Putin’s Kleptocracy was widely praised for its brilliant and in-depth examination of the Kremlin’s links to organized crime. But it also caused international controversy by being denied publication by Cambridge University Press on the grounds that it violated Britain’s libel laws. I interviewed Karen Dawisha via Skype on October 27, 2015."

Putin may present himself as the virtuous leader who’s saving Russia from falling back into chaos, but Dawisha presents compelling evidence that he’s actually running a colossally corrupt nation with the help of his mega-rich friends.

[TerryM]

LOL Terry M

There is no free speech provision in Canada, we have laws against hate speech & this thread started dangerously close to that line IMO.

i have no hate against the russian common people.
just those in power?
HATE SPEACH
omg
LOL

The good editors in Dallas didn't hate "common Americans", they just wanted Kennedy gone.
LOL, indeed.

[mati]

LOL Terry M

There is no free speech provision in Canada, we have laws against hate speech & this thread started dangerously close to that line IMO.

i have no hate against the russian common people.
just those in power?
HATE SPEACH
omg
LOL

The good editors in Dallas didn't hate "common Americans", they just wanted Kennedy gone.
LOL, indeed.

terry, you moved the goal posts, just as you have in other threads.
Explain again why my first post is "according to you" bordering on hate speech according to Canadian law.
I am still trying to get a handle on you and your belief system.  Don't quite know who's side you are *really* on. heh

[TerryM]

The linked 2015 article is entitled: "Karen Dawisha on How Putin Views the West, Interview With Renowned Russia Expert and Author of Putin’s Kleptocracy".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/samuel-ramani/karen-dawisha-on-how-puti_b_8404910.html

Extract: "Karen Dawisha is the Walter E Havighurst Professor of Political Science at Miami University in Oxford, Ohio. She is a world-renowned Russia expert who has written extensively about Soviet foreign policy, Russia-Middle East relations, and contemporary Russian politics. Her most recent book, published in 2014, is Putin’s Kleptocracy: Who Owns Russia? Putin’s Kleptocracy was widely praised for its brilliant and in-depth examination of the Kremlin’s links to organized crime. But it also caused international controversy by being denied publication by Cambridge University Press on the grounds that it violated Britain’s libel laws. I interviewed Karen Dawisha via Skype on October 27, 2015."

Putin may present himself as the virtuous leader who’s saving Russia from falling back into chaos, but Dawisha presents compelling evidence that he’s actually running a colossally corrupt nation with the help of his mega-rich friends.

If your answer to complaints of hate speech is to quote something that the Brits wouldn't touch because it violated their laws. I'm amazed.


Putin runs one of the most transparent democracies on earth. He speaks frequently and his speeches and talks are available in English.
You may find this incomprehensible, but Germans once wrote nasty things about Stalin, Churchill, and about Roosevelt. Nazi's in Ukraine still write nasty things about Putin, as they sing praises for the SS.
I reserve my right to take it all with a large dose of salt. If all you have to defame a world leader with is the propaganda of his enemies, your case is very weak.

[AbruptSLR]

If your answer to complaints of hate speech is to quote something that the Brits wouldn't touch because it violated their laws. I'm amazed.


Putin runs one of the most transparent democracies on earth. He speaks frequently and his speeches and talks are available in English.
You may find this incomprehensible, but Germans once wrote nasty things about Stalin, Churchill, and about Roosevelt. Nazi's in Ukraine still write nasty things about Putin, as they sing praises for the SS.
I reserve my right to take it all with a large dose of salt. If all you have to defame a world leader with is the propaganda of his enemies, your case is very weak.

If you have so little regard for a US Professor and for her US publisher, then here is a link to a British article about a British book entitled: "Red Notice: How I Became Putin’s No 1 Enemy by Bill Browder – review" written by a British citizen Mr Bill Browder.  In the book, Bill Browder claims that Putin has amassed a personal wealth of $200 billion, making him richest individual in the world.  If this is true then Putin is most clearly a criminal (as when he became head of Russia he was not rich) even though he has not been convicted, and even though libel laws make it illegal to point-out the obvious in Britain.


https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/mar/26/red-notice-how-i-became-putin-no-1-enemy-bill-browder-review

[TerryM]

LOL Terry M

There is no free speech provision in Canada, we have laws against hate speech & this thread started dangerously close to that line IMO.

i have no hate against the russian common people.
just those in power?
HATE SPEACH
omg
LOL

The good editors in Dallas didn't hate "common Americans", they just wanted Kennedy gone.
LOL, indeed.

terry, you moved the goal posts, just as you have in other threads.
Explain again why my first post is "according to you" bordering on hate speech according to Canadian law.
I am still trying to get a handle on you and your belief system.  Don't quite know who's side you are *really* on. heh

Sorry
I won't repeat the crap you posted.


You've on other threads assumed I wasn't familiar with California?, that I lived in Windsor?, that I lived in my mothers basement and/or some small room?, and that I'm not here in Ontario?
I'm not surprised that you have difficulty in knowing much of anything. You're fantasies seem to interfere with your perception of reality.


Imagining that goal posts are mobile may be indicative of this fantasy world you have created. Reacting to hate speech is and was the goal of my discourse. Comparing your writings to those of Southern Republicans writing in the summer of '63 was the vehicle I chose.
The posts haven't moved, you've simply been ensnared in the goal's netting. Things appear different when you're struggling to escape.

[TerryM]

If your answer to complaints of hate speech is to quote something that the Brits wouldn't touch because it violated their laws. I'm amazed.


Putin runs one of the most transparent democracies on earth. He speaks frequently and his speeches and talks are available in English.
You may find this incomprehensible, but Germans once wrote nasty things about Stalin, Churchill, and about Roosevelt. Nazi's in Ukraine still write nasty things about Putin, as they sing praises for the SS.
I reserve my right to take it all with a large dose of salt. If all you have to defame a world leader with is the propaganda of his enemies, your case is very weak.

If you have so little regard for a US Professor and for her US publisher, then here is a link to a British article about a British book entitled: "Red Notice: How I Became Putin’s No 1 Enemy by Bill Browder – review" written by a British citizen Mr Bill Browder.  In the book, Bill Browder claims that Putin has amassed a personal wealth of $200 billion, making him richest individual in the world.  If this is true then Putin is most clearly a criminal (as when he became head of Russia he was not rich) even though he has not been convicted, and even though libel laws make it illegal to point-out the obvious in Britain.


https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/mar/26/red-notice-how-i-became-putin-no-1-enemy-bill-browder-review

Am I supposed to accept that a book with the bolded title presents unbiased information?


Would you accept data from a book entitled "How I became Mann's Greatest Enemy"?

[AbruptSLR]

Am I supposed to accept that a book with the bolded title presents unbiased information?


Would you accept data from a book entitled "How I became Mann's Greatest Enemy"?

Think what you will, but Putin is the head of Russia and per Transparency International Russia scores a 30 on corruption on a scale of 0 to 100, where 100 is best (see the attached image).  In my opinion it is naïve to believe that Putin is not benefiting from all this corruption:

http://www.transparency.org/

[TerryM]

Am I supposed to accept that a book with the bolded title presents unbiased information?


Would you accept data from a book entitled "How I became Mann's Greatest Enemy"?

Think what you will, but Putin is the head of Russia and per Transparency International Russia scores a 30 on corruption on a scale of 0 to 100, where 100 is best (see the attached image).  In my opinion it is naïve to believe that Putin is not benefiting from all this corruption:

http://www.transparency.org/

Those damn Greenlanders don't even rate a ranking


Terry

[Neven]

I don't believe Putin is a good person, and I don't believe 'their' oligarchs are better/less bad than 'our' oligarchs. If you have a system in which there is no limit on wealth, it can never be good, period.

That's why it's important we don't get trapped in the divide&conquer-tactics served to us by the mainstream media, and then promote that division online. By saying 'Putin is evil and so he has to go', coming from a country whose leaders are equally evil, will only align the people of Russia with their evil leaders. That's exactly what leaders (and the oligarchs who hold the strings) behind them want.

We have to get rid of all those leaders, on all sides. And the only way to do it, IMO, is to put a cap on wealth. That way you take away the incentive for 'more, more, more' that happens, even if the mega-wealthy don't wish for it consciously.

[iamlsd]

Wow  Neven I so agree with this and have done so for quite some time.

For wages perhaps it could be achieved through a requirement of business / corporate registration, access to markets etc. that the organisation must have a ratio of highest wage level to lowest wage level of no more than 5 times.

I'm not sure how business owners wealth through shares could be managed perhaps a similar ratio for maximum share owned.

[AbruptSLR]

Per the linked article, when Putin became Prime Minister of Russia he had little wealth, after 17-years in power he is now worth over USD $85 Billion.

http://www.alternet.org/election-2016/trump-presidency-disaster

Extract: "Putin's power grab is a blueprint for Donald Trump's budding kleptocracy.
...
Why? Because it’s happened before.

In the fall of 1999, just months after then-unknown former FSB agent Vladimir Putin had been sworn in as prime minister of Russia, someone began bombing apartment buildings. Over the course of two terrible months, hundreds of people died in the series of explosions around the country and thousands were injured. As Masha Gessen tells it in her book The Man Without a Face, “panic set in all over the country.” The majority of the country assumed Chechen terrorists were responsible. Paranoia became the national mood and vigilante surveillance the national pastime. Into this chaos stepped Vladimir Putin.

“Putin made one of his first television appearances,” Gessen writes, “‘We will hunt them down,’ he said of the terrorists. ‘Wherever we find them, we will destroy them. Even if we find them in the toilet. We will rub them out in the outhouse.'...His popularity began to soar.”

Putin never looked back. Over the next 17 years, Putin ,  the uniquely unqualified newcomer to political office , became a global authoritarian. Russia was never the same.

Since those fateful days, experts around the world have come to agree that the Russian government was complicit in the terrorist bombings that swept Putin into power.
…
So, to summarize: In 1999 the FSB, the same organization now suspected of tampering in the U.S. election to tip it in favor of Donald Trump, was caught in the act of planting bombs in civilian apartment buildings in Russia in order to sow chaos and consolidate power for its disputed leader of choice."

[TerryM]

I don't believe Putin is a good person, and I don't believe 'their' oligarchs are better/less bad than 'our' oligarchs. If you have a system in which there is no limit on wealth, it can never be good, period.

That's why it's important we don't get trapped in the divide&conquer-tactics served to us by the mainstream media, and then promote that division online. By saying 'Putin is evil and so he has to go', coming from a country whose leaders are equally evil, will only align the people of Russia with their evil leaders. That's exactly what leaders (and the oligarchs who hold the strings) behind them want.

We have to get rid of all those leaders, on all sides. And the only way to do it, IMO, is to put a cap on wealth. That way you take away the incentive for 'more, more, more' that happens, even if the mega-wealthy don't wish for it consciously.

I think as long as we have "sides", we're up the creek & paddleless.
If we have them vs us we haven't a chance at cooperating to cut CO2 emissions. Each "side" perceives the other as gaining power, money, stature if they take the initiative to cut back growth.


Putin continuously refers to the West as "Our Partner(s)". A small, insignificant gesture to be sure. Also a gesture crying for reciprocity.


We're going in the wrong direction.
Terry

[AbruptSLR]

The linked Joe Romm article is entitled: "Did Putin help elect Trump to restore $500 billion Exxon oil deal killed by sanctions".  As Joe says: "Follow the money:"; which will take some time, as we are barely over 100-days into the Trump presidency.

https://thinkprogress.org/putin-helped-trump-exxon-oil-deal-sanctions-6f169c4a4cd0#.youhglk0d

Extract: "Follow the money: Will Trump repay Putin by ending Russian sanctions and killing the Paris climate deal?"

[TerryM]

The linked Joe Romm article is entitled: "Did Putin help elect Trump to restore $500 billion Exxon oil deal killed by sanctions".  As Joe says: "Follow the money:"; which will take some time, as we are barely over 100-days into the Trump presidency.

https://thinkprogress.org/putin-helped-trump-exxon-oil-deal-sanctions-6f169c4a4cd0#.youhglk0d

Extract: "Follow the money: Will Trump repay Putin by ending Russian sanctions and killing the Paris climate deal?"

It's so difficult to "follow the money"in this direction, when I've only recently learned that low oil prices preclude Arctic drilling.


Consistency counts, I was weened on Tony insisting that there was no global warming while praising the insight of those who had proved that global warming was due to the gulf stream slowing, or speeding, depending on the week.
So has Putin schemed to get his kleptocratic hands on a $500B cash stream, or is Arctic deep sea oil always going to price itself out of the market? - can't have it both ways.


Terry


I'm already dubious that the "Richest man in the world". according to the figure you posted so authoritatively, would risk all this amazing hoard on the off chance that oil will pop back up, and he'll be able to profit. What an amazing mind.

[Neven]

The linked Joe Romm article is entitled: "Did Putin help elect Trump to restore $500 billion Exxon oil deal killed by sanctions".  As Joe says: "Follow the money:"; which will take some time, as we are barely over 100-days into the Trump presidency.

https://thinkprogress.org/putin-helped-trump-exxon-oil-deal-sanctions-6f169c4a4cd0#.youhglk0d

Extract: "Follow the money: Will Trump repay Putin by ending Russian sanctions and killing the Paris climate deal?"

I think this (ie fossil fuels) is at the core of the relationship between the Putin-oligarchs and the Trump-oligarchs, temporarily upsetting the duopoly-oligarchy. It's not ideological or geopolitical as much as it is about money. Just like the Bushes and Clintons are big buddies with Saudi-Arabia's royal family. Among others.

[AbruptSLR]

I think this (ie fossil fuels) is at the core of the relationship between the Putin-oligarchs and the Trump-oligarchs, temporarily upsetting the duopoly-oligarchy. It's not ideological or geopolitical as much as it is about money. Just like the Bushes and Clintons are big buddies with Saudi-Arabia's royal family. Among others.

In my view what you call the Putin-oligarchs are full fledged kleptocrats and the Trump-oligarchs are kleptocrat 'wannabes'.

And to quote Wikipedia: "Kleptocracy (from Ancient Greek κλέπτης (kléptēs, “thief”), κλέπτω (kléptō, “steal”), from Proto-Indo-European *klep- (“to steal”); and from the Ancient Greek suffix -κρατία (-kratía), from κράτος (krátos, “power, rule”; klépto- thieves + -kratos rule, literally "rule by thieves") is a government with corrupt leaders (kleptocrats) that use their power to exploit the people and natural resources of their own territory in order to extend their personal wealth and political power. Typically this system involves embezzlement of funds at the expense of the wider population."

Effectively kleptocracy means 'rule by thieves', so setting rules to limit Putin's wealth (or to limit how much wealth Trump Inc. will illicitly garner during the Trump administration) is totally irrelevant because kleptocrats are criminals, working in criminal governments, who do not follow the rules.  Thus when proposing fixes to our communal problems it is helpful to identify explicitly how power (or rather abuse of power) will be controlled as populist uprising have a history of offering extremely short-lived fixes that have given us the likes of Stalin (from the Russian Communist Revolution) & I note that Putin is benefiting from Stalin's strongman legacy with regard to a mini-reign-of-terror (think that virtually all political opponents of Putin have died or been terrorized).

Edit: I note that the titles in the ASIF seem to encourage the concept of governance by those with a love of power.

[Neven]

Kleptocrats, oligarchs, potato, tomato. There's nothing wannabe about 'our' oligarchs, be they behind Trump or behind the establishment duopoly. I mean, just look at the bank bail-out and the perpetual war machine.

But anyway, I believe it's fossil fuels that lubricate the Putin-Trump oligarch/kleptocrat relationship. Saudi Arabia may turn out to be the cuckold.

Edit: I note that the titles in the ASIF seem to encourage the concept of governance by those with a love of power.

Would you like to be the first ASIF Kleptocrat, dear Emperor? 

[Martin Gisser]

It's so difficult to "follow the money"in this direction, when I've only recently learned that low oil prices preclude Arctic drilling.

Too expensive for Exxon alone, yes. But Russia is quite cheap. So, if they combine forces it might work. Or so they think. Plus, cheap Saudi oil will soon be gone. Paradoxically, that's why the Saudi pump it maximum. They are not as stupid and blinded by greed as Putin, Trump, Tillerson and friends. Alas that hasn't yet price-killed U.S. fracking and Canadian tar sands. Did you know Trump wants to build the Keystone XL pipeline? Hmmm...

[TerryM]

Too expensive for Exxon alone, yes. But Russia is quite cheap. So, if they combine forces it might work. Or so they think.

Russian production cost are in fact very low. Since Russia has China & so many more customers who are not restricting Russian goods, and since the field came in just as sanctions were put in place. Why on earth would Putin want to let Exxon back in?

Plus, cheap Saudi oil will soon be gone. Paradoxically, that's why the Saudi pump it maximum. They are not as stupid and blinded by greed as Putin, Trump, Tillerson and friends.

I am aware of "they're ruining the field by pumping seawater & now must pump at high rates until it's over" theory.


I believe what we've been seeing is a replay of the Reagan / Saudi strategy that brought down the USSR. At that time oil was forced down to ~$12 and USSR simply couldn't pay it's bills.
It doesn't seem to be working this time around, because Russia had/has very little debt, has financial backing from China, has a more diversified export market, and Putin's almost immediate decision to allow the Ruble to float while piling up gold reserves.

Alas that hasn't yet price-killed U.S. fracking and Canadian tar sands. Did you know Trump wants to build the Keystone XL pipeline? Hmmm...

Humor?
The USofA presently buys over 40% of it's crude from Canada. With Keystone up and running that number will increase.


What I want is high oil prices that encourage replacement with clean alternatives as well as more efficient use leading up to it's replacement.


US policy accepted the biotic theory of ff genesis. The USSR & Russia held to abiotic genesis of ff. Recent, (~4an) studies off Svalbard?, proved the abiotic theory was correct, although it may take a generation to change the textbooks. -an interesting subject in itself-


The US believed/believes that ff are finite, and that it can win??, by acquiring and hoarding this limited resource.


The USSR & Russia see ff resources as expandable & expendable, If we use these up we just drill for more. When the USSR began based their drilling on abiotic theory, they went from oil poor to fabulously productive exporters of gas and oil.


As some wag famously noted "The stone age didn't end because we ran out of stones". The oil age will only end when alternatives prove themselves to be better and cheaper than oil. We need to leave it in the ground.


Terry

[AbruptSLR]

Edit: I note that the titles in the ASIF seem to encourage the concept of governance by those with a love of power.

Would you like to be the first ASIF Kleptocrat, dear Emperor? 

I was thinking of titles more in keeping with democratic governance, but you could also scan my posts on Technocracy in the "Adapting to the Anthropocene" thread.

[pileus]

The linked commentary highlights Vald Putin's continuing efforts to undermine Western democracy:

Putin Declares War on the West
http://observer.com/2017/05/vladimir-putin-kremlin-wikileaks-france-germany-election-interference/amp/

"What happened is clear enough. Early analysis indicates that Macron’s emails were stolen by a Russian hacking group termed APT 28 or Fancy Bear—the very same shadowy cyber-gang which stole Democratic emails in 2016. In reality, this notorious criminal group is part of Russian military intelligence or GRU.

This was anything but subtle. As I recently noted, Putin no longer cares that Westerners know how the Kremlin is trying to install pro-Russian governments in our countries—what is properly termed subversion. Moscow could have covered its tracks better, employing “clean” hackers not already identified by Western counterspies; they chose not to. Indeed, they were sloppy—some of the Macron hackers left behind Cyrillic letters, perhaps in a taunting gesture.

Just as unsubtle was how Moscow employed well-known fronts for its spy services to disseminate Macron’s stolen emails. Here WikiLeaks played a lead role, just as it did in last year’s Russian espionage and subversion campaign against the United States. American fringe-right activists with visible ties to the Kremlin played an important part in pushing this story, too."
-----------------------
"Let us be perfectly clear about what has happened here. Russia employed its full arsenal of what I’ve termed Special War—interlinked espionage, propaganda and subversion—against yet another Western country in an illegal effort to elect a leader more to Moscow’s liking. That this operation failed in France, just months after working in the United States, means that the Kremlin ought to reassess the viability of its clandestine model. Ever since the cunning occupation of Crimea in early 2014 by GRU’s Little Green Men, which worked almost flawlessly, countries bordering Russia have prepared for identical Kremlin aggression. That spy-trick will not work as advertised twice"
--------------------
"Putin has declared war on the West. Not kinetic warfare, but political warfare. Its aims are identical to the objectives of actual warfare. Too weak militarily and economically to challenge NATO on the field of battle with any hope of victory, the Kremlin has opted for more cunning techniques. Yet Russia’s objective—to install pro-Putin governments in Western capitals—is no different than if Moscow ordered the 1st Guards Tank Army to march westward."

[TerryM]

Pileus
Your link won't allow me more than a peek.
Any other source?


The peek that I did see gave me the author's name as John R Schindler, apparently a former Conservative talking head who had worked at some point for the NSA or the War Colledge. When his penis appeared across the web he lost his job and went deep undercover for some time, and apparently still refuses to talk about this episode.


Not saying Conservative talking heads always lie.
Not saying everyone accused of wagging his PP on the web is guilty - although he did get fired.


I'd give a link, but all I did was to google his name.


Just that every time I hear of Fancy Bears, my spidey senses tingle.


A site that allows ad blocker would probably welcome me with open arms.
Thanks
Terry

[Martin Gisser]

Amazing: The observer is owned by Jared Kushner.

EDIT P.S.: Oops! No longer:
"Joseph Meyer, Kushner's brother-in-law who has been the CEO of Observer Media Group since 2013, will serve as publisher."
http://www.businessinsider.de/jared-kushner-steps-down-as-publisher-of-the-observer-2017-1?r=US&IR=T

[TerryM]

Amazing: The observer is owned by Jared Kushner.

His association with Kyiv Post and Business Insider indicate strong Ukrainian influence.
Stripes (Stars and Stripes) has a negative article & mentions Ukraine in passing while most large readership sites on both sides of the Atlantic have reported on his wagging proclivities.


I've read some of his hit pieces previously, but hadn't noted the author's name.
The Wikipedia Articles for deletion piece is wordy, but descriptive.


Can we assume his welcome at the observer (under Kushner) has been worn out?


pileus - Don't trouble yourself searching for another copy for my edification.
Thanks
Terry

[Neven]

Indeed, they were sloppy—some of the Macron hackers left behind Cyrillic letters, perhaps in a taunting gesture.

I don't know anything about this alleged hack, and I'm not going to try to find out because it is nigh impossible to find out the truth. But when I read this, I guess a set-up is equally possible. Why on Earth, if the Russians' motive is to stealthily disrupt elections in western countries, would they leave behind Cyrillic letters in a taunting gesture? If they have been so brilliant in doing all the 'warfare' unnoticed and without hardly leaving a trail so far, why would they suddenly be sloppy?

And somewhere else I read that Macron and his team suffered several hacking attempts prior. How on Earth is it possible that they get hacked after all, even when forewarned?

Given their surveillance powers, how is it possible that American intelligence services aren't able to prevent this, or even monitor it while it's going on?

This is a joke.

"Putin has declared war on the West. Not kinetic warfare, but political warfare. Its aims are identical to the objectives of actual warfare.

No, its aims are to make oligarchs more wealthy. And calling these things warfare, is calling for the real thing.

[NevB]

I came across this from the Guardian. This is the Arctic Sea Ice forum and ideally not the place for political debate, however as US politics is an important part of humanity's response to the climate crisis and now Putin's Russia has become entangled with US politics these side topics do have some relevance.

Besides this I do get a lot from the insights posted here from all the those who contribute but in this discussion I have had an uneasy feeling that the true nature of Putin as not been exposed even in this thread dedicated in his honor.

This particular article struck me as a vivid illustration of the type of Russia Putin has created that is described by Garry Kasparov in his books. Perhaps this could encourage people to look closer at the nature of the threat that Putin poses to liberal democracies.   

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/30/russia-putin-protests-police-arrests-tv-show

It takes a lot to shock me in Russia, after 45 years of studying it. But this month my blood ran cold. Not because I watched innocent kids being hauled off the street by thuggish riot forces, and not because I was myself arrested and questioned by police for seven hours – though those incidents played a part – but because of what I witnessed in a Russian state television studio. But let’s start at the beginning

This is the reality on the ground now, to understand how this came about and who and what Putin is I recommend Garry Kasparov's "Winter is Cominig". This should be read by those that are inclined to believe Putin is benign or even that Russia is the victim of western aggression.

As far as the ICIF goes I have been obsessively reading since near the beginning and much appreciate those who generously contribute their time and knowledge. 

     

[NevB]

Having Putin declared innocent in the Russia Gate thread prompts me to update this Putin thread rather than further divert that thread. 

I'm surprised and concerned that I have to point out here that this is how Putin has an 85% approval rating. I would have thought the oppression of any dissenting voice in Russia was rather obvious. I also fear that declaring Putin innocent while ignoring this can only encourage those in the US that are now attempting to assist Trump suppress any dissenting media.

Efforts to prove there was Russian meddling behind the deaths of Vladimir Putin critics have not amounted to much either.
They end up dead and Putin's calls the accusations "absurd." I guess Trump would call it fake news.
It doesn't mean that it is not true.

Denis Voronenkov in Kiev, Ukraine 2017
Boris Nemtsov, Feb. 28, 2015
Boris Berezovsky, 2013
Sergei Magnitsky, 2009 who uncovered evidence of corruption, fraud and a cover up.
Natalya Estemirova, 2009 was a journalist who investigated abductions and murders that had become commonplace in Chechnya.
Stanislav Markelov and Anastasia Baburova, 2009
Anna Politkovskaya, 2006
Alexander Litvinenko, 2006 a former KGB agent who died three weeks after drinking a cup of tea laced with deadly polonium-210 at a London hotel.
Sergei Yushenkov, 2003
Yuri Shchekochikhin, 2003 a journalist and author who wrote about crime and corruption in the former Soviet Union when it was still very difficult to do so

This list I came across someplace and I no longer have a link but these details are easily found. Free and fair media is long dead in Russia and President Putin is 7 foot tall. 

[TerryM]

Having Putin declared innocent in the Russia Gate thread prompts me to update this Putin thread rather than further divert that thread. 

I'm surprised and concerned that I have to point out here that this is how Putin has an 85% approval rating. I would have thought the oppression of any dissenting voice in Russia was rather obvious. I also fear that declaring Putin innocent while ignoring this can only encourage those in the US that are now attempting to assist Trump suppress any dissenting media.

Efforts to prove there was Russian meddling behind the deaths of Vladimir Putin critics have not amounted to much either.
They end up dead and Putin's calls the accusations "absurd." I guess Trump would call it fake news.
It doesn't mean that it is not true.

Denis Voronenkov in Kiev, Ukraine 2017
Boris Nemtsov, Feb. 28, 2015
Boris Berezovsky, 2013
Sergei Magnitsky, 2009 who uncovered evidence of corruption, fraud and a cover up.
Natalya Estemirova, 2009 was a journalist who investigated abductions and murders that had become commonplace in Chechnya.
Stanislav Markelov and Anastasia Baburova, 2009
Anna Politkovskaya, 2006
Alexander Litvinenko, 2006 a former KGB agent who died three weeks after drinking a cup of tea laced with deadly polonium-210 at a London hotel.
Sergei Yushenkov, 2003
Yuri Shchekochikhin, 2003 a journalist and author who wrote about crime and corruption in the former Soviet Union when it was still very difficult to do so

This list I came across someplace and I no longer have a link but these details are easily found. Free and fair media is long dead in Russia and President Putin is 7 foot tall.

What's to follow?
Another "Arkancide" list?
Terry