Evidence that Putin is a Soviet Dictator

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

I did address your point. I said we had that system in the past, where continental powers would dictate smaller countries their politics. It's called imperialism. This system worked in medieval times, but in the industrialized modern era it led to bloodier and bloodier conflicts, culminating in two world wars. I don't need a nuclear world war to see that this system is a bad fit for out time.

No, you didn't. I spoke about protecting national interests. Allowing Crimea to stay in the hands of a NATO friendly country (Ukraine) would be against national interests because it's not only a jumping point to an invasion of Russia but could be used as a base of operations to attack Russian sea trade.

A Central American drug-funded ISIS was possible in the 80s. The US did what it had to in order to prevent drug lords arming themselves with heavy equipment.

The CIA worked with drug lords to bring drugs into the US. This has been documented. Those drug lords you speak of lived in South America. Central America doesn't produce cocaine, etc. Drugs were brought to Central America and then from there brought to the US. Central America was a transfer point.

You're so ridiculous. Where would these drug lords get the heavy equipment? That only appeared after the 80s when the Soviet Union collapsed. You don't know what you're talking about.

Central American countries are not friendlier to the US today than they were in the 80s. Despite that, the US did not try to annex any of them.

This is literally a waste of my time because you don't actually address the point but instead make up a new discussion because you can't deal with what was presented to you. First of all, whatever issues Central American nations have today with the US- an all nations have some issues with others - doesn't negate the problem that needed to be addressed in the 1980s. Did Communists get a foothold in Central America? No. That perhaps a government comes into power years later that felt previous governments were excessive or just downright terrible against the people as it fought Communists and they hold the US responsible is irrelevant. What is relevant is that there was an issue involving foreign-influenced antagonists in our backyard and that issue was taken care of (unfortunately it was done so brutally towards the civilians). Central America is in our sphere of influence and remains in our sphere of influence.

I just quickly googled El Salvador and as far as Pew Research Center polling goes El Salvador is one of the most pro-American nations in the world. I don't care to go down the list because it's not central to my point but if you want let's have a go. It's not central that they're friendly to us. It's central that they do not go against our interests, whether that's based on friendship or fear.

Yes, mister strategic genius, today in the era of large anti-ship missiles and naval drones, Crimea doesn't have the strategic importance for the Russian Navy that it used to have.

This is like saying in the era of large anti-ship missiles and naval drones no naval base is of strategic importance. Russia should just forget about having a navy. Why not? It doesn't matter, right? As if a military doesn't work toward resolving its problems. What works well today may not work well tomorrow because of military technological advances and so why would anyone just ignore a military strategic point?

The Russians just invaded Crimea cuz... they just felt like it... That's what nations do, ya know? They just irrationally take territory that has no purpose...

Black Sea is so small that it is completely covered by electronic intelligence. No ship more expensive than a salvo of anti-ship missiles survives in this environment.

The reason why the Russian Black Sea fleet is not at the bottom of the sea in its entirety is because the war started with Ukraine not having completed its own program of anti-ship missiles. Despite that, Ukraine sinks Russian ships with cheap naval drones.

It doesn't matter if Ukraine got the better of Russian ships. The assumption is that because the Russians don't have their act together in one area, then they should just reject what everyone except an anonymous emotional forum poster with an axe to grind thinks is militarily strategic. As if technological advances don't appear to resolve current problems.

Military Benefits

Most importantly, control of Crimea gives Moscow continuing access to the naval base at Sevastopol, home to Russia’s Black Sea Fleet. Sevastopol’s warm water port, natural harbor and extensive infrastructure make it among the best naval bases in the Black Sea. While Russia’s current lease of Sevastopol runs through 2042, due to recent events Russia had become increasingly concerned that its future access might be compromised. Operating from Sevastopol, the Black Sea Fleet provides Russia with the ability to project power in and around the Black Sea, while also serving as a potent symbol of Russian power. True, the Black Sea Fleet is not currently much of a force, consisting of about forty aging vessels dating primarily from the 1970s, including two cruisers, several frigates, corvettes, mines warfare vessels, amphibious transport craft, and one submarine. However, Russia is in the process of upgrading the fleet, which is scheduled to receive six new submarines, six new frigates and a French-built Mistral helicopter carrier within the next few years.

Moreover, even as currently configured, the Black Sea Fleet provides Russia with substantial operational capability within the immediate area. In 2008, for example, Russia used the fleet to ferry troops and to conduct a blockade against Georgia. Sevastopol also provides the Russian Navy with access to the Mediterranean, and to the South Atlantic and Indian Oceans beyond, subject to certain limitations imposed by the Montreaux Convention on transit of warships through the Turkish Straits in time of war. It serves as headquarters for Russia’s newly constituted Mediterranean Task Force, which has recently resumed permanent operations in the Eastern Mediterranean, extending Russia’s reach and enhancing its prestige in the region. The Mediterranean Task Force was recently used to deliver military equipment to Syria, to remove Syrian chemical weapons and to conduct anti-piracy operations near Somalia.

Additionally, control of Crimea provides Russia with important strategic defense capabilities. While it may lack modern vessels, the Black Sea Fleet remains capable of addressing naval threats from other states in the region to Russian interests within the Black Sea. Its warships are well equipped with advanced supersonic anti-ship cruise missiles, air defense systems, and torpedoes. Crimea is also home to the BSF 11th Coastal Defense Missile Brigade, which uses the K-300P coastal defense system, armed with the very capable Yakhont anti-ship missile. Moreover, with long-term control assured, Russia is already upgrading Crimea’s air defense capabilities, and will eventually install an integrated air defense system likely based on Russia’s formidable S-400 area defense platform. Together with advanced combat aircraft stationed at Crimea’s Kacha and Gvardeisk air bases, this will significantly enhance Russia’s air defense capabilities on its southern flank.https://www.csis.org/blogs/post-sovi...c-value-russia

Center of Strategic & International Studies > you

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

They even lost their flagship Black Sea fleet, Moskva, despite the disadvantage of Ukraine you mentioned. I agree with you on the Black Sea. Moreover, the Bosphorus Strait and the Aegan Sea belong to NATO, and Russia is pretty locked in the Black Sea because of that.

It doesn't matter. You don't surrender what could later be used against you.

[Anglo-Celtic]

With all due respect, facts are facts, even if people don't like them. As an information source, the Governor of an American State is good enough for me; Dunleavy did post those tweets, and they show that Russia did make those threats.

Putin won't be leading a victory parade down the streets of Anchorage next week, because the Russian army simply isn't good enough for an invasion at the present time. But Dunleavy's tweets do show that the U.S. government should regard Russia as a long-term security threat.

There's a reason why no one ever mentions this alleged threat by Mad Vlad. Think about why that might be.

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

There's a reason why no one ever mentions this alleged threat by Mad Vlad. Think about why that might be.

People really stick to their biases to the point of absurdity.

I have a deep dislike for Islam (and so Muslims) and when I was younger my views toward ME were based on my dislike for the religion and its worshipers. Then one day I realized this was not a rational approach to ME geopolitics. It was stupid. You're supposed to approach an issue without your baggage to see clearly.

Most people can't get past their personal biases.

[Anglo-Celtic]

People really stick to their biases to the point of absurdity.

I have a deep dislike for Islam (and so Muslims) and when I was younger my views toward ME were based on my dislike for the religion and its worshipers. Then one day I realized this was not a rational approach to ME geopolitics. It was stupid. You're supposed to approach an issue without your baggage to see clearly.

Most people can't get past their personal biases.

A large portion of the American population were alive during the Cold War when Russians were the designated villains in both pop culture and real life. Some of them never escaped this mentality, so they often sound like people ranting about Nazi krauts decades after the end of World War II.

[Smaland]

There's a reason why no one ever mentions this alleged threat by Mad Vlad. Think about why that might be.

A large portion of the American population were alive during the Cold War when Russians were the designated villains in both pop culture and real life. Some of them never escaped this mentality, so they often sound like people ranting about Nazi krauts decades after the end of World War II.

• Governor Dunleavy's tweets show that Russia's threats were not alleged, they are real. They should have been front-page news for 'two weeks' straight, but they weren't at all; the U.S. news media fell far short on this point.
  _
• During the Cold War, the Soviets were not just designated villains, they were real ones. Example: at the end of World War II, the Soviets conquered Hungary, among other countries in Eastern and Central Europe. In 1956, Hungarians had gotten tired of being a Soviet satellite state, they revolted against the Soviets, and the Hungarian Uprising was brutally suppressed. According to the Wiki article about the uprising, "2,500-3,000 (Hungarians were) killed", "13,000 (were) wounded", and "200,000 (were) exiled".
  _
• Since the Soviets really were the villains of the Cold War, those who talk about what they did aren't ranting, they're talking about history.

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

[LIST][*] Governor Dunleavy's tweets show that Russia's threats were not alleged, they are real. They should have been front-page news for 'two weeks' straight, but they weren't at all; the U.S. news media fell far short on this point.

Why didn't Dunleavy take it to Congress? Why wasn't there a press conference?

You've been asked several times and you remain quiet.

The US media didn't fall short. The US Media is not run by autists. The US media didn't take it seriously for the same reason no one on this forum took you seriously when I made a thread about it. Not one person - even people who are very much seething at the mouth against Putin - supported your autistic take. They understand what is pointless shit talk and what isn't.

Also, Autist, Anglo-Centric said 'alleged threat from Mad Vlad..." He never publically made a threat. You assume these two Russians who did are mouthpieces for Putin and so that's why it would be alleged (alleged by you). You can't even read simple English.

[Anglo-Celtic]

• Governor Dunleavy's tweets show that Russia's threats were not alleged, they are real. They should have been front-page news for 'two weeks' straight, but they weren't at all; the U.S. news media fell far short on this point.
  _
• During the Cold War, the Soviets were not just designated villains, they were real ones. Example: at the end of World War II, the Soviets conquered Hungary, among other countries in Eastern and Central Europe. In 1956, Hungarians had gotten tired of being a Soviet satellite state, they revolted against the Soviets, and the Hungarian Uprising was brutally suppressed. According to the Wiki article about the uprising, "2,500-3,000 (Hungarians were) killed", "13,000 (were) wounded", and "200,000 (were) exiled".
  _
• Since the Soviets really were the villains of the Cold War, those who talk about what they did aren't ranting, they're talking about history.

Yeah, I know that the USSR was the main threat during the Cold War. Now, post the threat from *Putin*, and we'll take your claim seriously. My point about the krauts is that both the Cold War and World War II are in the past. Of course, many people want to return to the former.

[Anglo-Celtic]

Also, Autist, Anglo-Centric said 'alleged threat from Mad Vlad..."

Anglo-Centric? It might be time to rest your eyes from the computer glare.

[Colonel Frank Grimes]

Anglo-Centric? It might be time to rest your eyes from the computer glare.

Yeah, that was weird.