Posted on 02/11/2014 10:01:10 PM PST by cunning_fish
An unfortunate legacy of the Cold War is the negative attitude some American conservatives yet harbor toward Russia. Conditioned for decades to see Russia and the Soviet Union as synonymous, they still view post-communist Russia as a threat. They forget that Tsarist Russia was the most conservative great power, a bastion of Christian monarchy loathed by revolutionaries, Jacobins, and democrats. Joseph de Maistre was not alone among 19th-century conservatives in finding refuge and hope in Russia.
Under President Vladimir Putin, Russia is emerging once more as the leading conservative power. As we witnessed in Russia’s rescue of President Obama from the corner into which he had painted himself on Syria, the Kremlin is today, as the New York Times reports, “Establishing Russia’s role in world affairs not based on the dated Cold War paradigm but rather on its different outlook, which favors state sovereignty and status quo stability over the spread of Western-style democracy.”
In his own Times op-ed on Syria, Putin wrote, “It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it.” Sen. Robert A. Taft and Russell Kirk also doubted it.
Moscow appears to understand better than Washington that the driving foreign-policy requirement of the 21st century is the preservation of the state in the face of Fourth Generation war waged by non-state entities, such as those fighting on the rebels’ side in Syria. Russia has rightly upbraided Washington for destroying states, including Iraq and Libya.
(Excerpt) Read more at theamericanconservative.com ...
Spoken like a true liberal.
“otoh, was a destabilizing threat to the region and our ally Israel. Taking Hussein out was the right thing to do.”
Hussein wasn’t an Islamist. The Ba’athist Party he belonged to was an pan-Arabic party with roots in Socialism. Hussein admired Stalin, not Mohammed.
The result of removing Hussein has been to give Shia Islam a second sphere of influence and Shiite Islam is a far greater threat to Israel than Baathism ever was.
So you’re still trying to paint Lind as a Marxist?
Is his collaborator Paul Weyrich also a ‘Marxist’? Try reading the thread and learn something.
>>Tell you what - I’ll believe Russia goes “right” when they recognize that their citizens have the right to keep and bear arms and it shall not be infringed.. When Ivan, Yevgenny, and Boris can walk into “Mikhailovich’s Guns, Ammo, and Borscht Shop” and can buy their own used AK47, AK74, AK106, etc., and surplus ammo to plink with.
That would be a step in the right direction.<<
Why everyone thinks guns are banned in Russia?
>>>The result of removing Hussein has been to give Shia Islam a second sphere of influence and Shiite Islam is a far greater threat to Israel than Baathism ever was.<<<
Not to mention radical Sunni Islam which is much worse than Shia version.
The article itself said they were strictly controlled there.
And when you say “gun rights” and “Russia” in the same sentence, the image of people driving to the range on the weekend to cut loose with “Ol’ Painless” does NOT come immediately to mind.
Commies weren’t too fond of people being able to shoot back...
Now, has that changed, is the real question...
“Conservatives for public transportation?”
He’s all about land-grabbing for light rail.
Yuck!
-— They forget that Tsarist Russia was the most conservative great power, a bastion of Christian monarchy loathed by revolutionaries, Jacobins, and democrats -—
Yup. If you read Dostoevsky’s “Demons,” you can see how the Revolution festered for decades. The dream was kept alive by the Bill Ayers’, coffee-house, low-lifes of the 19th century. It was a long time coming.
In that case I apologize for my error of missasumption
I was wrong....I confused you with r9etb....a race baiter who actually is
zotted
No need to ping JR to spats....that has mal intent undertones
You keep up good
Right turn? Conservative? Honestly. Bob Costa types and leftist Liberals have much more in common with authoritarian leaders than conservatives do, homosexuality aside. That homo Adolph Hitler promoted heterosexuality to produce children for the state, Russia has the problem of population growth. I do not see Russia as a moral leader or to the right or conservative as to how those terms relate to America
There is another saying, that “When a Russian acts like an Asian, he is generally trustworthy; but when he acts like a European, he is lying to you.”
“The coherent philosophy required to sustain those institutions and the adherence to those institutions indispensable to sustaining the philosophy is far greater than our abhorrence of a particular practice, such as sodomy.”
Philosophy underlays ones actions. If leaders do not follow that philosophy, what good is the philosophy, and what good are the leaders?
Putin is changing his actions, one would presume on a change in his philosophy, one that is more closely aligned with 19th century conservatism in Russia.
I think equating that with Hitlers treatment of gays is a stretch.
Any leader that challenges the grossly over-represented gay lobby is worthy of respect.
Comparing Putin to other ex-Communists, or to Socialist demagogues like Hitler or Obama--and yes there are too many parallels between them to ignore--is absurd. Putin, in the 21st Century, shows none of the doctrinaire Marxist. Not only the ex-Communists, but both Obama & Hitler have/had repeatedly advocated Marxist ideas (income inequality as a major problem, demonizing the 1%/or Jews, etc.; or for that matter trying to force your ideology on other peoples).
As for cutting some corners to reverse a wrong-headed system? How could you do otherwise? Did not the American Revolution cut some legal corners? Did Pinochet not have to cut corners to remove the Marxist influence & control in Chile?
No one suggests that Putin is a saint. But the policies, which he openly avows, are ones far more in line with American traditional policies than some of those advocated by Clinton/BushII/Obama.
And does anyone here actually believe that there is anything wrong with trying to stop people with aberrant sexuality from trying to recruit children?
William Flax
Amen
I second the amen plus......
Putin has a really tough job.
He inherited a population of pretty much dysfunctional alcoholic men and women that held the place together working with poor or no leadership. The international investment was stolen by the old communists that didn’t understand the difference between revenue and profit. They destroyed the companies and the country by taking all the cash flow and sending it to Zurich.
The women ceased having babies resulting in a precipitous population decline as the old alcoholic men and the worn out women just died. He used his resource sales to get by because he had no industry and no products other than weapons and heavy arms worth a damn to sell. We don’t know how many but a lot of young Russians are now Americans or Brits or Frogs. They fled the land of no opportunity.
Russia population 141 million GDP US$1.86 trillion
Japan population 127 million GDP US$5.96 trillion
Putin has my wife
Not literally
Not yet
Lock her up he comes to Nashville..lol
She likes his bravado and cultural keeness
I like it too..fully aware how he is i ...wish we had someone like half he is
Wardaddy, your posts accusing me of being a leftist "like Alinsky" troll posting a "personal" "smear job" and "hit" may be your idea of a "spat" but they were received as the disgusting lies and insults they are and should be when posted to any Conservative Freeper.
Your further explanation that you had confused me with a "zotted" "race baiter" followed by your added slap that a ping to Jim has "mal intent undertones" diminishes your apology to the level of the meaningless cliche "I'm sorry, but...".
Regarding your complaint over my pinging Jim to (a) " spat(s)" as having " mal intent undertones" - it would be good if you re-read my post to you where I mentioned that I had responded to Jim in this thread. Some consider it rude to neglect pinging Freepers mentioned in posts, thus my ping to Jim Robinson.
Wardaddy, when someone of your stature on Free Republic publicly accuses another of being a typical leftist "like Alinsky" troll deceitfully posing as a Conservative on Free Republic, good prudence might suggest that a response is warranted from the accused with an included ping to Jim Robinson, in hopes of preventing a suspension or permanent ban.
Jim Robinson's duties as owner of Free Republic, undoubtedly includes a schedule filled with numerous obligations and responsibilities which keep him busy while running this enormous web site. Despite an obviously hectic schedule, Jim Robinson still has found time to post very insightful, interesting and often humorous commentary.
As long as Jim Robinson finds time to post and as long as he allows my posts on his web site, whenever I mention Jim Robinson by name in a post, or when I find something noteworthy in a thread which might be of relevant interest to Jim, I will continue to ping Jim.
He's not a Marxist. He is opposed to something he calls "cultural Marxism."
The Free Congress Foundation was founded by Paul Weyrich, who was far from a Marxist himself.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.