[Dan Cooper]

I mean, if I've missed anything or left anything important out here or gotten anything wrong, somebody let me know, but this is the picture I'm seeing. I don't see anything not to like with Putin or the vision of the current Russian government.

Yes, you left out the Bolshevik conquest of Ukraine in 1919, the killings and deportations to Siberia, and the subsequent Soviet genocide of 1932-33 killing 10 million Ukrainians.

You also left out the Ukrainians desire for independence in 1990 and the declaration of an independent state in 1991 with majority of the people voting to approve it, even in Crimea.

You seem to imply that Ukrainian desire for closer ties to the EU and to get out from under the thumb of Russia is some sort of globalist/Soros conspiracy. It is the desire of a people who for much of their history have been the battleground for other powers to have a better future for themselves. You are kidding yourself if you think Putin and the new Russian empire are going to be content with Crimea.

[MadMax, the Grinning Reaper]

Putin and his regime are still illegal killers, of journalists, defectors, critics, and possibly some clergymen.

You can take a person out of the Communist Party, but you can’t take the Party out of the person.

Communism was the ultimate form of state power and that’s what Putin is all about.

About 20 years ago, I knew a few lawyers who were going to the new Russia to help them write a new Constitution. That didn’t work very well, did it?

The KGB did what a Leopard couldn’t do, change its spots to FSB.

While I don’t like the Chechnians because the are extremely cruel and kill children by the hundreds, the Russians were ruthless in suppression the revolt there. I don’t think anyone won that war except the dead who got out of it the hard way.

Putin is a man of detiny in his own mind, a lot like Hitler was, Mussolini was, and Mao and Ho were. Look at the cost of their megalomania to mankind.

He has got to be reigned in if only to stop his delusional concept of being invincible(a concept that Obama also shares in but as a Second Tier Communist).

Some backbone by the Western nations when all this hit the fan months ago would have prevented what has happened and what is going to happen.

The same for Obama’s deliberately missed chances to bring down the Mullahs regime in Iran during the 2009 protests there, and the more recent protests in Syria where it might have been possible to have a moderate regime instead of the revolt becoming a training ground of Al Qaeda International and the Hezbollah boys of summer.

While Obama is “fundamentally changing America for the worst”, Putin is fundamentally changing Russia for a much stronger and important role in guiding almost all of Eastern Europe, the Baltic States (and by proximity, Scandanavia), and even doing some fancy footwork re Turkey, Iran, and anyone else in “Mr. Putin’s Neighborhood”.

Who’s going to stop him? Obama? Biden? Pelosi? Debbie Wasserman Putz? Susan Rice? Samantha Powers? Jay the asshole Carney? Gen. I’m So Pretty Dempsey, the pansy of the Marines? How about Secy of the Navy Mabus, who is more concerned about putting women and transgendered people onboard ships rather than having enough fighting ships and crews to protect us and to project us.

Who you gonna call, “Ghostbusters”? Sorry, they went out of business when Reagan retired.

[elhombrelibre]

You should get this history published. You could name it “Putinism Propaganda History for Dummies”

[Psalm 144]

A very nice view of the forest. I am sure the Soros Bund faux-cons will attack it accordingly.

[rbmillerjr]

“I don’t see anything not to like with Putin or the vision of the current Russian government.”

lmao. You have no historical perspective. This article reminds me of the Louis Farrahkan speeches with numerology, which unfortunately, has more logic than this diatribe.

Ukrainians despise the Russians and would have fought against the Soviets had the Nazis realized the intense hatred of the Russians/Soviets.

[Jimmy Valentine]

A very nice take on the situation. As an aside the Ukrainian language is more closely related to the Czech language.

You are correct that Putin wants all of Ukraine. Agriculture iron ore coal and a very strong industrial base come with it

[Ben Ficklin]

bump

[WKTimpco]

The West is toast and the Russian model is no answer.

[Cronos]

nice review, but I see a few faults:

1. The difference between Russian and Ukrainian is similar to the difference between our English and Chaucer's and anybody in the Ukraine who isn't retarded can speak Russian. -- not so different. Also, the fact of Ukrainians being able to speak Russian is due to centuries of rule by Moscow and intense Russification since the 1870s
2. for a period of a century or so until Russia started to get organized again, Poland and Lithuania began to look like serious countries on maps. -- Lithuania more than Poland as the native Baltic area is small. Also, the language of governance of the grand Duchy of Lithuania was Ruski -- old Belarussian, so it was heading towards being a Slavic state that had had non-Slavic rulers (like Kievan Rus or Bulgaria). Also, Poland-Lithuania was a "serious country" for much longer than a century from 1400 -- it was arguably strong until 1700. Finally, "Russia" is a misnomer for Moscow. The Poles as fellow Slavs did have chances to unite with the Eastern Slavs in 1610 when they conquered Moscow, but religion divided
3. In those days, the Ukraine was part of Poland and one of the biggest if not THE biggest celebrations there ever was in the Ukraine was when Russia took it over in the 1700s. -- wrong on two counts:
   1. only western Ukraine was part of Poland -- west of the Dnieper. To the east of the Dnieper there was never any serious control. Also, this was the badlands where the Crimean Tatars regularly took white slaves
   2. The biggest celebration? Really? Nope. The Khmelnitsky rebellion ended up with the Cossacks being conned by Moscow -- they wanted the Tsar's protection so a two-sided treaty, but what happened was that they signed away their freedom to the Tsar
4. My guess would be that languages which will still be in use by 2050 will include: -- From my travels, I would say that the demise prediction is incorrect. Language is identify, even if one is bi-lingual or multi-lingual. If you lose it, you lose your identity
   1. the Germanic languages: while German and English may predominate, there are many Dutch, Flemings, Scandanavians who retain their languages as well very effectively
   2. Romance languages: French and Spanish may be, but the Italians I've known who live in Italy (not the ones abroad) seem reluctant to learn any other language and they mostly don't need to. Also, Italian is fairly easy to pick up at the beginning. Also, Romanian is very alive and kicking and due to the poverty in Moldavia will remain the only language of many well into the 22nd century
   3. slavic languages: Russian yes, but Polish is pretty alive as is Serbo-Croat and even Czech and Slovak and Bulgarian.
   4. "sub-continent language" -- India has 4 families of languages: the Indo-european of which Hindi is dominant for now, but you also have 90 million Marathi speakers and 200 million Bengali speakers and millions of Punjabi and Kashmiri and Sindhi speakers. While Hindi subsumed Rajasthani, it is also being split by Bhojpuri speakers and there is a strong move to bring back Sanskrit (as in Uttarakhand). Besides the Indo-European, the Dravidian languages are strong: Tamil, Telugu, Malayalam, Kannada, Tulu. And the Tibeto-Burman languages of the north-east continue
   5. Chinese language and Korean -- I don't know much about the far-east, so won't comment
   6. But you are forgetting Persian, Swahili,Tagalog, Bahasa Indonesian, Malay
   
   
5. Ukrainian is a dead language walking -- I disagree with that, specifically as ukrainian is more a language continuum rather than a language
6. The future of the Ukrainian people clearly lies with Russia. -- sorry, but that may be true of those east of the dnieper, but not for those to the west of the Dnieper
7. Vladimir Putin is the best Ruler Russia has ever had since Tsar Peter -- forgetting Catherine the Great or Tsar Alexander? Vladimir is a good ruler for Russia, but he enriches his oligarchs rather than his people and under his watch, the Russian economy has become more dependent on high oil prices -- 70%+ of the economy is energy dependent
8. how many times does that make that Russia has bailed our hiney's out of some really awful kind of ****? Pic -- once, WWII. That's it

While modern Russia has a lot of good things going for it and I strongly support what Putin is doing in Syria, we cannot go the whole hog and say it's a beautiful regime

[bert]

Damn...... there is a Freeper that really knows and understands and tells his brethren as it is.

Rave on brother...........

[CougarGA7]

languages of the various places which comprised Russia must have fused

More likely they diverged. There was at one time a general Slavic language that sometime around the 6th century developed into three distinct subgroups. The Western Slav (Czech, Polish), the Southern Slav (Croat, Macadonian), and Eastern Slav (Russian, Ukrainian).

As the Kievan Rus developed (centered around Kiev of course) it became a significant commercial hub. Kings of this area ebbed and flowed in power, and there was often power struggles at the death of a king that would result in a fratricidal fight for rule.

When Iaraslav the Wise came to power in 1036 (through another series of battles amongst his siblings) he decided that the transition from power should not be subject to such chaos. He divided his empire into principalities that he bestowed on his offspring and set up a rotation of rule for Kiev itself. Kiev was the central government for the banded principalities. This of course would not last forever, but it did work for a time.

Eventually these principalities developed into small kingdoms of their own in which the languages diverged further. The Suzdal, which you mentioned were in the north and were the predecessors of the princes of Moscow and the Russian people of today. In the southwest the Galicia-Volhynia developed and is considered by many historians as the first true Ukrainian state. Again, the separation created a continued divergence in the language.