Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: kosta50
Let's not forget that he was a loyal communist for many years when it was benefitial to his career.

Putin was not?? I’m not fan of Yeltsin at all, I can even understand that Putin is better. However he is still a thug and his political background, I mean former KGB apparatchiks are even worse.

Roman Abramovich belonged to Yeltsin favorite group of oligarch and today he stand firmly near Putin. The same with many other Russian oligarchs.

78 posted on 04/30/2007 6:04:17 AM PDT by Lukasz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies ]


To: Lukasz; Diocletian
Putin was not?? I’m not fan of Yeltsin at all, I can even understand that Putin is better. However he is still a thug and his political background, I mean former KGB apparatchiks are even worse.

Roman Abramovich belonged to Yeltsin favorite group of oligarch and today he stand firmly near Putin. The same with many other Russian oligarchs

You are absolutely right on both accounts. However, the state has a duty to protect itself. Yeltsin's loyalties were to those outside of Russia. Big difference.

No one gets to be a top dog in any country and remain a saint. It requires eliminating competition. I remember Gorbachov's visit to the US and someone's comment what a "nice" man he was. I thought "how can someone become the chairman of the Soviet Presidium and the Communist party by being a 'nice guy'"? Nice guys are eaten for breakfast.

President D. Roosevelt once said "they may be thus, but they are our thugs" or words to that effect. And that's the crucial difference. Thugs that work for foreign masters are traitors. Thugs that serve national interests are often considered patriots and even heroes.

My point was not to paint Putin as a "nice guy" but as someone who works for the interest of Russia, unlike Yeltsin did.

79 posted on 04/30/2007 6:19:34 AM PDT by kosta50 (Eastern Orthodoxy is pure Christianity)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]

To: Lukasz; kosta50

I need to find an article for you from a Russian dissident from the Soviet era who shocked the CIA when he told them (around 1980) that the KGB was actually the most non-ideological institution in the USSR, but that it wouldn’t strike against the regime because of the nationalist/patriotic stance of the KGB at the time. He ended his statement by saying that Andropov’s KGB was a complete 180 from that of Yagoda, Yezhov, and Beria. I too always automatically thought KGB=evil automatically until I read this dissident’s comments. Solzhenitsyn echoed the same sentiment some time later.


96 posted on 04/30/2007 2:05:28 PM PDT by Diocletian (visit www.speakeasy.invisionzone.com - it's new and it's pretty silly)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson