Posted on 09/28/2015 1:45:38 PM PDT by Sir Napsalot
At the UN General Assembly, Russian President Vladimir Putin says that President Obama needs to learn the lessons of history before intervening internationally, because "certain episodes from the history of the Soviet Union, social experiments for export, attempts to push for changes with other countries based on ideological preferences... often lead to tragic consequences."
"It seems that far from learning from the mistakes of others, everyone keeps repeating them," Putin said. "And so the export of revolutions, this time of so-called democratic ones, continues. It was enough to look at the situation in the Middle and North Africa."
"But how did it actually turn out? Rather than bringing about reforms and addressing foreign interference, it resulted in a brazen destruction of national institutions and lifestyles. Instead of the triumph of democracy and progress, we got violence, poverty and social division. And nobody cares about about human rights, including the rights to life."
(Excerpt) Read more at realclearpolitics.com ...
Obama’s interference in Venezuela, Algeria, Libya, Egypt and Syria have been massive failures. Putin is trying to save some of the region and stop the terrorists; Obama is trying to destroy the region and empower the terrorists. I don’t like Putin, but he’s right, dammit.
...jerry jeff walker
once sang
“the pot can’t call the kettle black cuzz the trains running down the same ole track”
LOL Two liars trying to out do one another
The only difference is, Putin had extensive experience as an apparatchik that got real blood on his hands.
Obama never had the chance to do it for real like Putin, so his experience in that respect is all delegated.
Other than that, their views about government are pretty closely aligned, though neither would admit it.
Sure. Democratization worked in (much of) Eastern Europe, because it was a popular movement (and because there was already some experience — however short — of working representative government). Attempts to democratize the Middle East — Bush’s as well as Obama’s — have been far less successful because the foundation of rule of law and respect for the individual really weren’t there.
Agreed. Both agree politically, but Putin is willing to roll up his sleeves and get to it, while Obama would rather read from the teleprompter and then go golfing.
Maybe I am mistaken, but isn’t it a rewrite to say that the goal of the Gulf War was the democratization of Iraq? Wasn’t it about Iraq invading Kuwait and murdering Kurds as well as torturing their own people?
I like Putin better than Obama. One thing I would like to ask Putin is if he would have just left Iraq in Kuwait without helping Kuwait. And what about Sadaam gassing the Kurds and killing his own people by placing them in meat grinders?
pretty frank talk from an ex KGB
As for Afghanistan, the United States was attacked. It was not about spreading revolution as much as it was about fighting terrorism. Am I remembering wrongly? We actually did a good job coordinating a national coalition. Putin may be correct about current events, but he is not entitled to his own rewritten “facts” about our past conflicts.
Obama to us: Islam played an important Part in Our Nation's Founding
Vlad, he should probably learn ours first.
An INTERNATIONAL Coalition I mean.
I know, there are other pieces in Putin’s speech (including ISIS just as smart, etc) that was a real whack on our fragile flower, I mean, potus.
That one-on-one meeting between Putin and Obama is (thank goodness) behind closed doors. Good thing Obama is half black, otherwise he’s showing all the bruises. We will know, because Obama will be extra nasty against his domestic enemy, us.
No sweat. They just aren’t bothering to cover Putin’s comments.
“the United States was attacked:
So why did we attack Afghanistan instead of Saudi Arabia?
There were no Afghani hijackers on those planes.
“So why did we attack Afghanistan instead of Saudi Arabia?”
Ohhhhh,,, you aren’t allowed to ask the forbidden question. And a military attack wasn’t what Saudi Arabia deserved beyond a small nuke on Mecca.
What the Saudis deserved was a financial attack from us. An instant freezing and confiscation of all Saudi assets and properties. And the seizure of their oil fields if we wanted them.
That would have got the worlds attention.
“Saudi Arabia deserved beyond a small nuke on Mecca.
What the Saudis deserved was a financial attack from us. An instant freezing and confiscation of all Saudi assets and properties. And the seizure of their oil fields if we wanted them.
That would have got the worlds attention.”
We need a do-over
Gulf War 1990-1991, sure.
But I'm pretty sure there was another Bush later who had different plans.
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.