Tsar Putin

W.G.Ewald

Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2
Professional
Joined
Sep 28, 2011
Messages
14,139
Likes
8,594
Articles: Tsar Putin

The "democratic" rise to power of the former KGB officer Putin began in 1999 with a KGB coup. On December 31, the first freely elected Russian president, Boris Yeltsin, stunned the world by announcing his resignation. "I understand that I must do it and Russia must enter the new millennium with new politicians, with new faces, with new intelligent, strong, energetic people,"[2] Yeltsin solemnly stated. He then signed a decree transferring his power to the former head of Russia's political police, Vladimir Putin. For his part, the newly appointed president signed a decree pardoning Yeltsin -- who was allegedly connected to massive bribery scandals -- "for any possible misdeeds" and granting him "total immunity" from being prosecuted (or even searched and questioned) for "any and all" actions committed while in office. Quid pro quo.
 

Damian

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2011
Messages
4,836
Likes
2,202
You know, Putin is not that bad. As far as I know, real democratic opposition in Russia is weak, and the stronger opposition is mainly made by concrete head communists and hard line nationalists.

So Putin is better than any possible alternative, and he rather seek stabilization in his country, than making it unstable and dangerous also for neighboures.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
First of all, the author of the article, Ion Mihai Pacepa, is apparently a Moldovan or Romanian. I didn't expect anything different from him. Right content for the right audience (west, and their lackeys), I would say.

Secondly, the second election of Yeltsin was hardly democratic. It was more of a CIA funded cover up operation than anything else.

Thirdly, why do such authors talk about democracy only when it suits them? Whatever happened to the referendum to preserve the USSR that was ignored by Yeltsin? For some reason he is hailed by the west as the paragon of democracy, when he has acted in quite the opposite manner?
 

Damian

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2011
Messages
4,836
Likes
2,202
Politics, this says something to You?

USSR was collapsing by that time, was weak in economy and internal politics, You wouldn't take a chance to further weaken Your biggest adversary?
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
Politics, this says something to You?

USSR was collapsing by that time, was weak in economy and internal politics, You wouldn't take a chance to further weaken Your biggest adversary?
Exactly, but then, for the crook that he was, I am not surprised that he showed the thumb (the non existent one) to Gorbachev and the referendum and destroyed the USSR. Politics, you are right, but I beg to disagree. 70% of the Soviet Union, save for the Baltics, wanted to preserve the USSR in a reformed state, and not dismantle it. That was the democratic wish of the people that Yeltsin acted against, for personal greed for power.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,593
You know that democracy is the weakes and most inefficent political system? ;)

Absolute Monarchy is best... Putin, Tsar, ekhm, ekhm. ;)
To be honest, democracy is a boring, inefficient and chaotic system, that simply doesn't work. That is not the fault of democracy that it doesn't work. It's simply dishonesty, greed and selfishness of the powers that be that is responsible. Same reason why communism didn't work.

It's time we declared democracy as outdated.
 

Damian

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 20, 2011
Messages
4,836
Likes
2,202
As I said, we should back to monarchy.

State and nation in monarchy is property of king (emperor, ceasar, tsar), so he will not waste resources (money, humans/citizens etc.) on stupidness, and if he is stupid enough to do that? Well, tell me, what is easier, poison one fool or 100 (or more) fools sitting in parliment and discussing how to steal more money from citizens? Obviously it is easier to poison one fool.

Besides this, royal families are mostly very big, so there is allways good chance that somewhere there will borne person with great capability to be great leader. Not to mention that kids in royal families were trained from youngest to be good rulers of their state, country and nation.

And hey, good king is a symbol, symbol that have great respect in citizens, and unite them, not divide in to different parties with different goals... at least not in the same level as political parties.

In fact the only democracy that was working was democracy in US, untill Americans started to copying European democracy... then everything started to ---- up.
 

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top