Demonization of Putin is one of the biggest threats to American national security,Stephen Cohen.

[Stratford57]

Ah Ha, you're a conspiracy guy. The fringe people's grist, along with alternate realities using one or more lies, half-truth, rumors or innuendos to support your beliefs; in this case the innuendo.

What motive do you imagine the US and/or its allies choose to kill civilians in a tiny village in Syria? I admit Trump might do something such as this, since he never seems to think of the consequences of his words, but the risk of so many members of our military to carry out a war crime and keep it secret is so absurd only real crazies believe it.

This is not delusion.
The USG has openly acknowledge their efforts to support the Syrian opposition.

The US Government has made no secret in supporting the victims of Assad and Putin's war crimes. What evidence do you have that the USG decided to kill the victims? That would be stupid, and even Trump (I hope) is not that stupid.

Those victims specifically, the same as you have, none. We were talking only of motive.

Now do you want to pretend that the USG has qualms about killing innocents to achieve its objectives?

No, there have been cases of unintended consequences in every use of military action; cover ups, denial rarely work (. The difference is, very few are intended by our forces, the same cannot be said for Assad, Putin and other despots throughout history).

I still remember MyLai, for those too young to remember, herein is a link to this graphic example:

William Calley Lives

The USG regularly kills innocents wherever they intervene.

The USG is Intervening in Syria as we speak.

The Syrian government, regardless what you think of it, is defending itself from the above-mentioned intervention.

These are the facts.

Dan Glazebrook, a freelance political writer who has written for Counterpunch, Z magazine, the Morning Star, the Guardian, the New Statesman, the Independent and Middle East Eye, amongst others:

US and Britain are not interested in peace; they want to keep this war ongoing. They want Syria to become the failed state that they’ve turned Iraq and Libya into. They don’t want the restoration of government authority. Yet, it is that restoration of government authority across Syria that is the best chance and the best hope for peace, and that is why they are scared that this peace is about to break out. That is why we’re seeing the British Ambassador shedding crocodile tears at the UN, when the reality is – this is the same British government that killed from one to two million people in these invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan...destroyed Libya, created the migrant crisis…

They will dismiss, or worse – deliberately undermine, or try to scupper - any attempts to alleviate the suffering on the ground. This is in part because they want to see as many civilians die as possible in Russian and Syrian airstrikes; this is a good propaganda for them, because their line is – it is only Russian bombs that kill civilians, only Syrian bombs that kill civilians, and never British bombs or American bombs…

'US, UK sabotage any attempts at Syria settlement'

 

[Wry Catcher]

The United States and its Western allies are in Syria supporting terrorists determined to overthrow the Syrian government. Equals motive, opportunity and means.

Ah Ha, you're a conspiracy guy. The fringe people's grist, along with alternate realities using one or more lies, half-truth, rumors or innuendos to support your beliefs; in this case the innuendo.

What motive do you imagine the US and/or its allies choose to kill civilians in a tiny village in Syria? I admit Trump might do something such as this, since he never seems to think of the consequences of his words, but the risk of so many members of our military to carry out a war crime and keep it secret is so absurd only real crazies believe it.

This is not delusion.
The USG has openly acknowledge their efforts to support the Syrian opposition.

The US Government has made no secret in supporting the victims of Assad and Putin's war crimes. What evidence do you have that the USG decided to kill the victims? That would be stupid, and even Trump (I hope) is not that stupid.

Those victims specifically, the same as you have, none. We were talking only of motive.

Now do you want to pretend that the USG has qualms about killing innocents to achieve its objectives?

Some facts confirming your point:
1. Thanks to the irresponsible foreign policies of both President Obama and Hillary Clinton, the terrorist group ISIS has been allowed to spread in more than 30 Nations. This group has caused a lot of damage to United States soldiers and civilians.

Meanwhile President Obama and Clinton have never come up with a plan to completely destroy ISIS. Despite the fact that they are the ones that helped create them in the first place, they don’t seem keen on making sure they don’t spread. As a result, other nations have been forced to help clean up their mess.

Russian military leaders have said that President Obama is allowing thousands of ISIS fighters to be given a safe passage out of Iraq! They would then be let back into the country to fight against the Russian army, or go somewhere else to fight them!

The military source in Moscow said: “In preparation for the operation in Mosul, US intelligence agencies and Saudi Arabia agreed that before the assault all militants will be offered a safe route to leave the city with their families.”

President Obama is literally allowing people to leave the city!
BREAKING: Obama Approved Operation To Release 9,000 ISIS Soldiers Inside Moscow - Conservative Daily Post
--

2. The CIA has been coordinating weapon deliveries on the Turkey-Syria border, German journalist Jurgen Todenhofer, who recently spoke with a Jabhat al-Nusra commander, said. He added that the US knows that the weapons it delivers to rebels end up with terrorists.

‘US knows weapons sent to Syrian rebels end up with terrorists’ – German journo to RT
Watch the video ^, the jihadist is telling how Washington supports them.

In response to a recent State Department release which said the US had not been supporting terrorists, but some of its allies could have been, Todenhofer said, “maybe there were allies in between. But everybody knows that they are using allies and they are allowing allies... It doesn’t matter if a TOW rocket or a TOW missile, which is an American missile, comes [to terrorists] from another group.”

Todenhofer said that when a terrorist group wants the weapons which are supplied to rebels it changes its name and from that point it belongs to the so-called ’moderate opposition.’

“In a certain way he [the Jabhat al-Nusra commander] is repeating what Pentagon said four years ago,” he stated. “They are trying to get rid of Assad with the help of the rebels,” the journalist concluded.


In the interview the Jabhat al-Nusra unit commander Abu Al Ezz said that US weapons are being delivered to the terrorist group by governments that Washington supports and American instructors have been providing instruction on how to use them. “Yes, the US supports the opposition [in Syria], but not directly. They support the countries that support us. But we are not yet satisfied with this support,” he said.

He also echoed claims made by Moscow and the Syrian government that the militants were using the Syrian ceasefire, agreed on by Russia and US on September 9, to prepare for a new offensive. “We do not recognize the ceasefire. We will regroup our groups. We will carry out the next overwhelming attack against the regime in a few days,” he said.
‘US knows weapons sent to Syrian rebels end up with terrorists’ – German journo to RT

Jurgen Todenhofer: In Iraq the Saddam's overthrowing cost 1 million lives; in Libya Qaddafi's overthrowing cost 500 thousand lives; in Syria for the sake of Assad's overthrowing 400 thousand people have been already killed. I'd like to ask: how many innocent people have to be killed to overthrow "the dictator"? This is a moral question, which Washington has to answer.
---
Churkin to UN Security Council: There are representatives of certain countries in this room, everybody knows their countries are financing and supplying terrorists with weapons: ISIS, Nusra and many others. Stop supplying the terrorists with the weapons and you’ll see how quickly the humanitarian situation in Syria will get better.

A Paranoid Schizophrenic also has details to support their narrative. Some are quite credible, but do not pass the test of reality and time.

 

[Tehon]

This is not delusion.
The USG has openly acknowledge their efforts to support the Syrian opposition.

The US Government has made no secret in supporting the victims of Assad and Putin's war crimes. What evidence do you have that the USG decided to kill the victims? That would be stupid, and even Trump (I hope) is not that stupid.

Those victims specifically, the same as you have, none. We were talking only of motive.

Now do you want to pretend that the USG has qualms about killing innocents to achieve its objectives?

No, there have been cases of unintended consequences in every use of military action; cover ups, denial rarely work (. The difference is, very few are intended by our forces, the same cannot be said for Assad, Putin and other despots throughout history).

I still remember MyLai, for those too young to remember, herein is a link to this graphic example:

William Calley Lives

The USG regularly kills innocents wherever they intervene.

The USG is Intervening in Syria as we speak.

The Syrian government, regardless what you think of it, is defending itself from the above-mentioned intervention.

These are the facts.

Dan Glazebrook, a freelance political writer who has written for Counterpunch, Z magazine, the Morning Star, the Guardian, the New Statesman, the Independent and Middle East Eye, amongst others:

US and Britain are not interested in peace; they want to keep this war ongoing. They want Syria to become the failed state that they’ve turned Iraq and Libya into. They don’t want the restoration of government authority. Yet, it is that restoration of government authority across Syria that is the best chance and the best hope for peace, and that is why they are scared that this peace is about to break out. That is why we’re seeing the British Ambassador shedding crocodile tears at the UN, when the reality is – this is the same British government that killed from one to two million people in these invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan...destroyed Libya, created the migrant crisis…

They will dismiss, or worse – deliberately undermine, or try to scupper - any attempts to alleviate the suffering on the ground. This is in part because they want to see as many civilians die as possible in Russian and Syrian airstrikes; this is a good propaganda for them, because their line is – it is only Russian bombs that kill civilians, only Syrian bombs that kill civilians, and never British bombs or American bombs…

'US, UK sabotage any attempts at Syria settlement'

A plan to balkanize parts of the ME is an old idea that has the potential to be realized if the Syrian State were to collapse.

And I don't believe the USG has made a good faith effort to bring stability to Syria.

I wouldn't arbitrarily discount the authors viewpoint.

 

[Stratford57]

The US Government has made no secret in supporting the victims of Assad and Putin's war crimes. What evidence do you have that the USG decided to kill the victims? That would be stupid, and even Trump (I hope) is not that stupid.

Those victims specifically, the same as you have, none. We were talking only of motive.

Now do you want to pretend that the USG has qualms about killing innocents to achieve its objectives?

No, there have been cases of unintended consequences in every use of military action; cover ups, denial rarely work (. The difference is, very few are intended by our forces, the same cannot be said for Assad, Putin and other despots throughout history).

I still remember MyLai, for those too young to remember, herein is a link to this graphic example:

William Calley Lives

The USG regularly kills innocents wherever they intervene.

The USG is Intervening in Syria as we speak.

The Syrian government, regardless what you think of it, is defending itself from the above-mentioned intervention.

These are the facts.

Dan Glazebrook, a freelance political writer who has written for Counterpunch, Z magazine, the Morning Star, the Guardian, the New Statesman, the Independent and Middle East Eye, amongst others:

US and Britain are not interested in peace; they want to keep this war ongoing. They want Syria to become the failed state that they’ve turned Iraq and Libya into. They don’t want the restoration of government authority. Yet, it is that restoration of government authority across Syria that is the best chance and the best hope for peace, and that is why they are scared that this peace is about to break out. That is why we’re seeing the British Ambassador shedding crocodile tears at the UN, when the reality is – this is the same British government that killed from one to two million people in these invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan...destroyed Libya, created the migrant crisis…

They will dismiss, or worse – deliberately undermine, or try to scupper - any attempts to alleviate the suffering on the ground. This is in part because they want to see as many civilians die as possible in Russian and Syrian airstrikes; this is a good propaganda for them, because their line is – it is only Russian bombs that kill civilians, only Syrian bombs that kill civilians, and never British bombs or American bombs…

'US, UK sabotage any attempts at Syria settlement'

A plan to balkanize parts of the ME is an old idea that has the potential to be realized if the Syrian State were to collapse.

And I don't believe the USG has made a good faith effort to bring stability to Syria.

I wouldn't arbitrarily discount the authors viewpoint.

Certainly, poring gasoline on fire is not gonna stop the fire. Obama and Clinton knew that supplying weapons to terrorists in ME will cause deaths of lots of civilians, but didn't seem to care.

Richard BLACK, Virginia Senator: we've employed massive, unrelenting propaganda against President Assad and his government. We call him a "regime," the "Assad regime."

STEINBERG: Right, as opposed to "an elected, sovereign government."

BLACK: Yes. Now, of course, we always ignore the fact that he was popularly elected, in fair and open elections in 2014. Now, on the other hand, we sit at Geneva III at the peace talks, and on one side we have Saudi Arabia, where if you were to suggest the election of the King or dictator of Saudi Arabia, your head would be a spike the next day; and then, on the other hand, you have President Erdogan, the man who would be Adolf Hitler!

BLACK: Yes, and you know, that brings us to a good point: You then come to the point of the uprising itself, how was this carried out? Just prior to the uprisings, Ambassador Ford was sent to Damascus; we had not had an ambassador there for some time. He was put in place by Hillary Clinton. Around that time, of course, you have all of these covert agencies; Western agencies, plus the Saudis and the Turks. And their mechanism was the Muslim Brotherhood.

BLACK: Well, you know, I'll tell you what is amazing is that when we started the war on terror, after 9/11, it was essentially a war against al-Qaeda and similar organizations. We have gone full circle from opposing al-Qaeda, which sent 3,000 Americans to a flaming death on 9/11, complete circle to where we now supply them; we arm them; we finance them; and it's all coming with the approval of the highest authorities in the United States government.

1) President Assad must not leave office because if he does, Syria will fall into chaos, just as Libya has done.

2) President Assad has said from the beginning, they said, there are no moderate rebels. The notion is a fantasy, they do not exist! And yet, I think yesterday, Secretary Kerry was out there saying, we've got to help the moderate rebels. The "moderate rebels" are al-Qaeda, who flew the jets into the Twin Towers and today these are the "moderates"!
U.S. Policy in Syria: An Interview with VA Senator Richard Black

I'm very glad there are Senators like that. Because the recent actions of Congressmen have shown that majority of them are in Soros' pocket (probably, for quite a while).

 

[Stratford57]

Financial Times:

Abu Ahmad: 'I used to think America was the ruler of the universe. “ When he crossed into Syria, he brought bags filled with hundred-dollar bills to hand out to rebel fighters. His comrades received US-approved anti-tank missiles, discreetly delivered at the border. For security reasons, he asked for his name and those of several others who discussed his story to be changed.

Some rebels called him the CIA’s man in Syria. “We used to joke, ‘If you want something from Barack Obama, call Abu Ahmad,’” another CIA-backed rebel commander recalls.

The story of his rise and fall offers a rare insight into how the CIA operated within the confines of President Obama’s halfhearted Syria policy. It reveals how the rivalries between US bureaucracies — and, even more importantly, the growing divergence between Washington and its Nato ally Turkey — exacerbated Syria’s mayhem.

A determination not to be dragged into Syria’s war, alongside a recognition of its regional significance, left Washington with one foot in and one foot out — a situation that may prove as problematic in the long run as full-fledged intervention.

“People have this perception the Americans weren’t very involved [in Syria]. But that’s not true — they were, and to a minuscule level of detail for a while in places like Aleppo when [the CIA programme] started,” a regional diplomat says. “The problem with American policy in Syria was in some ways the same as it always was: all tactics, no strategy . . . It was a mess.”

“If you had a question about a battle rebels wanted to do, Abu Ahmad would immediately say this is how many bullets you’d need, how many fighters are actually there, which way they should approach it,” the diplomat says. “The Americans ate it up.”

Rebels approved as ideological “moderates” received a monthly salary of about $150 for a fighter and $300 for a commander and soon the Americans asked Abu to be their consultant, handing him about $1,000 a month.

He says commanders regularly inflated their forces’ numbers to pocket extra salaries, and some jacked up weapons requests to hoard or sell on the black market. Inevitably, much of that ended up in Isis hands. Other groups cut in Jabhat al-Nusra on deals to keep it from attacking them. “The CIA knew about this, of course, everyone in MOM did. It was the price of doing business.”

In the summer of 2015, the US launched the Pentagon’s “Train and Equip” programme for select rebel fighters. It cost $500m, and went horribly wrong.

Subscribe to read

 

[Tehon]

Those victims specifically, the same as you have, none. We were talking only of motive.

Now do you want to pretend that the USG has qualms about killing innocents to achieve its objectives?

No, there have been cases of unintended consequences in every use of military action; cover ups, denial rarely work (. The difference is, very few are intended by our forces, the same cannot be said for Assad, Putin and other despots throughout history).

I still remember MyLai, for those too young to remember, herein is a link to this graphic example:

William Calley Lives

The USG regularly kills innocents wherever they intervene.

The USG is Intervening in Syria as we speak.

The Syrian government, regardless what you think of it, is defending itself from the above-mentioned intervention.

These are the facts.

Dan Glazebrook, a freelance political writer who has written for Counterpunch, Z magazine, the Morning Star, the Guardian, the New Statesman, the Independent and Middle East Eye, amongst others:

US and Britain are not interested in peace; they want to keep this war ongoing. They want Syria to become the failed state that they’ve turned Iraq and Libya into. They don’t want the restoration of government authority. Yet, it is that restoration of government authority across Syria that is the best chance and the best hope for peace, and that is why they are scared that this peace is about to break out. That is why we’re seeing the British Ambassador shedding crocodile tears at the UN, when the reality is – this is the same British government that killed from one to two million people in these invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan...destroyed Libya, created the migrant crisis…

They will dismiss, or worse – deliberately undermine, or try to scupper - any attempts to alleviate the suffering on the ground. This is in part because they want to see as many civilians die as possible in Russian and Syrian airstrikes; this is a good propaganda for them, because their line is – it is only Russian bombs that kill civilians, only Syrian bombs that kill civilians, and never British bombs or American bombs…

'US, UK sabotage any attempts at Syria settlement'

A plan to balkanize parts of the ME is an old idea that has the potential to be realized if the Syrian State were to collapse.

And I don't believe the USG has made a good faith effort to bring stability to Syria.

I wouldn't arbitrarily discount the authors viewpoint.

Certainly, poring gasoline on fire is not gonna stop the fire. Obama and Clinton knew that supplying weapons to terrorists in ME will cause deaths of lots of civilians, but didn't seem to care.

Richard BLACK, Virginia Senator: we've employed massive, unrelenting propaganda against President Assad and his government. We call him a "regime," the "Assad regime."

STEINBERG: Right, as opposed to "an elected, sovereign government."

BLACK: Yes. Now, of course, we always ignore the fact that he was popularly elected, in fair and open elections in 2014. Now, on the other hand, we sit at Geneva III at the peace talks, and on one side we have Saudi Arabia, where if you were to suggest the election of the King or dictator of Saudi Arabia, your head would be a spike the next day; and then, on the other hand, you have President Erdogan, the man who would be Adolf Hitler!

BLACK: Yes, and you know, that brings us to a good point: You then come to the point of the uprising itself, how was this carried out? Just prior to the uprisings, Ambassador Ford was sent to Damascus; we had not had an ambassador there for some time. He was put in place by Hillary Clinton. Around that time, of course, you have all of these covert agencies; Western agencies, plus the Saudis and the Turks. And their mechanism was the Muslim Brotherhood.

BLACK: Well, you know, I'll tell you what is amazing is that when we started the war on terror, after 9/11, it was essentially a war against al-Qaeda and similar organizations. We have gone full circle from opposing al-Qaeda, which sent 3,000 Americans to a flaming death on 9/11, complete circle to where we now supply them; we arm them; we finance them; and it's all coming with the approval of the highest authorities in the United States government.

1) President Assad must not leave office because if he does, Syria will fall into chaos, just as Libya has done.

2) President Assad has said from the beginning, they said, there are no moderate rebels. The notion is a fantasy, they do not exist! And yet, I think yesterday, Secretary Kerry was out there saying, we've got to help the moderate rebels. The "moderate rebels" are al-Qaeda, who flew the jets into the Twin Towers and today these are the "moderates"!
U.S. Policy in Syria: An Interview with VA Senator Richard Black

I'm very glad there are Senators like that. Because the recent actions of Congressmen have shown that majority of them are in Soros' pocket (probably, for quite a while).

It is unfortunate that Richard Black's influence does not extend beyond the Virginia State Senate.

 

[Balancer]

Why would you support Putin?

I am categorically against the concentration of power in one person. Because the country in this case is waiting for chaos after his departure. And I will gladly vote for any worthy alternative to Putin. The problem is that now in Russia, apart from Putin, there is not a single sane politician who would have presidency ambitions.

Do you know among candidates for the presidency of Russia at least one candidate that would be better than Putin? Me not. The rest are clowns or losers.

And you are wrong. I do not support Putin. I refute false accusations against whom they would not be nominated. In Russian forums, I also repeatedly supported, for example, American presidents, when the accusations against them were quite stupid

 

[Balancer]

Lets look at it through the eyes of national GDP

One can argue a lot about why Russia is poor. But the fact is that throughout the history of Russia, the Russians have never lived as richly as now

In addition, GDP is very poorly reflecting reality. Even the infamous Big Mac index, to which I referred above, reflects the reality better. Although he does not take into account any social benefits left over from the USSR, as free medicine, free education, etc. My wife has a third year of maternity leave and receives a salary. And how much time in the US can a woman be on maternity leave by birth?

Your problem is that you are trying to judge life in Russia do not know anything about Russia. While in Russia people know very well about life in the US from American sources - news from Western media, the Internet, American cinema, literature ... And if the residents of Russia largely agree that they live poorer than in the US, but not enough to change something radically, it already speaks for itself.

 

[Balancer]

Once oil collapsed and Obama led sanctions took hold, Putin struggled

Believe the view from Russia, your sanctions or fluctuations of oil inside the country are not noticeable Prices in stores are now almost the same as three years ago. A small inflation, of course, is, probably, about 5% per year. But this is not even close to inflation of 200% per year in the first half of the 1990s.

The majority of Russians admit the announcement of the next sanctions with laughter, as a sign that the US government is losing its connection with reality even more. In fact, the more sanctions, the more actively develops the domestic market. Our farmers simply pray for the extension of sanctions

 

[Balancer]

Everything anyone needs to know about Putin was on display last night on 60-Minutes. Watch it and be horrified of the results of the nerve gas attack on civilians, and the bodies of men, women and dozens of children.

Here, by the way, is a vivid example of how lies in the Western media act on the brains of people in spite of all logic. People are not able to think logically (to answer the question - why Assad needs to use chemical weapons) and are ready to take on faith any nonsense, if it is said in the media.

 

[Balancer]

That great Putin guy that is now one of the richest men in the world

Can you prove it?

 

[Balancer]

Who else has chemical weapons? Who else has means, opportunity and motives?

Chemical weapons in the form of chlorine are generally an industrial reagent, available everywhere. Most likely, liquid chlorine is even a few miles from your home at some water treatment station.

Chlorine gas leak in W Virginia prompts mass evacuation

Chlorine leak reported from Dow Chemical Plant in Louisiana

USA – Chlorine Gas Leak Occurs At Olin Chemical Plant – Fire Direct

I conducted experiments with chlorine, which I myself synthesized, already in the 7th grade of the school, at the age of 13

Even much more complex organophosphorus poisoning agents can be prepared at home. Have you already forgotten the attack of religious sectarians in the Tokyo subway?

Tokyo subway sarin attack - Wikipedia

The presence of chemical weapons from IGIL and Syrian terrorists has long been a proven and well-known fact.

Terrorists are interested in the use of chemical weapons, since they have few conventional weapons, they do not care about public opinion and it is important for them to terrorize the civilian population.

Assad - NOT interested in the use of chemical weapons. Its use causes a great blow to the image of both Assad and Russia. And the use of chemical weapons by Asad has no tactical or strategic meaning, since Russia's military support gives him much more. So why should he use senseless chemical weapons, at the risk of losing support for Russia?

I have so far seen only one argument, why Assad needs this. Because Assad is a sick bloody maniac. Why a bloody maniac? Because it uses chemical weapons. Everything, the circle is closed. Did you see at least one proof? I believe that no

 

[Balancer]

A Paranoid Schizophrenic also has details to support their narrative. Some are quite credible, but do not pass the test of reality and time.

Are you now talking about the charges against Assad? Yes, I agree. These paranoid accusations do not pass the test of reality

 

[Wry Catcher]

Everything anyone needs to know about Putin was on display last night on 60-Minutes. Watch it and be horrified of the results of the nerve gas attack on civilians, and the bodies of men, women and dozens of children.

Here, by the way, is a vivid example of how lies in the Western media act on the brains of people in spite of all logic. People are not able to think logically (to answer the question - why Assad needs to use chemical weapons) and are ready to take on faith any nonsense, if it is said in the media.

And yet the bodies were not staged by Hollywood. So, if not Assad?, please explain who, why and how these people were slaughtered?

Until there exists exculpatory evidence which is credible, I assume the news is not fake, and that people like you are plants working against the Western Nations and in particular the US.

How is the weather in Moscow today?

 

[Stratford57]

Lets look at it through the eyes of national GDP

One can argue a lot about why Russia is poor. But the fact is that throughout the history of Russia, the Russians have never lived as richly as now

In addition, GDP is very poorly reflecting reality. Even the infamous Big Mac index, to which I referred above, reflects the reality better. Although he does not take into account any social benefits left over from the USSR, as free medicine, free education, etc. My wife has a third year of maternity leave and receives a salary. And how much time in the US can a woman be on maternity leave by birth?

Your problem is that you are trying to judge life in Russia do not know anything about Russia. While in Russia people know very well about life in the US from American sources - news from Western media, the Internet, American cinema, literature ... And if the residents of Russia largely agree that they live poorer than in the US, but not enough to change something radically, it already speaks for itself.

Last year:

Megyn Kelly: You mentioned that Russia is entering a new phase of growth right now. And walking around talking to some of the Russian people, they say they are spending too much money on food, they are spending much money out of their budget on shoes. What’s being done to address that?

Putin: We have many such tools, such as support for low-income families to pay their utility bills. This may not seem very special at first glance, but it is important for the people. They also include the maternity capital that we pay to families with two or more children. I know you have three children. If you were a Russian citizen, you would receive it as well.

St Petersburg International Economic Forum plenary meeting

 

[Balancer]

They also include the maternity capital

By the way, I paid 1 / 6th of the cost of my new apartment to my wife's maternity capital. This is a nice and appreciable contribution. And somewhere in a small city of the maternity capital will suffice and completely on purchase of an inexpensive apartment.

 

[Igrok_]

Putin is still crawling around on his knees.

Russia is no economic powerhouse: it rates behind India and Italy and GDP.

Putin had them convinced that Russia was thriving under his leadership. But it was all built on hyper inflated oil revenues

Once oil collapsed and Obama led sanctions took hold, Putin struggled

The Russian people are too dumb to realize Putin is leading them to rampant stagnation

You are missing one thing. Russians don't asses politicians by their economic success only. There are thing that matter: religion and culture. Under Putin Russia returns to its original values, which consist of traditional orthodox Church instead of communism, traditional family, respect to the Motherland and more or less social equality (in comparison with 1990s). Count this, and maybe will not consider Russians so dumb.

 

[Igrok_]

Putin is still crawling around on his knees.

Russia is no economic powerhouse: it rates behind India and Italy and GDP.

TIL Russia has a smaller GDP than California, Texas or New York ...

... Spain and Russia had roughly equal ...

Still enough to crush the Ukraine, which overall GDP is more than twice smaller than GRP of Moscow...

 

[JakeStarkey]

Other than the Ukies, who cares?

 

[Stratford57]

It is sad that Russia was given such an opportunity to abandon years of oppression and embrace Western Democracy

The west opened their arms and offered free trade opportunities.

But Russia could not help but revert to their old ways personified by Putin

CNBC yesterday:

There's no doubt that Putin has restored Russia to the status of global superpower during his time in power although it has both lost and gained friends in the process.

Putin pledges fight against poverty and more help for families in pre-election speech