- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Memos of Conversations Between Bush and Putin
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:04 am to lake chuck fan
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:04 am to lake chuck fan
Russia is far closer to being a natural ally to the US than China.
0
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:05 am to lsuguy84
quote:
Recent history may show that, but historically the nuclear arms race and the spread of communism were the driving factors behind that.
Yeah but that ended 35-ish years ago. Russia was a poor, broken country in 1990-91. They lost in embarrassing fashion and emerged as a country with a poverty culture and economy
We are approaching an equality of time for the USSR and post-Soviet eras. It's like 45-35 years. In a decade it will be equal.
quote:
It’s more to propping up a boogeyman to continually have a perceived threat. GWOT comes to mind also.
Again...China or "globalism" fits this
Russia isn't a threat and only gets heat for how it acts. It just has a vast online propaganda network that is very influential and has created a lot of ignorant sick puppets.
If Russia simply let it's former Soviet satellite nations live in peace it would have no heat
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:08 am to WKUHilltopper
quote:
Who are these people?
"The Khazars"
-Putin
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:12 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Russia was a poor, broken country in 1990-91. They lost in embarrassing fashion and emerged as a country with a poverty culture and economy
America's debt in 1991= 3.5 TRILLION
USSR debt in 1991= 63 BILLION
I think we can make the argument America was more broke and still is compared to the Russians. They aren't heavily indebted to a group of bankers like America.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:16 am to ClientNumber9
quote:
Russia was at a crossroads in 1991. They could have embraced freedom and democracy. Instead, Putin installed a dictatorship. He trashed his constitution, absolved term limits to remain in power forever, imprisoned or murdered anyone who disagrees with him, and threw in his alliances with Iran, Venezuela, North Korea and China. I'm a conservative and it confuses the hell out of me to see a fringe of our party carrying the water for a murderous thug.
You mean Putin saw Western oligarchs raping and pillaging post Soviet era Russian resources, the Russian people grew angry, elected Putin in 2000, subsequently kicked out Western oligarchs and has since grown Russia into a Russia first Christian nation...and that makes you mad?
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:22 am to GoAwayImBaitn
quote:
America's debt in 1991= 3.5 TRILLION
USSR debt in 1991= 63 BILLION
I think we can make the argument America was more broke and still is compared to the Russians
Why did you ignore GDP and PCGDP?
quote:
They aren't heavily indebted to a group of bankers like America.
What?
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:23 am to Sassafrasology
quote:
You mean Putin saw Western oligarchs raping and pillaging post Soviet era Russian resources, the Russian people grew angry, elected Putin in 2000, subsequently kicked out Western oligarchs and has since grown Russia into a Russia first Christian nation...and that makes you mad?
Whoa...what?
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:35 am to Sassafrasology
quote:
You mean Putin saw Western oligarchs raping and pillaging post Soviet era Russian resources, the Russian people grew angry, elected Putin in 2000, subsequently kicked out Western oligarchs and has since grown Russia into a Russia first Christian nation...and that makes you mad?
Holy shite, this may be the stupidest, revisionist nonsense I've ever read in this board and that's saying something. Yes, Putin the Christian. The peaceful, minding his own business Christian who just want to sit back and not reconquer the former USSR.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:43 am to ClientNumber9
quote:
Western oligarchs raping and pillaging post Soviet era Russian
Is the dumbest part.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:46 am to lake chuck fan
Do people believe that the USSR's proposal to join NATO was sincere? It was most definitely an intent to propagandize as [West] Germany was integrated back into the West.
I am not trying to defend NATO today (I would rather we left NATO as it no longer has a purpose) but to take USSR's proposal on its face is naive at best.
I am not trying to defend NATO today (I would rather we left NATO as it no longer has a purpose) but to take USSR's proposal on its face is naive at best.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:53 am to JimEverett
quote:
Do people believe that the USSR's proposal to join NATO was sincere?
Do people believe that the United States' stance on never expanding NATO was sincere? U.S. Secretary of State James Baker reportedly told Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO wouldn't expand "one inch eastward"...we then DOUBLED the amount of NATO countries after 1991. But yeah, Russia is acting like a bunch of unprovoked hot heads is what we are always told.
We lie to them over and over.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 9:59 am to lsuguy84
quote:
Damn, dude wasn’t even alive and was making moves. Is he a time traveler?
Yes. Him and Trump both. It’s why they get along.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 10:00 am to GoAwayImBaitn
quote:
Do people believe that the United States' stance on never expanding NATO was sincere?
What official treaty or agreement records this?
Posted on 12/26/25 at 10:07 am to GoAwayImBaitn
quote:
Do people believe that the United States' stance on never expanding NATO was sincere? U.S. Secretary of State James Baker reportedly told Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO wouldn't expand "one inch eastward"...we then DOUBLED the amount of NATO countries after 1991. But yeah, Russia is acting like a bunch of unprovoked hot heads is what we are always told.
I was replying to this
quote:
The most important part of this memo is not the 2001 line, but the 1954 reference.
Because it collapses the morality play.
If the Soviet Union, a state the West defined as the existential enemy, floated the notion of joining NATO in 1954, that means something profound: the idea of Russia being inside the European security architecture is not a “Putin-era trick.” It is a recurring historical proposal, returning whenever Moscow believes there may be a rational way to avoid permanent confrontation.
which is complete bullshite.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 10:16 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
Russia isn't powerful enough to be "the other"
The other is often not strong enough to be a real threat. There only has to be a perception of a threat for those in power to convince the masses. With a willing media it is even easier.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 10:27 am to lake chuck fan
This post was edited on 1/17/26 at 10:21 pm
Posted on 12/26/25 at 10:34 am to lake chuck fan
quote:
Nah.... I don't agree. What Putin wanted, based on his words and actions, was become part of the West. Create better economic opportunities for his country and prosperity. Instead of allowing this, the West continually ostracized Russia and now he's closer to China than ever before. THAT is the biggest failing of the West's foreign policy.
BS. The West gave Putin and Russia every single opportunity to do that until 2022. Even when it was obvious that Putin’s Russia was not to be trusted, we still allowed them to get away with some things that were controversial, in the name of trying to be peaceful and building a relationship with them. Which was the big mistake by the West, we were too nice to them.
Russia was well on its way to being able to be a Western nation and no longer an enemy of the West. All the pipelines supplying Europe from Russia were growing. But then they had to go all 1930s and 40s again. I don’t buy this narrative that the West bullied and cornered Russia, and forced them into having to resort to war. That’s hogwash. This is what they wanted.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 10:46 am to lake chuck fan
quote:
If the Soviet Union, a state the West defined as the existential enemy, floated the notion of joining NATO in 1954, that means something profound: the idea of Russia being inside the European security architecture is not a “Putin-era trick.” It is a recurring historical proposal, returning whenever Moscow believes there may be a rational way to avoid permanent confrontation.
I think the idea of Putin’s Russia as an ally had merit, but this notion of 1954 USSR is horseshite. The USSR was bent on world domination and a socialist future. Any diplomatic initiative was meant to serve that mission.
When WW2 ended the USSR built walls and dropped “The Iron Curtain” between the West and the Soviet Bloc. That wasn’t NATO’s doing; it was Stalin’s.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 10:51 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
That applies to something like China or "globalism"
Russia isn't powerful enough to be "the other"
In a real world maybe, but this is the world where NATO is propping up Russia to remain the other whether they like it or not. BECAUSE we can stomp them out whenever we feel like. It's Orwellian.
Posted on 12/26/25 at 12:43 pm to SlowFlowPro
quote:
"The Khazars" -Putin
Is there any legitimacy to this answer? :-|
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News