Putin Vindicated?

The Weekly Standard ^ | 04/07/2006 | Dan darling

[justa-hairyape]

If you look at what is going on within Russia, my guess is that the Russians are using the pretext of cooperation on the WOT to cover their return to totalitarianism. They are also colluding with Islamic terrorist sponsoring regimes and arming just about everyone of the publicly defined 'enemies of the US'. In other words what you heard was disinfo from a Russian placed spy or asset. Turn them in NOW.

[Sam Cree]

*

[GSlob]

Unless Saddam had collapsed into complete dotage after a massive brain trauma, to predict that he'd be looking for some form of vengeance would take minimal IQ of 0.5 - and one could be a layman, not an intelligence professional.

[dangus]

>> Unless Saddam had collapsed into complete dotage after a massive brain trauma, to predict that he'd be looking for some form of vengeance would take minimal IQ of 0.5 - and one could be a layman, not an intelligence professional... <<

You're presuming he intended to get caught and held responsible.

As it was, he ran terrorist airliner-takeover schools in Northern Iraq, and the media denies he had anything to do with 9/11. So his strategy was quite simple: Get Saudis to do it, and all his sycophants in the US media will say, "why attack Iraq instead of Saudi Arabia." Don't forget: Hussein's number one foreign-policy goal was regime change in Saudi Arabia.

[RusIvan]

Remember the GPS jaming devices given to Iraq by Russia?==

There were no proves of it.

[RusIvan]

America retreating would oblige Russia to deal with militant Islam and Chinese expansionism.==

IMHO that is true.

As long as America is engaged, he can play America and our common natural enemies off against each other. ==

IMHO it is far fetched. Because such tactics may unite your "enemies" so they both attack you to punish for betrayal.

[RusIvan]

If you look at what is going on within Russia, my guess is that the Russians are using the pretext of cooperation on the WOT to cover their return to totalitarianism.==

Yeah?:). If Russia will decide to return to totalitarism then she won't ask anyone or disgise her actions. Everyone might see it clear.
Now I see some authoritarism of Putin. But very very far from Stalin' totalitarism. Believe me I know what I say.

[GSlob]

I merely presume that he had typical arab mentality and a knee-jerk reflex. As for him trying have a billt-in deniability - goes without question.

[GarySpFc]

I was told by a source that I can not reveal that, the Russians are in bed with us in the WOT. For reasons I can't even understand, the appearance MUST be deceiving. Probably has something to do with the 'keeping your friends close and your enemies closer' theory.

The Russianphobes see Russia as our enemy, but those in the intelligence community do not agree. The following is an e-mail I recently received from Dan Darling.

Mr. Xxxxx,

I am deeply flattered by your comments and please convey my best wishes to your wife's nephew.

The problem that exists in recognizing the Chechen ties to al-Qaeda (or al-Qaeda ties to other entities) is that among both the expert and the chattering classes there is deep unease about the way that Russia has conducted its campaign in Chechnya, but instead of offering constructive criticism they have attempted to deny the conflict any legitimacy by trying to engage in extremely legalistic and straw man arguments surrounding the ties of a number of Chechen and in particular Chechen Arab leaders and al-Qaeda. It's pure cognitive dissonance if you refuse to recognize that Khattab was bin Laden's protege, Abu Walid was from the same tribe as 3 of the 9/11 hijackers, Abu Omar al-Saif has openly called for Saudi al-Qaeda members to fight in Iraq, and Abu Hafs al-Urduni is openly allied with Zarqawi and then argue that there is no al-Qaeda connection to Chechnya.

Another issue that exists as a result of the Cold War in conservative circles is that a lot of people are still operating on Cold War-era blinders and hence aren't seeing the forest amidst all the trees.

Best,
Dan

[HardStarboard]

>>>,i>The "bush lied" crowd is beginning to suffer 1000 cuts as these documents continue to come to light. <<<

Show me the blood!! There isn't any. Why?

Because the only place these translated documents are given any weight, or even mentioned at all, is in the conservative media. Until the other 65% of the people in America see it in the NYT or on NBC - it ain't happening.

[Names Ash Housewares]

"Until the other 65% of the people in America see it in the NYT or on NBC - it ain't happening."

We do not live in that world anymore. If that were true, Kerry would be President right now.

There is a reason people refer to those old sources as the antique media.

They are losing their hold on the people.
The internet has risen.

[Lukasz]

What I'm wondering is why Putin wanted Bush elected. What was in it for him ? Wheels within wheels.

Perhaps he was afraid that Kerry would find in Schroeder and Chirac good friends. Thus those two would treat him with more distance. When US and the EU argue with each other, Putin is dancing.

[HardStarboard]

>>>They are losing their hold on the people. The internet has risen. <<<

You are right - for about 35 to 40 % of the people. And that group is heavily weighted with under25somethings.

Unfortunately there is a huge group of politically active folks in their 30's to 70's that simply adhere to the old media and will not believe what is being uncovered (and covered) by the blogs and other alternate forms of media.

I live in Seattle - a place you would think would be pretty hip to the internet. Yet many I know in the 40 to 70 bracket will look at sources on the internet but give them no credence unless its got an old time name on it: NYT, Washington Post, CBS, CNN, Time, Newsweek - el al.

Of course Seattle is a liberal cesspool....but that is another story!!