4 ms·

Putin often does want the world to know Russia was behind some aggressive action while simultaneously denying it in order to avoid repercussions. In the last d

Putin often does want the world to know Russia was behind some aggressive action while simultaneously denying it in order to avoid repercussions. In the last decade or two it has been their MO. At the same time, sloppiness has come into play on multiple occasions. They want to project an image of strength but there is a vein of ineptness running through their military and sometimes their intelligence ops. This is why the West needs to slap Putin down rather than appease his aggression. He is a puffed up bully who is trying to push the envelope beyond what he is capable of backing up.

petre 9y ago
Of course its not the official stance and they'd never admit it. They're just hints left in plain sight to point at Russia. Putin's tactics used in Crimea are quite the same ones used by Stalin's Russia after WW2 in Eastern Europe. You can find all of them in decassified CIA reports. The only difference is the lack of insignia on troops, clearly designed to support the claim that the forces that siezed Crimea were rebels as opposed to Russian military. I disagree, Putin doesn't need to be slapped down, for this is too risky and could trigger a war. Nato (US) presence in Eastern (Romania) and Northern Europe (Poland, Eastonia, Letonia, Latvia), military and economic cooperation with these states is sufficient to deter his bulying ambitions. Hungary and Bulgaria have been ruled out for being too cosy with Russia.
toyg 9y ago
> there is a vein of ineptness I don't see that. The raid on Osama was pretty inept too, as it was arming and training any random anti-Iranian person in the region and ending up with IS/Daesh. It's just that direct action is inevitably brazen and unsubtle, and will often have unpredictable repercussions. You give state-of-the-art anti-aircraft weaponry to Ukrainian biker gangs and they shoot down a civilian plane; you support anti-Ghaddafi groups and they end up burning down your own embassy. You just cannot predict which way the grass will bend under your feet. Any direct action will have its fair share of fumbles, it's just that the world is now so well-connected that they will be ruthlessly exposed pretty much all the time. Personally, I wouldn't underestimate Putin - like all fascist regimes, his rule has likely cultivated a cohort of inept yes-men, but he's also reinvigorated what was a tremendously dangerous military apparatus that is still capable of triggering a nuclear holocaust. I think our approach should be a bit subtler than "slapping down a bully".

petre 9y ago

Of course its not the official stance and they'd never admit it. They're just hints left in plain sight to point at Russia. Putin's tactics used in Crimea are quite the same ones used by Stalin's Russia after WW2 in Eastern Europe. You can find all of them in decassified CIA reports. The only difference is the lack of insignia on troops, clearly designed to support the claim that the forces that siezed Crimea were rebels as opposed to Russian military. I disagree, Putin doesn't need to be slapped down, for this is too risky and could trigger a war. Nato (US) presence in Eastern (Romania) and Northern Europe (Poland, Eastonia, Letonia, Latvia), military and economic cooperation with these states is sufficient to deter his bulying ambitions. Hungary and Bulgaria have been ruled out for being too cosy with Russia.

toyg 9y ago

> there is a vein of ineptness I don't see that. The raid on Osama was pretty inept too, as it was arming and training any random anti-Iranian person in the region and ending up with IS/Daesh. It's just that direct action is inevitably brazen and unsubtle, and will often have unpredictable repercussions. You give state-of-the-art anti-aircraft weaponry to Ukrainian biker gangs and they shoot down a civilian plane; you support anti-Ghaddafi groups and they end up burning down your own embassy. You just cannot predict which way the grass will bend under your feet. Any direct action will have its fair share of fumbles, it's just that the world is now so well-connected that they will be ruthlessly exposed pretty much all the time. Personally, I wouldn't underestimate Putin - like all fascist regimes, his rule has likely cultivated a cohort of inept yes-men, but he's also reinvigorated what was a tremendously dangerous military apparatus that is still capable of triggering a nuclear holocaust. I think our approach should be a bit subtler than "slapping down a bully".