Libaax-Sankataabte Posted May 10, 2006 Putin Chastises U.S. on Democratic Ideals Wednesday May 10, 2006 8:01 PM AP Photo MOSB114 By JUDITH INGRAM Associated Press Writer MOSCOW (AP) - President Vladimir Putin took a swipe at the United States in his state of the nation address Wednesday, bristling at being lectured by Vice President Dick Cheney and comparing Washington to a wolf who ``eats without listening.'' During an emotional moment in the nationally televised speech, Putin used the fairy-tale motif on the need to build a fortress-like house and to illustrate Russia's need to bolster its defenses. He also suggested that Washington puts its political interests above the democratic ideals it claims to cherish. ``Where is all this pathos about protecting human rights and democracy when it comes to the need to pursue their own interests? Here, it seems, everything is allowed, there are no restrictions whatsoever,'' Putin said, smiling sarcastically in the address to both houses of parliament. ``We are aware what is going on in the world,'' he said. ``Comrade wolf knows whom to eat, he eats without listening, and he's clearly not going to listen to anyone.'' Political analyst Alexei Makarkin told Ekho Moskvy radio the ``wolf'' reference was a response to the ``United States, its actions in Iraq and plans toward Iran, its games on the territory of the CIS (former Soviet territory) and its criticism of Russia.'' Putin's speech came nearly a week after Cheney on May 4 took a verbal slap at the Russian leader, saying the government sought ``to reverse the gains of the last decade.'' In another apparent barb aimed at the United States, Putin said countries should not use Russia's World Trade Organization membership negotiations to make unrelated demands. ``The negotiations for letting Russia into the WTO should not become a bargaining chip for questions that have nothing in common with the activities of this organization,'' Putin said. In April, U.S. senators visiting Moscow said Russia's democracy record and its stance in the Iranian nuclear crisis would influence Congress as it considers Moscow's bid to join the global trade body. Nationalist legislator Alexei Mitrofanov told reporters in the Kremlin that Putin's Russia was in no way looking for a confrontation with the West, ``but we want to be a politically and economically independent state.'' Putin pointed out that Russia's military budget is 25 times lower than that of the United States. Like the U.S., he said, ``we also must make our house strong and reliable.'' ``We must always be ready to counter any attempts to pressure Russia in order to strengthen positions at our expense,'' he said. ``The stronger our military is, the less temptation there will be to exert such pressure on us.'' Putin said the government would work to strengthen the nation's nuclear deterrent as well as conventional military forces without repeating the mistakes of the Cold War era, when a costly arms race with Washington drained Soviet resources. He said Russia would soon commission two nuclear submarines equipped with the new Bulava intercontinental ballistic missiles - the nation's first since Soviet times - while the land-based strategic missile forces would get their first unit of mobile Topol-M missiles. The new missiles and warheads, which can foil defenses by changing direction in flight, would allow Russia to preserve a strategic balance without denting the nation's economic development goals, he said, adding that Russia needs a military that is capable of answering all modern challenges. Two-thirds of the army will be professionals instead of conscripts by 2008, he said, allowing the state to reduce the length of obligatory service from two years to one, and nearly 600 rapid-response units will be formed by 2011. ``We need a military that is able simultaneously to carry on battle in global, regional and, if need be, several local conflicts,'' he said. The military should be able to guarantee Russia's territorial integrity, he said - a reference to the threat of Islamic extremists in southern regions surrounding Chechnya. He said the threat of terrorism remained significant, and that ``extremists of all stripes'' feed off of local and religious conflicts. ``I know that someone very much wants Russia to get bogged down in these problems and, as a result, to be unable to solve a single one of its problems of full-scale development,'' he said darkly without identifying the foe. Turning to health care issues, Putin called the demographic slide that has shrunk Russia's population by millions since the 1991 Soviet collapse ``the most acute problem of contemporary Russia,'' and he encouraged legislators to budget for more generous birth bonuses, childcare support subsidies and educational benefits for mothers to encourage women to have children. ``I am convinced that with such an approach, you will earn words of gratitude from millions of mothers, young families, all the citizens of our country,'' Putin said. He also called on more Russians to take in foster children from institutions where about 200,000 orphans and abandoned children are interned. Most Russian families are small, with couples usually having only one or two children. Putin and his wife have two daughters. Russia's population dropped by about 4 percent to 142.7 million between 1993 and 2006, according to the Health Ministry. Experts attribute the plunge to post-Soviet economic turmoil that has badly hurt the state health care system, leading to a drop in birth rates and life expectancy. Increased poverty, alcoholism, soaring crime and emigration have also taken their toll, leading to an average life expectancy of just 66 years - 16 years lower than Japan and 14 years lower than the European Union average. The ITAR-Tass news agency reported that the comments on reversing the population decline prompted 27 bursts of applause and that listeners in all applauded 47 times - more than in any of Putin's other state of the nation addresses. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Castro Posted May 10, 2006 In another apparent barb aimed at the United States, Putin said countries should not use Russia's World Trade Organization membership negotiations to make unrelated demands. LOL. That's nice. Now someone remind me again what "union" is the author referring to when Russia is concerned? I thought the Soviet Union disintegrated into many fiefdoms one of which is Russia. I'm confused. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gabbal Posted May 10, 2006 I honestly believe we are underestimating the political twists and turns of the day. Russia, China, and various other nations challenging and increasingly stepping up to the United States just really marks the beginning of not only a new century but also a new World Order. That one that started with the disintegration of the Soviet Union is ending. This new one has been rising for some years or so but has only gotten momentum with the U.S's disregard for the United Nations in the months leading up to the Iraqi invasion. Truly we are in a changing world. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Libaax-Sankataabte Posted May 10, 2006 Originally posted by Castro: Now someone remind me again what "union" is the author referring to when Russia is concerned? I thought the Soviet Union disintegrated into many fiefdoms one of which is Russia. I'm confused. Castro Russia's official Name is --- Russian Federation. The Russian Federation is made up of Russia and mini-republics(autonomous). 1. Adygea 2. Altai 3. Bashkortostan 4. Buryatia 5. Dagestan 6. Ingushetia 7. Kabardino-Balkaria 8. Kalmykia 9. Karachay-Cherkessia 10. Karelia 11. Komi 12. Mari El 13. Mordovia 14. Sakha (Yakutia) 15. North Ossetia-Alania 16. Tatarstan 17. Tuva 18. Udmurtia 19. Khakassia 20. Chechnya 21. Chuvashia Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Castro Posted May 10, 2006 Thanks awoowe. I do know that at least #20 on that list is trying to get out of the "union". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
xiinfaniin Posted May 10, 2006 Libaaxow, wallee najjaasaa fayleh. The writings are on the wall, and even Putin is emboldened now. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faarax-Brawn Posted May 10, 2006 Originally posted by Castro: Thanks awoowe. I do know that at least #20 on that list is trying to get out of the "union". Err correction,the right term would be "Has been trying" for close to 16yrs now. Russia,macal iran macal jini oo dhan aint got sh1t on the US of A. They are not listening to no one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Castro Posted May 10, 2006 ^ Sure they are. The US just reversed it's stance on aid to the Palestinians. I think it was convinced by Israel who is worried Palestinians might storm the borders and do something crazy if they remain hungry too long. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
General Duke Posted May 10, 2006 Putin is a big power player. He has transformed Russia into a strong independent state. It was to be expected that he would reply to the utterances of Dick Cheney... Putin a true master of the dark arts... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Castro Posted May 11, 2006 Originally posted by Brown: Russia,macal iran macal jini oo dhan aint got sh1t on the US of A. They are not listening to no one. I told you being the strongest doesn't mean you can't "bend" once in a while. U.S. foreign policy positions may bend on Iran and Palestinian aid BY WARREN P. STROBEL AND JONATHAN S. LANDAY Knight Ridder Newspapers WASHINGTON - Working to hold together an increasingly tenuous international alliance, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice executed tactical retreats this week on two major issues, Iran's nuclear program and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, according to U.S. and European officials. On Iran, Rice agreed to go beyond threatened punishments and consider a revised potpourri of incentives that Europe favors to get Tehran to halt its enrichment of uranium, a process that can produce fuel for nuclear weapons. She also agreed to parts of British and French proposals to create a fund to channel international aid to the Palestinians. The aid would help alleviate a social crisis made worse by an international cut-off of aid to the Palestinian Authority because it's led by Hamas. The United States and the European Union view Hamas as a terrorist group. The partial U.S. agreement on aid represents a potential softening of the U.S. stand that nothing be done to aid the Hamas-led government, even indirectly. Rice agreed to consider a temporary fund that would channel help directly to the Palestinians, bypassing Hamas. But virtually every detail of the idea remains to be decided. Diplomats, many of whom requested anonymity to discuss behind-the-scenes negotiations, said it remains to be seen whether the U.S. policy shifts, made during two days of high-level talks in New York, are more than rhetoric. Details of both initiatives are vague and remain to be hammered out in the coming weeks. But the U.S. course corrections underscore the tensions between the United States and the European Union, Russia and China over how to proceed on key issues. They also underscore tensions between Rice and other members of Bush's foreign policy team, particularly Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, over how to deal with potential threats to U.S. security. Cheney, officials said, has opposed U.S. overtures to Iran and North Korea and has advocated spurning Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, whose Fatah faction lost to Hamas in parliamentary elections this year. Rice, the officials said, has been forced to expend significant political capital and time to pursue a diplomatic solution to the confrontation with Iran. Rice told reporters Wednesday that the U.N. Security Council will delay any action against Iran for two weeks while diplomats prepare an offer that promises Iran rewards if it ceases its uranium enrichment program and punishments if it doesn't. "We felt that two weeks to continue to try to work for council unity was well worth it," she said. Western diplomats said the incentives for Iran would be broadly based on an offer that Britain, France and Germany made last August, which Iran rejected at the time. Iran would have to halt uranium enrichment, cease work on a heavy water nuclear reactor that could produce plutonium, agree to intrusive inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency and pledge to fight terrorism. In return, the European Union offered Iran help with civilian nuclear technology, a long-term accord on trade and investment, and recognition of Iran's "important role" and interest in regional security. The Bush administration didn't oppose the proposal when it was first made. A Western diplomat said the Europeans hope to get the United States and Russia to join in making the offer to Tehran. Some experts said that with the huge risks of taking military action to stop Iran's nuclear ambition - increased terrorism, military retaliation in the region and higher oil prices - the Bush administration has little choice but to back the European approach if it hopes to get eventual support for punitive measures. "I don't think there is any chance to get an international consensus for punitive steps until the administration plays all of its positive cards," said former senior U.S. diplomat James Dobbins, now at the RAND Corp., a policy research organization. A European diplomat added: "The change in (U.S.) tone is obvious. The readiness to have a multilateral dialogue is something we all appreciate." The shift in approach came after Rice, in more than three hours of meetings with her counterparts Monday night, failed to get Russia and China to agree to a tough resolution threatening sanctions against Iran. Still, key differences remain. French Foreign Minister Philippe Douste-Blazy said Tuesday that security guarantees for Iran should be considered as part of the offer. But earlier, a senior State Department official told reporters that the United States wouldn't offer Iran guarantees against an attack. The official briefed reporters on condition of anonymity under rules imposed by the State Department. Source Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maf Kees Posted May 11, 2006 I told you being the strongest doesn't mean you can't "bend" once in a while. Out of convenience, not necessity. Besides, Brown why did YOU bend? I was preparing for a fight on the username issue. You mean I got off the hook that easily? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Faarax-Brawn Posted May 11, 2006 Originally posted by Farah Blue: quote: I told you being the strongest doesn't mean you can't "bend" once in a while. Out of convenience, not necessity. Besides, Brown why did YOU bend? I was preparing for a fight on the username issue. You mean I got off the hook that easily? You are the Generic version of Farax Brown,until you assert your own "Brand Name",you will forever be ..... But no,dude i went Back to the original Name;you know like the way KFC went back to the Original Kentucky fried Chicken,coz ppl were saying that the C no longer stands for chiken,am sure you get the analogy,Danyeerow Castro,Pliz be the infedil that you have been,ight Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites