Objective view on Vladimir Putin?

No more dangerous animal in the animal kingdom than one that is injured and cornered. You could say the same about present day Russia and Putin, and while it cannot be ignored , neither should it be a paralyzing factor. If Putin goes nuclear, Putin goes nuclear, and that will have to be dealt with if and when it happens. As I mentioned in another post, ( a few posts back) If Putin did not have the Nato / West meddling excuse, he would have found another one. His personal ambition is to restore the Russia of old, and having restored it, becoming the Tsar of all the Russia's, and going down in history as such. What the west / NATO did or didn't do is irrelevant.. ( except as a justification ) Putin's personal ambition is what is relevant.

Blaaz, I lived in Russia for several years, both under the Communists and again a few years later under Putin. As for the Communist times, there was no comparison like you made between the Catholic Church and the Communists. Catholic Church power and control over the population pales into insignificance compared to the power the local Communist Committee,,,it was absolute. It was one gigantic web of control. And the source of this control? The Big Red Book, where everything was an offence against the state, or could be manufactured into an offence. I well remember after a night out with colleagues, one of them came to me, and on bended knee begged me not to report him for being drunk, that's how intrusive it was. Go into your room in the hotel, and there was the ever present Babushka in the hallway ( and every hallway at that) noting everyone's coming and goings. Having a beer in a bar /restaurant, a man wearing a suit comes in, and the room goes quiet,,,,they know instinctively who he is, they are so used to the "System" He demands ID. and he is shown ID cards,, no questions or any sign of dissent. So you might not consider this " pre-programming" but if its not, then I do not know what is. The chairman of the local Committe was THE BOSS, and that was it. There's a scene in the movie Chernobyl where the Nuclear scientist attached to Chernobyl goes to the local part boss, requesting iodine for the children, and evacuation of Pripyat, and he just laughs at her,, even when she tells him of her qualifications as a scientist, and reminds him that in his former job, he worked in a shoe factory. He agrees, but tells her he is now the Boss, curtesy of the workers party. And his power there was absolute. No iodine fir the children, much less evacuation of Pripyat. Communism in action. But human nature being what it is, this translated into mafia like behaviour,,,you need a service which is free of course under communism, but a kind of bartering system developed,, a small present got you a priority in the queue or on the list, and by the time communism collapsed, and Putin arrived, this alternative system was ripe for development, and we have seen the fruits of this " entrepreneurialism". A massive mafia state.

I was in Grozny while it was still being bombed back into the stone age, and again later under Kadyrov. The reconstruction made it almost unrecognizable at that point. Throughout the major cities, big changes came too...gone were the massive GUM store's ( Governmental Universal Magazines) which had massive staff's ( unemployment being forbidden ) but very little in the line of good's for sale. They were replaced by modern western style supermarkets, with all that the West could offer. They allowed the west in to show them how it was done ( Air Lingus Duty free being a case in point) then when they had imparted their know how, they were unceremoniously kicked out, ( or at least until their expertise was again needed. ) So Yes, the cities thrived, but the vast rural areas, not so much. Ethnic Russians are not all that popular in the Republics.

And yes Putin brought order to the post USSR world, and prosperity too, but not to all. The wealth of Russia he managed ( and still does) is shared out to his oligarch friends ( and here I use the term Friends advisedly) and is mainly dependent on oil / gas sales. The Rural areas are a case in point...not much has "trickled down" to them. So yes, visit Moscow, St. Petersburg etc and you will see examples of the new ( and old ) glittering Russia, but thats not all of Russia, it's what is on display. Travel throughout the republics, and you will see a different Russia. One that still has its own charm, in its own way, but a far cry from the cities. Could Putin have done it differently? I'm sure he could, but this is the path he choose. For sure, its not the majority of Russians who are benefitting from the wealth of Russia.

Horseshit.

Meddling?

Either these countries are independent states free to choose their policies and alliances, or they are condemned to be vassal states of Russia independent in name only.

You don't appear to have any problem with the latter, which displays a profound ignorance of our own history.

Only for those who are very easily fooled.

It would definitely have an effect. That and the rule of Law as its applied in Europe. Mafia business is conducted in as dark a place as possible, so an open EU Country which Ukraine is aiming for, ( and will succeed in getting) would not be in Putins interests. And thats before Russian citizens start questioning why EU citizens have better quality of life, which Russia under Putin does not offer them. ( at least the majority of them) That would be another needless thorn in his side.

@[Deleted User] He went into middle East,defeated Isis (broke all sorts human right violations along way),stemmed the tide of suicide attacks into Europe,brought some semblance of stability to middle East after 20 or so years of American led interventions......had Russia in a v.strong position in terms of geo-politics, particularly in middle East...

Bs did he ,

He couldn't find isis if they were sitting at his famous long table.

@Blaaz I don't wanna be seen to be entirely on side of Russia,but realistically they did win that war,commited horrendous human right violations along the way to do so...

No they didn't realistically defeat ISIS they hardly ever went after isis ,

You are right about one thing horrendous human rights abuse's carried out on the population of Syria,

But he didn't do anything to isis ..

In Syria, Putin supported Assad only the extent of keeping the noose around his ( Assad's) neck from tightening. And removing isis from the Syrian equation was not in Putin's best interests. Everything he did for Assad had a price, and Putin played the game 100%. In one instance, at a time when Assad forces were suffering catastrophic setbacks due to a shortage of fuel, (of which Putin had plenty of..) he refused to share it with Assad until he was desperate, and then, after he had extracted more concessions he gave him the fuel. Neither did he place his troops at Assads disposal in any major ground attacks on isis / Free Syrian Army/ Al-Quaeda etc.as he did not want Russian's arriving back in Moscow in body bags. His Wagner group was operating ( but they were deniable ) with Hisbollah, and units of Assads army, but that was that. They attacked a US / Yazidi position in superior nrs, and got decimated, which put a stop to that. He bombed hospitals, schools, civilian targets,, apartment blocks etc indiscriminately but played no major role in the defeat of isis. That was left to the Yazidi's on the ground, with US support, plus the support of Bahrain, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the Unted Arab Emirates. Putin did not play a major part in the defeat of isis. The only real Russian attacks they carried out on isis was when a Russian passenger jet was blown up after taking off from Sharm-El -Sheik airport in Egypt. The plane was bombed by a Jihadi in response to Putins attacking Muslims in Syria. In revenge, Putin targeted fuel convoys leaving isis controlled ( but Syrian ) oilfields, bound for Turkey. This in turn, triggered Turkey into shooting down a Russian warplane. And it was touch and go for a while as to how that would turn out. He did however drive Assads Syrian enemies out if their strongholds, and in doing that, finished the civil war in Syria. But to this day, the remnants of the opposition are holed up in Idlib, which is still not under the full control of the regime, and even recently it was bombed again. So yes, In Syria, Putin was a winner,,,,he now has a base in the Mediterranean, and use of an airport, and very few Russian troops lost their lives. How he fares now in Ukraine will play a major part in what happens in Syria now going forward. And for sure he will be well remembered there, but for all the wrong reasons.

The point is that another poster was claiming wrongly that Putin was responsible for driving out isis, meaning that it was one of the "good " things he did. The Kurdish Yazidi's were the main on the ground forces that drove isis out. There were others of course, but the Kurds were the main ones, even their women fought. And easy to see why, when you hear about what isis did to them. Russian atrocities committed so far in Ukraine do not even come near what the isis monsters did in Syria / Iraq.

You are right however it is happening all over the planet. Sure, Saudis are no longer meddling in Yemen they went for other solutions. Turks are not "meddling" in Syria or Iraq and Albanian/Serb "meddling" in Kosovo ended up well, we all know how.

Cuba too was independent state and their attempt to choose policies and alliances brought them quite a lot of "meddling" and decades of sanctions.

No difference in regard to current "meddling".

None of the above situations impacted the EU on the scale of what’s transpiring now. I believe “the EU will cease to exist” was the threat from his mate Viacheslav Volodin, the head of the Duma and ally of Putin…this was regarding direct EU military intervention in this crisis.

so that has to be taken seriously.

Yes, and that was the straw that ultimately will break the Russian back. But with hind sight, given Putins previous history. had he been stopped earlier, the Ukraine invasion might not happened. But basically did as he wished without hindrance, and each time he did do something and git away with it, he became more and more emboldened and went on to do more and worse things.

American weapons ,and not everyone in the 28 currently members have nuclear weapons stored in the country

Soon to be 30 members.

Russia has nuclear weapons so why shouldn't all of its neighbors

NATO cannot accept applications to join from any Country currently in conflict, so by the time Ukraine request's NATO membership, the Russian invasion of Ukraine ( or war if you refer) will be long finished, and Russia's input / opinion / influence ( or what's left of it,,,) re Ukrainian NATO membership , ( or anything else either,) will not matter.

As for geo-political changes since WW2, and on-going, there is one irrefutable metric that cannot be denied, and Mr. Putin has not only proved it, but in the present time, reinforced it. A Country's first and foremost objective MUST be its security. And what NATO members want will play a very important part in worldwide decision making. And rightly so. We have seen just what happens when a strong Country just walks into its weaker neighbor unopposed. That cannot be allowed to happen again, at the very least in this part of the world. How far would Putin have gone if the other ex USSR Country's had not joined NATO? Maybe rolled all the way to Berlin? or Alaska? ( because this is what he planned,) Restoration of Imperial Russia.

Some facts to back up your statements would be helpful. As for predicting the end of the war being dodgy territory, whatever merit there is in that statement, as like every other poster on here, I'm neither a seer or a prophet, but to my mind anyway, the outcome, is a fore gone conclusion. Russia loses, Ukraine wins. Now back to checking latest gains by Ukraine. You are following , I presume?

The problem with Putin and those similar types who spend so long on their thrones, they become institutionalised in their own hubris. Putin truly believes in his own delusions and madness.

Apologies sir ...

In an amoral sense, there are some positives from a Russian nationalist pov because Russia is more able to act as an independent country than it was pre-Putin. He is of course more genuinely popular than Yelstin and clueless Westerners should not praise or defend Yelstin.

However it seems he is ruining the standard of living in Russia through pursuing this war. Though its hard to get accurate information, some sources say the Russian economy is adapting to separation from the West. Perhaps this is partly true, I don't know.

The country is a dictatorship and e.g. protestors against Covid restrictions have gotten 15 years in prison. Its isn't just anti-war people who get locked up but anyone with a strongly independent view

Putin himself was sorry that the Soviet Union collapsed yet he also criticises Marxism and sometimes presents himself as a Christian (and the Western media interprets him as a 'right-wing nationalist' exclusively). My conclusion is that he doesn't have any strong feelings about left-right ideologies and is only interested in power.

He was a senior secret police figure in a Communist regime but now sees that Communism is no longer a useful vehicle for power.

Note: I'm not sympathetic to Putin, this is just my attempt to give a balanced view rather than seeing it from 'our' (Western Europeans') perspective.

Putin wants a return to Russia as a premier world power and him as a dictator. He only uses communism if it facilitates his objectives. He accumulates power, influence and wealth as a dictator would.

The problem with his world view, is the military is mostly obsolete and thus far only has the resources to modernize only a very modest amount of the military. It's a shadow of it's former self. But still big enough to be a nuisance.