Newsbud Exclusive- Putin in Slovenia: An Analysis (1 Viewer)

[Pod]

The Hidden Subtext Behind Putin's Third Slovenia Visit

Putin is no stranger to the ex-Yugoslav republic of Slovenia. In fact, in June 2001, when Slovenia was still neither an EU nor a NATO member state, it was chosen as a neutral meeting place for the first official meeting between him and the U.S. president George W. Bush. Ironically, the meeting took place in the Brdo Castle near Kranj, one of the long-time Communist leader Tito's summer residences. At that time, the U.S. high level officials did everything they could to flatter Putin and get him to accept their hegemonic geopolitical agenda for Eastern Europe, Russia, and Eurasia in general. For instance, during the press conference that followed their two-hour long discussions, Bush stated that he could fully trust Putin in international matters because "he's an honest, straight-forward man who loves his country. He loves his family. We share a lot of values. I view him as a remarkable leader. I believe his leadership will serve Russia well."[1]

But, when Putin, unlike Yeltsin, whose hand-picked successor he was, proved unwilling to play along with the U.S. plans, his stature in the U.S. foreign policy discourse quickly deteriorated from that of "a remarkable leader" and an honest patriot to that of a brutal dictator and even "a thug". This of course should come to surprise to nobody because, as Henry Kissinger stated long ago, paraphrasing perhaps the most Machiavellian 19th century leader (in very heavy competition), the British prime minister Lord Palmerston, in the conduct of (realist) foreign policy, there are "no permanent friends or enemies, only interests."

Read more at: http://www.boilingfrogspost.com/2016/08/10/newsbud-exclusive-putin-in-slovenia-an-analysis/

 

[Vickie]

Interesting! Thanks for posting this Pod. I don't know how I missed it.

 

[Mike]

That's the good ol' USA for ya lol

 

[Pod]

Interesting! Thanks for posting this Pod. I don't know how I missed it.

Bless you Vicki! When I saw the alert in my email box, I thought "Oh I must read that, missed it myself" only to find I popped it in a month ago!

Talk about living in the moment!

 

[Pod]

That's the good ol' USA for ya lol

No Mike, it is not the US it is the criminal government that none of you voted in. Not the people. Same in the U.K. Not in my name!

 

[Vickie]

No Mike, it is not the US it is the criminal government that none of you voted in. Not the people. Same in the U.K. Not in my name!

Pod, I say that all the time too. It's not the country it's the criminals that run the country.

 

[Laron]

d Slovenia Visit

Pod, when you are not writing your own text, if you could place quotation marks and/or indent the text, that would be great, just so we know it's not actually you who wrote it. In this case it's a bit easier as you had a heading, but doing this is also important to show people it's from the article being linked to. Thanks! Italics can be helpful to show it's a quote/excerpt as well.

 

[Pod]

Pod, when you are not writing your own text, if you could place quotation marks and/or indent the text, that would be great, just so we know it's not actually you write it. In this case it's a bit easier as you had a heading, but doing this is also important to show people it's from the article being linked to. Thanks! Italics can be helpful to show it's a quote/excerpt as well.

Got it.....I thought that the "read more at bla bla bla" was indication enough.

Quotation marks it will be! Thanks for that.

 

[Laron]

Got it....

It's just that when you read anything on a forum you expect it to be written by the person, so there should be an obvious indicator to show it's not, especially when it's the top/beginning of the thread/post. It would be good if we could get a standard guideline for this that we can all aim for if we are using text from elsewhere.

 

[Stargazer]

It's just that when you read anything on a forum you expect it to me written by the person, so there should be an obvious indicator to show it's not, especially when it's the top/beginning of the thread/post. It would be good if we could get a standard guideline for this that we can all aim for if we are using text from elsewhere.

I think a brief introduction of the material and some personal thoughts about it, followed by the link to the original article is always helpful.

That way I can get a feel for the article topic as well as an idea as to whether or not I may be interested--plus, the personal comments tend to spark further thought and discussion.