- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Boris Yeltsin Transcript ...spoke to US Congress 1992
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:26 am to Harry Rex Vonner
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:26 am to Harry Rex Vonner
quote:The office was created in a referendum election held on 14-March-1991.
The position "President of Russia" did not even exist until the USSR was already in its death throes.quote:
wrong just stop
1
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:27 am to AggieHank86
calling a liar a liar is not a personal attack
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:33 am to KAGTASTIC
quote:Not exactly.
Putin didn't really "rise" to power, the way most would think. Yeltsin hand picked Putin, who was a pretty low level govt guy, to replace him.
Putin was selected/recommended as PM by Yeltsin's Chief of Staff (and son in law) Valentin Yumashev in August 1999. Putin had been working as Yumashev's deputy for about two years, and had been climbing the governmental ladder for almost a decade, starting in the city government of St. Petersburg.
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:33 am to AggieHank86
you said Yeltsin "held the stage as a post-Soviet" and now you're backtracking
he held the stage as Russian president while Gorbechev was still the head of the Soviet Union
the reason it's important anyway is that James Baker promised both of them that NATO would not be expanded - Clinton waited until he was reelected to start doing it
and you'd rather make it into a fictional narrative about Putin
he held the stage as Russian president while Gorbechev was still the head of the Soviet Union
the reason it's important anyway is that James Baker promised both of them that NATO would not be expanded - Clinton waited until he was reelected to start doing it
and you'd rather make it into a fictional narrative about Putin
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:34 am to Harry Rex Vonner
quote:Was the office of President first created in the 1991 referendum ... or not?
calling a liar a liar is not a personal attack
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:37 am to Harry Rex Vonner
quote:
and you'd rather make it into a fictional narrative about Putin
Progs love their fairy tales.
Most of these people are upper middle class with too much to lose to think for themselves. They're not stupid, just sellouts and too indoctrinated to realize the people they support are coming after them too.
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:39 am to Harry Rex Vonner
quote:Harry, do you understand the word "transitional?"
you said Yeltsin "held the stage as a post-Soviet" and now you're backtracking
Yeltsin served as a Russia-wide official under the Soviet system for about a year, with most of that time spend DISMANTLING that system. He served as post-Soviet President of Russia for about eight years before resigning.
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:42 am to jonnyanony
quote:You need to consider the fact that most intelligent posters having ending response to your nonsense...
jonnyanony
...does in no way make any position of yours valid or evidence that you have ever uttered the first correct position on this
You remain a profound dumbass - and most realize this.
You will find your kind on the O=T. and an affinity for the same stupidity you steep in..
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:45 am to AggieHank86
quote:
2. We did not treat 1990s Russia as an “enemy.” We made the mistake of treating them like a third-world backwater, which hurt their pride … and GAVE us Putin.
3. If we had treated them as a respected international partner, Putin would never have risen to power. WE put Russia back into the “enemy” column when WE created Putin.
more absolute crap - hope that doesn't hurt your delicate feelings
we didn't **accidentally treat Russia badly***, like dropping a pan of cornbread in the floor, we began intentionally provoking the hell out of Russia in 1996
Clinton started it, Bush expanded it, Obama expanded it, Trump did nothing to help it, and Weekend at Bidens is trying to cause a nuclear war
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:47 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Putin’s Russia cannot ever be anything but a rival.
And why is this so?
Another question: Can China, in your opinion, ever be considered anything other than a rival?
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:47 am to Harry Rex Vonner
quote:Selective editing. I SAID
you said Yeltsin "held the stage as a post-Soviet" and now you're backtracking
quote:It is like you live in a world where prior statements do not exist.
(Yeltsin) was the transitional figure. Initially rose to power as a Soviet, but held the stage as a post-Soviet.
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:51 am to Harry Rex Vonner
quote:Who said anything about an "accident?" As a matter of policy in the 1990s, the US treated the successor state to the Soviet Union like a banana republic. Of course there were going to be consequences.
we didn't **accidentally treat Russia badly***, like dropping a pan of cornbread in the floor, we began intentionally provoking the hell out of Russia in 1996
Putin's belligerence is one of those consequences.
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:54 am to Harry Rex Vonner
quote:The entire list of contributors to the OT thread, the entire EE roster at the Dept of State, Pentagon and all the Ivies that teach the OT thread bullshite should try to read an agnostic book on Russian history sometime, which began around 750 AD. Of which only 80 years was communism, BTW.
as usual you're a terrible historian
Gorbechev was the president of the entire Soviet Union, Yeltsin was the president of Russia
James Baker promised them both we would not expand NATO one inch toward the east, and then Clinton made us out to be liars when he began expanding NATO in 1996 - every US president since then has made it all steadily worse, by design
we've been provoking Russia for 26 years
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:55 am to Gideon Swashbuckler
quote:Putin is an expansionist (technically revanchist) autocrat. As long as his policies cause Russia to seek territorial expansion, I just do not see how he can be an "ally."
Putin’s Russia cannot ever be anything but a rival.quote:
And why is this so?
quote:Under its current system, no, IMO.
Can China, in your opinion, ever be considered anything other than a rival?
Unlike some, I have NEVER seen China as anything other than a rival.
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:55 am to AggieHank86
Essentially his climb wasn't what people would think is ideal for the position. More a random dark horse pick.
Posted on 12/26/22 at 9:58 am to AggieHank86
quote:
Harry, do you understand the word "transitional?"
Yeltsin served as a Russia-wide official under the Soviet system for about a year, with most of that time spend DISMANTLING that system. He served as post-Soviet President of Russia for about eight years before resigning.
Hank...Boris Yeltsin served as president of Russia while the Soviet Union still existed and while Gorby was still president of the USSR
same as the presidents...I think...of Czech and Lithuania, same exact time (maybe not Lith, but Czech and somebody else)
the reason it's important is because Yeltsin was more motivated to get rid of the Soviet Union than Gorbechev - they were both basically on the same page, but Yeltsin was the true go-to in regard to American diplomacy of the issue
it's easy to pin "Soviet" on anyone there at that time, especially given the wide range of lies "our" historians have told the past 60 years
Did James Baker know Clinton was going to dismantle his agreement with both guys on NATO 4 years later? I don't know.
I wouldnt mind getting along with you, but you just tell big fricking whoppers because of whatever reason.
Posted on 12/26/22 at 10:02 am to alpinetiger
quote:I wrote a paper in 1979 as a high school sophomore in World History, on the premise that Russia has ALWAYS been both xenophobic and expansionist and that their threat to Europe lay in those traits, not in "Communism."
The entire list of contributors to the OT thread, the entire EE roster at the Dept of State, Pentagon and all the Ivies that teach the OT thread bullshite should try to read an agnostic book on Russian history sometime, which began around 750 AD. Of which only 80 years was communism, BTW.
At the height of the Cold War, my classmates did not like the paper, but my teacher thought it was quite insightful.
Posted on 12/26/22 at 10:04 am to AggieHank86
quote:One man's belligerence is another man's patriotism. Putin's removal of the oligarch plague in Russia as well as the foreign influence (guess who?) was part of that belligerence, as you call it. Dept of State and the other cast of characters couldn't have that.
Putin's belligerence is one of those consequences.
What people like me want is for our ancient, global foreign policy strategies to die and for the US to actually mind its own business. The US has evolved as being generally loved globally in the 1940's, to currently being hated. Any guesses to why that is?
Posted on 12/26/22 at 10:07 am to KAGTASTIC
quote:I think that is fair.
Essentially his climb wasn't what people would think is ideal for the position. More a random dark horse pick.
My read it that he was a VERY efficient technocrat and thus caught the eyes of the right (more powerful) people.
Hell, Yumashev described Putin to Yeltsin as a "democrat." But he was also a fervent Russian nationalist. If we had treated Russia like a near-equal in the 1990s, I think Putin would have carried-on Yeltsin's reforms, and the World would be very different today. But our treatment of his beloved Rodina as a backwater just got under his skin.
Posted on 12/26/22 at 10:08 am to alpinetiger
here's what none of them understand
some of them are hardened confederates, and yet they are too stupid to understand plugging Donbass into the examples of non-slave owning Mississippians and non-slave owning Gumps
they let *Ukraine!* be their Mississippi because CNN and FOX told them to
some of them are hardened confederates, and yet they are too stupid to understand plugging Donbass into the examples of non-slave owning Mississippians and non-slave owning Gumps
they let *Ukraine!* be their Mississippi because CNN and FOX told them to
This post was edited on 12/26/22 at 10:35 am
Page 2 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News