Where’s Vladimir Putin?

spending time with his new daughter?

http://inosmi.ru/russia/20150314/226847830.html?utm_source=fb1

I hope so, this would certainly reignite a sense of "humanity" to the situation from a global perspective, so much hate and distrust right now.

Would that be by his personal trainer?

Last it was reported, he is supposed to make an appearance Monday. Guess we'll see.

By the way where is James Bond car thread ? No one did care to ask yet ?

Whatever happened in Russia I don't find it all that concerning that a coup might had taken place. Russia will be just as much Russia next week as is today with or without Putin...if a crazier wako gets to be in his place it wont last long either...

He met President of Kyrgyzstan, Almazbek Atambayev, today in St. Petersburg.

My homepage is set on yahoo, surprisingly, they have a good mix of headlines, so yeah, I caught that, he is glad of rumors apparently. So there is no coup?

lol, this thread is dead!

It is...for now.

But, what is Putin gets ill and can't rule anymore... or if he died by any reason right now?

Will Russia be better... worst... the same?

So far, Russia -with inflation and other problems aside from economical- is surely strong and competitive with the West, and Putin shows to be an excellent leader of his country (this won't mean about good or bad in reference to the West).

I think you will find that there is a large proportion of their population that disagrees with your assessment, Mr Baron.

Their man was shot in the back just the other day, remember?

Russia is but a shadow of what it once was, they would be no competition for America let alone all of NATO, Putin knows this and this would be why he constantly throws down the "nuke" card.

Threatening "Global Inhalation" speaks in droves as to the mentality of this so called "leader!"

WELL VLADIMIR BE PUTIN HIS POOP IN UR CORN FLAKES

Maybe he caught the Kremlin cold (this might only make sense to folks who remember Breshnev and other former leaders who died weeks before it was announced in order to give the kremlin time to decide on the next leader)

I'm not sure about your words.

When the US was "expanding" took by force lands from Mexico and from Hawaii, but when it was the turn of Alaska, instead of force it was a business deal.

The same "respect" towards Russia in the past by the US still is present today.

The US learned a hard lesson with Vietnam. In this war, the enemy received the same arms to equalize the US military power. This war was a "one to one" fight, where both opponents had the same strength to fight and overcome the adversary. The Soviet Union supplied the required armament for the Vietnamese.

Vietnam was lost not because the US was incapable to win, but because the Vietnamese was defending their land and they had strategic support to respond the attacks of the US army. It was a war not only against Vietnamese soldiers but also against civilians.

After this lesson, the US has not participated in any other great war "without a coalition". This is to say, to win against Iraq, the US had no other choice but to use bases in Saudi Arabia and other countries. The US managed to stop any strategic help from Russia which should allow Saddam Hussein to respond as the Vietnamese did it in the 70's.

No doubt that without this "coalition" and fighting against Iraq having the same armament -including war airplanes, helicopters, etc.- to respond the US attacks , perhaps it should become another "Vietnam" for the US army.

Just think about it. The US fighting without the help of the neighbor nations against Iraq should be a complete disaster and the use of "Orange Product" weapons should be the only solution to end a war with Iraq.

If this scenario is possible with a small nation like Iraq, I think that attacking Russia by the US should be suicidal. The US should need of a coalition to win a war against Russia. Military bases in neighbor countries must be needed for supplies, deployment of troops, and more.

Just look what happened recently, Russia took Crimea in front of the whole world. Where were the US, France, UK, China, Italy, and more, after this taking of land by Russia?

Why not attacking Russia to "free" Crimea like it happened with Kuwait?

I think that you can't tell that Russia is not what it was in the past. On the contrary, Russia proved that still is strong and that it can take lands when they decided to do so.

The only respond for their land taking was "economic sanctions", which might be working in one way, but eventually will affect the US and the worldwide economy at the end.

And yes, Russia might use the nuke card if it is invaded, and this is a major reason for not to mess with this nation. The US used it in the past, why other nations can't use it when they think is OK to do so?

And this is the ideology: for us, we are the good guys and they are the bad guys. For Russians, they are the good guys and we are the bad guys.

Who is good and who is bad depends on your place of birth. That's all.

I never liked the idea of good and bad guys or good and bad anything for measure of proper talking. Reality is made of shades of grey everywhere...but comparing Russia to the USA is preposterous.
(This even considering USA and the all world is going a bit on a civilizational recession crisis currently)