President Putin issues New Year message to President Trump, calls for "pragmatic cooperation"

[gipper]

Pragmatic cooperation is the right term and it can be applied to any country in the world.

The problem with Russia, like China, is that they have vastly different systems and their eyes on global dominance, not just regional. As such, you can never have full trust, nor should you. Some military intervention against terror is a prime example in which they have limited agreement and cooperation.

Russia and China do not have their eyes on global dominance, but the USA does. Neither nation has the ability to contest the US military. However, they would like to keep the US off their borders and from taking control of their neighbors.

I suspect both nations know the US leadership is capable of starting a major war at any moment. A warlike nation like the US, should be feared because the leadership is crazy. No one but the US leadership wants a nuclear war.

Then why are Russia and China working to keep the DPRK afloat?

If they don't, the US will nuke NK...leading to WWIII and millions of deaths.

Nonsense. The former depends upon Kim. The latter is unlikely, as neither China nor Russia would sacrifice themselves to avenge North Korea.

Nonsense. The MIC needs an enemy. NK makes a good enemy.

So what do China Russia and Iran. What do these nations have in common? They refuse to kowtow to the Empire. Kill them!

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Pragmatic cooperation is the right term and it can be applied to any country in the world.

The problem with Russia, like China, is that they have vastly different systems and their eyes on global dominance, not just regional. As such, you can never have full trust, nor should you. Some military intervention against terror is a prime example in which they have limited agreement and cooperation.

Russia and China do not have their eyes on global dominance, but the USA does. Neither nation has the ability to contest the US military. However, they would like to keep the US off their borders and from taking control of their neighbors.

I suspect both nations know the US leadership is capable of starting a major war at any moment. A warlike nation like the US, should be feared because the leadership is crazy. No one but the US leadership wants a nuclear war.

Then why are Russia and China working to keep the DPRK afloat?

If they don't, the US will nuke NK...leading to WWIII and millions of deaths.

Nonsense. The former depends upon Kim. The latter is unlikely, as neither China nor Russia would sacrifice themselves to avenge North Korea.

Nonsense. The MIC needs an enemy. NK makes a good enemy.

So what do China Russia and Iran. What do these nations have in common? They refuse to kowtow to the Empire. Kill them!

What empire?

 

[MrShangles]

Pragmatic cooperation is the right term and it can be applied to any country in the world.

The problem with Russia, like China, is that they have vastly different systems and their eyes on global dominance, not just regional. As such, you can never have full trust, nor should you. Some military intervention against terror is a prime example in which they have limited agreement and cooperation.

Russia and China do not have their eyes on global dominance, but the USA does. Neither nation has the ability to contest the US military. However, they would like to keep the US off their borders and from taking control of their neighbors.

I suspect both nations know the US leadership is capable of starting a major war at any moment. A warlike nation like the US, should be feared because the leadership is crazy. No one but the US leadership wants a nuclear war.

Do you just make this up as you’re day goes,
US wants a nuclear war?
What land have we taken from other countries during a war?
Do you not want USA to have the strongest military or the weakest?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[gipper]

Pragmatic cooperation is the right term and it can be applied to any country in the world.

The problem with Russia, like China, is that they have vastly different systems and their eyes on global dominance, not just regional. As such, you can never have full trust, nor should you. Some military intervention against terror is a prime example in which they have limited agreement and cooperation.

Russia and China do not have their eyes on global dominance, but the USA does. Neither nation has the ability to contest the US military. However, they would like to keep the US off their borders and from taking control of their neighbors.

I suspect both nations know the US leadership is capable of starting a major war at any moment. A warlike nation like the US, should be feared because the leadership is crazy. No one but the US leadership wants a nuclear war.

Do you just make this up as you’re day goes,
US wants a nuclear war?
What land have we taken from other countries during a war?
Do you not want USA to have the strongest military or the weakest?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The empire doesn’t need to take the land, just control it.

 

[gipper]

Russia and China do not have their eyes on global dominance, but the USA does. Neither nation has the ability to contest the US military. However, they would like to keep the US off their borders and from taking control of their neighbors.

I suspect both nations know the US leadership is capable of starting a major war at any moment. A warlike nation like the US, should be feared because the leadership is crazy. No one but the US leadership wants a nuclear war.

Then why are Russia and China working to keep the DPRK afloat?

If they don't, the US will nuke NK...leading to WWIII and millions of deaths.

Nonsense. The former depends upon Kim. The latter is unlikely, as neither China nor Russia would sacrifice themselves to avenge North Korea.

Nonsense. The MIC needs an enemy. NK makes a good enemy.

So what do China Russia and Iran. What do these nations have in common? They refuse to kowtow to the Empire. Kill them!

What empire?

Funny

 

[EverCurious]

I think the US, like all nations, is a bit selfish - it's how it should be honestly. That said, there is nothing wrong with "sharing" the world stage with other nations like Russia and China. I've never been fond of the broad brush of the term "enemy," if there's an "enemy" you "oppose" and/or kill them and that's rather apparent on the left spectrum with the whole "sanction Russia" and "hate Russia" narrative.

There is a far, far better place for America, Russia, and China to be - in "competition."

Who remembers the whole "keeping up with the Jones" ideology? Basically it's a "friendly" rivalry between folks based not on hatred or fear, but on healthy one-ups-manship. That's what I grew up in, everyone my folks knew was in competition for who had the most toys, who had the most money, the most wealth.

That is the kind of relationship we should have with foreign nations because that is the kind of relationship that motivates /all/ nation's governments to do better - and generally speaking that means the people do better. If you want/need more production you either beat the shit out of your workers until they die and produce nothing for you, OR you encourage them to work for the nations benefit - the US, Japan, S. Korea, and many, many other nations are a blatant and obvious success story call-out to less than human friendly governments that they'd be more "competitive" if they adopted American economic/social policies.

We'd slipped in that ideological "lead by example" win button through a series of flawed policies and failed political theories. It is my hope that Trump can bring us back to that place, and away from the [generally] left leaning bullshit of "warfare" (be that foreign "enemies," class and race warfare, and their entire us vs them ideological underpinnings.)