Статья Владимира Путина в Нью-Йoрк Таймс

[alex korolev]

Comments to Putin's BS:

• gux
• Quito

Dear Mr. Putin, when you state that God created us all equal, you mean also gay people, right?

• mm
• galva, illinois

It is unbelievable to me that people are actually writing in support of this ex KGB Russian. This certainly reflects the failure of our educational system when people do not understand who this man is, how he operates, and what his motives are. How shocking it is for people to praise this man's propaganda. Our system may not be perfect, but is is exceptional compared to what Putin provides for his citizens

• Darwin
• dallas

NYT Pick


I really want to believe Mr. Putin, but you'll have to excuse me if I take his statements with a gigantic grain of salt. It's very hard to believe he's a man of good will when he's dealt with Chechens with an iron fist; not to mention choking all kinds of freedoms and civil liberties in Russia.

• davon
• Philadelphia, PA

NYT Pick


While I do find many of President Putin's points to be salient, I am nevertheless hesitant towards his motivations with this op-ed. Simply put, what do you do when the board won't approve your measure? You go directly to the shareholders - it's a hostile action. Hardly anything adds up to satisfaction when it comes to what's been presented about the alleged chemical weapon use in Syria, whether the Syrian rebels had, in this particular instance, the logistical capability to launch the attacks with the impact they had, or the Syrian government's own involvement. To be sure, I certainly hope that diplomatic measures do prevail, and that Mr. Putin is correct, but it would be a shame if more atrocities are allowed to occur in the interim.

• Chris McMorrow
• Waltham, Mass.

NYT Pick


I wish I could feel that Mr. Putin was being sincere here. If nothing else, he has a fabulous writer.

But at my age, having grown up during the Cold War and witnessed all sorts of tricks, lies, distortions, and manipulations by the old Soviet Regime, I just have some doubts. As an ex-KBG agent, Mr. Putin may not be my age, but he was trained in the old Soviet culture.

I think the main thing that really strikes me here is how myopic the US can be to its image around the world. We pay lip service to the idea that certain actions will "surely win us more enmity around the world," but we usually go on our merry way trying to get our way.

So, the benefit of Mr. Putin's assessment here--even if contrived, manipulative, and written to lecture this country, in and of itself a pretty arrogant act--is how based in realpolitik it is.

But--and this is a very big but--I'm not sure that Russia is in any position to lecture anyone right now, given its long history of isolationism, paranoia, and curbs on basic freedoms inside its borders.

I think it will be interesting for all of us to save this article, and our posts, and see how they stack up against events as they unfold over the next 6 months. We will either be pleasantly surprised, or just surprised as how gullible we really were.

[inok]

Ну, должно же быть хоть какое то развитие сюжета

Сильная статья. Произвела впечатление. Плюс ему.

[Eric007]

alex, ну чего ты испугался?... Лично тебе трахаться в задницу никто не зарещает, что в Америке что, в России.
Или ты за детей ратуешь?

[alex korolev]

• dc
• miami

NYT Pick


I am amazed that this op-ed would be generating such positive responses. How dare the leader of Russia, who's human rights record leaves much to be desired, have the nerve to lecture the United States and the American people about moral standards. Under Putin's leadership, civil liberties and the right to voice opposition to the government are the worst since Russia became a democracy. This is who everyone is praising? I don't really see what difference it makes who launched the attack. Everyone knows it was the Syrian government, but isn't getting rid of the weapons more important than who launched them? Anyone wondering why Russia is against military action? Perhaps to protect their own interests. Let's get some responses here from people more educated on the topic.

• Bill in Tennessee
• Knoxvillle TN

NYT Pick


With all due respect to Mr. Putin (and I am saddened to say that my respect for Putin exceeds that of my respect for Obama right now), what the phrase "American exceptionalism" means is not that our people are special and exceptional...not at all. Our founders knew that men are not angels... thus they instituted a Constitution and a way of self-governance that was unlike any other on earth at that time, a representative republic that had no king, no caste system, no aristocracy, but all men equal under the law and having natural rights granted, not by government, but by our creator. Such rights, not coming from government but being endowed by our creator, were therefor "inalienable"... they could not be rescinded by government because they do not come from government. This, in my opinion, is the source of American exceptionalism; not that our people are superior but that our way of self-governance and equality under the law is superior.

Nations that choose to model themselves after the American experiment also are exceptional, the relationship between the governed and those who govern has now been raised to a new, exceptional level. Mr. Putin, I hope your own nation can one day rise to the level of self-governance that was put forth in Philadelphia, July 4, 1776. Future generations will then speak of Russian exceptionalism.

• J Young
• Seattle

NYT Pick


Am I the only one who finds it strange that Putin asserts the rebels were responsible for the chemical attacks at the same time he suggests that the Syrian government turn over its chemical weapons arsenal? Kind of a head-scratcher. As is the fact that so many commenters express gratitude for his counsel and seem utterly unaware of the hypocrisy entailed in his lecturing the US on equality and the rule of international law.

Are we completely post-history these days? Even recent history? For goodness' sake, this man represses his own people and arms international conflicts on a regular basis, apparently without compunctions. To take his words at face value is inane. He is clearly playing (and preying) on American fears and on our vast naivete regarding world affairs. Make no mistake, this solution serves his ends. The fact that it may serve ours as well does not make him a friend.

• Daniel Cuhat
• Cedar Falls, IA

NYT Pick


The sophistry of the argument presented by Putin is appalling. He claims that a U.S. strike would weaken the legitimacy of the United Nations, while Russia stands ready to use its veto power to shield the Syrian government against any U.N. resolution. He makes the astounding claim that rebels would condemn their own family to a horrible death, without providing any evidence for it. He professes his desire for a peaceful settlement, in spite of the fact that Russia supplies the Syrian government with advanced weapon systems. And he signals his distaste for the idea of American exceptionalism, while he was never shy himself to promote Russian nationalism. Yet, Putin should see plainly that the strong stand of the U.S. against the use of chemical weapons is part of what makes this country exceptional.

[Eric007]

Сильная статья. Произвела впечатление. Плюс ему.

Американские журналисты вроде не оценили. Или я заблуждаюсь?... По моему, они эту статью восприняли в штыки.

[alex korolev]

• Chris Bartley
• New Haven, CT

NYT Pick


"It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation." This coming from the man who stages photo-ops of himself being exceptional. Not be cynical but let's first admit that this is an attempt to redefine the debate. To codify the sense that American intervention would simply be another example of unchecked American aggression. Putin and Assad would like you to believe that there's no moderate opposition. There are many opposition groups so let's be clear, this is not a choice between Assad and terrorists. Putin is now at the helm of this debate is able to redefine reality. The reality is that there are moderate groups. The reality is that a minority-controlled government is unsustainable in perpetuity. The reality is that we've lost our leverage. Rhetorical pressure brought Syria and Russia to the table but we've lost any ability to further influence the debate because quite frankly a paper tiger has no leverage. As we wait for the world to decide what to do we're dithering into irrelevance. Strength comes not from having to use force but from know that when the going gets rough you WILL remain moored to your principles and do what you have to do. Sadly, from an international stand point we now look feckless. Putin and Assad really want a political end to this? I'll believe it when they publicly identify opposition groups with whom they'd be will to negotiate. Until then, words are that...

• Kevin
• New York

NYT Pick


It seems to me that Mr. Putin has misunderstood the notion of American exceptionalism. I don't think Mr. Obama meant to say that as individuals we are uniquely exceptional. And while there are dark stains on our national history, there are unique and exceptional examples as well.

In his essay Mr. Putin corrrectly notes that during WWII the USA and Russia were allies in defeating the Nazis. But it is what came afterward that matters, and is to me, the epitome of this notion of American exceptionalism.

The USA did not subjugate, denegrate or punish our former enemies. We did not ship thousands of former enemy soldiers off to a gulag. We did not destroy the idea of the Japanese Emperor, we did not bomb Kyoto. We annexed no territory. We exacted no reparations. When the fighting was over we worked hard to turn our former enemies into our friends and to help them get back on their feet. No other people in the history of the world have ever behaved such toward their vanquished foes.

It seems to me that it is that moment in history which America keeps trying to recapture; to reiterate a national desire to save others. Perhaps that moment will never come again, and that in trying to do so we have blundered badly, but it is an exceptional idea.

• Sept. 12, 2013 at 7:11 a.m.
• Recommended61

• Viktor
• Pittsfield, MA

NYT Pick


As a person that spent 3/4 of my life in the USSR-Russia I have to tell that the history of that country and even its existing state do not make me optimistic in evaluating its actions and intentions. The Communist regime killed many millions of their own citizens, and Chechen war took about 100,000 lives- fully comparable with deaths in Syria.
But, unfortunately, Mr. Putin is right in one, the most important thing: the USA believes in its exceptional role and the force to instill it on the world. America has only 5% of total world population and cannot be a world gendarme forever. Worse, most of Americans, and even our government, do not understand deeply, or at all, national, religious, ethnic, historical and cultural specifics of other nations and tribes, so many of US international actions are useless or even counter-productive. That Russia also got defeated in Afghanistan is not a good solace to our situation in Afghanistan and Iraq.
I do not believe that any limited strike could change the Syria situation to better, rather opposite. So, we have to be more cautious here and, choosing our actions, work with our nations even we do not like them.

• Sept. 12, 2013 at 7:11 a.m.
• Recommended69

• Russian-American
• New York

NYT Pick


From the perspective of a Russian-American

1) Assad slaughters his own people and virtually every world leader condemns him except for Putin, because of their cosy relationship.

2) The UN tries to pass a diplomatic resolution but Putin constantly blocks it.

3) Then the UN tried to pass a humanitarian resolution, and Russia... you guessed it.

4) Assad gassed his own people (UN report just proved it), and Putin defends him.

5) The U.S. decides to step in to protect civilians from chemical weapons (and of course send a message to you-know-who), and after years of denials and lying to everyone's face, Assad and Putin agree to relinquish the weapons - but only after the U.S. threatened to use force.

6) Putin says he cares by calling for peace, while he continues to support Assad's dictatorship - please tell me, what kind of peace is he calling for?

I agree with Putin when he says we should pursue peace, but don't just talk the talk, walk the walk.

And how stupid does Mr. Putin think we are? At the end of the day, he doesn't care about peace; he only cares about Russia's waining influence in the Middle East.

Finally, if Mr. Putin really wants peace, let him start at home: stop jailing and suppressing, journalists and opposition groups; stop the corruption so that my country (Russia) can live up to it's full potential.

Finally, I agree with Obama when he said America is exceptional, because if I was in Putin's Russia I would be jailed for this comment.

Putin = Snake

• Sept. 12, 2013 at 7:15 a.m.
• Recommended140

[wlass]

Американские журналисты вроде не оценили. Или я заблуждаюсь?... По моему, они эту статью восприняли в штыки.

Было бы странно , если бы не восприняли. Я тут уже упоминал, есть мнение, что Путин этой статьей отвлек внимание от Обамы.

Но вообще-то не все восприняли в штыки. Да и комментарии читателей там не только про несчастных геев, как тут Королев пытается представить.

[alex korolev]

• Dan G.
• Virginia

NYT Pick


Before we go patting Putin on the back too much, lets not forget this guy pretty lengthy resume of human rights abuses himself. This is the same guy that has actively worked to take away rights from the LGBT community in Russia and has encouraged their abuse. I don't for one second believe his goal is peace and I would be lying if I said that this Op-Ed has changed my opinion that he's just a thug in a suit. HOWEVER, that doesn't change the fact that in this case I agree with him. As a country we have become too meddlesome and our hypocrisy in terms of foreign policy has become so flagrant that there doesn't seem to be any point in keeping up pretenses. Ostensibly, the whole reason we went to war after 9/11 was to go after Islamic extremists. Now instead, by supporting the so-called rebels (who themselves have committed numerous human rights violations), we are literally supporting the very groups we have been trying to root out for the last 12 years. And on trumped up charges no less. Admittedly, there is not overwhelming evidence either way, but at this point what evidence there is suggests it's more probable the rebels perpetrated the sarin gas attacks than Assad's forces. Yet for some reason (read: to destabilize a country that we can't keep under our thumb) we insist wasting more money on yet another war, all the while our country slowly erodes from within.

• Sept. 12, 2013 at 8:38 a.m.
• Recommended19

• Sergey
• St. Petersburg, Russia

NYT Pick


As a Russian citizen I want to share my opinion about the whole situation and president Putin's letter.
About Syria: the major thing I want american people to know is that we (Russians) are not really the "opposing force" for you. Syria is too much close to our borders. Instability and chaos combined with chemical weapons is a real threat for Russia. As well as it threatens Israel - a friendly country for us. So, we are playing the role of a Good Cop while you are playing yours. The harder you push, the quicker progress we can reach acting together.
About Putin's letter: it seems to me, that Putin is jealous to Obama's Nobel prize for peace! So, he is trying to be a biggest "peacemaker" on the planet. But I believe, he is honest in his intentions to stop killing and save lives, as it is so natural for all of us, human beings.
Please accept my apologize for my "very far from perfect" English! Peace everybody!

• Sept. 12, 2013 at 8:38 a.m.
• Recommended57

• Casey Brown-Myers
• The Great State of Texas

NYT Pick


I guess I missed it when Putin went to the Security Council to get approval for his attack on Georgia during the South Ossetia War in 2008. Putin used cluster bombs to kill Georgians in their apartment buildings and a hospital in Gori without UN approval.

• Sept. 12, 2013 at 9:06 a.m.
• Recommended46

• 
  
  • mtwallet
  • St. Paul
  
  NYT Pick
  
  
  American, "exceptionalism" implies America has been an EXCEPTION relative to the arch of history of states and their systems of government. Since our founding when monarchy and dynastic rule prevailed, through the rise of confiscatory communism, fascism, and all manner of bad, "isms" we have remained an EXCEPTION to this rule of history. A system based on individual liberty is an EXCEPTION. If all nations were and had been such, then Putin could claim Russian Exceptionalism, given Russia has always been lacking in the area of individual liberty. So, "Exceptional" means exception to this rule of history. Yes I believe our system is better, but it does not mean I as an individual am, "exceptional" relative to a Russian. This term should not be misused, or misunderstood.
  
  
  
  • Sept. 12, 2013 at 11:03 a.m.
  • Recommended9
  
  
  
  

[alex korolev]

• Ron D
• Canada

NYT Pick


Dear Mr. Puttin,

It is interesting that you state that you believe the opposition manufactured this crisis and were responsible for the CW attack in order to stir up the wrath of the United States. This argument is totally illogical. Firstly, with your cosy relations with Mr. Assad, it should be easy enough to provide convincing evidence for your view that the CW attack was carried out by the opposition. Secondly, provide convincing evidence to disprove the findings of US intelligence that the Assad Regime were the perpetrators. Without this evidence your words are just rhetoric.

• Sept. 12, 2013 at 11:34 a.m.
• Recommended10

• eka
• georgia

NYT Pick


As a Georgian national I have every reason to detest Putin and his endless hypocritical claims. However I agree with the essence of this article - Americans and its other Middle Eastern cronies (like Saudis) should NOT INTERVENE by any means and should stop aiding "rebels" in Syria. I strongly believe in American people's ability to see this conflict as highly complex, involving wrongdoers and extremists from both government and rebel sides. There is no black and white situation here, the protesters are no Mahatma Gandhis...

I firmly believe intervention should be the last possible option to be avoided by all costs. With no clear evidence unveiling the authors of the chemical bombing plus atrocities these rebels are conducting the intervention is simply unthinkable.

I hope Americans don't really see themselves as exceptional due to US policies, as US foreign policies tend to be detested universally. They're not any more or less special than other nationals, but these blatantly ethnocentric remarks are indeed puke inducing.

• Sept. 12, 2013 at 11:43 a.m.
• Recommended8

• NN
• The USA

NYT Pick


A lifetime* president of Russia is making the case in support of a lifetime* president of Syria and sharing his thoughts about the law and democracy... I personally find this pretty ironic, to put it mildly.
But the mere fact that both of them have had a chance to speak directly to the American public on American TV and in the New York Times even during standoff is part of, as president Obama put it, “what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.” To me, it is called freedom and democracy, and it is worth fighting for.

[Eric007]

Да и комментарии читателей там не только про несчастных геев, как тут Королев пытается представить.

Не, ну Королёв то гей, ему простительно.