After watching Putin's legendary performance on the Carlton Tucker interview - and gaining some appreciation of the man's intellect and sense of humour - I'm interested in finding out more about what the man enjoys when it comes time for him to chillax.
Anyone know? Any insights into his favourite films or what TV shows he likes to settle down to after a hard day's graft at the Kremlin?
https://youtu.be/6XCm9SkmaMQ?si=fV4bOphGGLsrpuBW Twin Peaks hehe *sadistic grin*
shareIt is happening again.
shareNotice none of the Democrat rectum lemmings weigh in as they have no idea what to say until their mental masters instruct them.
Dr Shivago would be on there. A great performance from Alec Guinness.
Well . .. I know he enjoys bombing children's hospitals if that helps.
As far as films go, I'm guessing he loves Caligula.
American has bombed far more children's hospitals and everything else than Russia - even including Ukraine. The US killed millions in WWII ( which was more or less justified ), but then went to kill millions in Korea, Vietnam, Laos, and support brutal undemocratic regimes in South American and Africa. We have turned many more democratic regimes into tyrannies than we have the reverse.
shareSo that makes it ok for Putin?
Putin IS the topic of conversation after all.
It's not as if a North Korean victory in Korea would've been pro-democracy. Bloody, yet history has indicated that was a justifiable intervention.
shareI did not say anything about the intervention.
Justifiable in what way? I might remind you that we did not win, and now face a very clever lunatic with very dangerous weapons.
I might also remind you that at the time or the original Kim leader had saved his country from the Japanese and was hugely popular.
All the talk about the rules of war applying to Israel-Palestine, but we broke all the rules ( bombing dams and civilian infrastructure ) and even were prepared to use nuclear weapons.
Thanks for an actual statement of opinion from you. Keep it up.
>Justifiable in what way? I might remind you that we did not win, and now face a very clever lunatic with very dangerous weapons.
And if the USA did not intervene, the entire peninsula would be under the sole control of said "clever lunatic" (not sure what makes you think he's clever though). All Koreans would be subjugated into a one-party dictatorship and personality cult. All of Korea would be like Turkmenistan.
South Korea wouldn't exist, and wouldn't be the US ally and cultural giant that it is today.
>Thanks for an actual statement of opinion from you. Keep it up.
I've given many opinions.
> And if the USA did not intervene, the entire peninsula would be under the sole control of said "clever lunatic"
Let's stick to reality. You cannot retroactively predict the future.
South Korea was a military dictatorship for a long, long time and was very lucky that their junta was civilized enough to give up some power. They could still take over if there was a need, but the blossoming of SK is a beautiful thing to behold. There is not reason to think that any other country given the right circumstances could not follow that path.
US markets and Japan and cheap labor had a lot to do with that, as well as Taiwan. Look at the countries we have embargoed, and then realize it is not the political systems they have which have made the difference, it has been the US threatening and strangling their economies to bring them in line with our global corporate view of the world.
> I've given many opinions.
I haven't seen them, but maybe not so much in your replies and hectoring or me here.
>South Korea was a military dictatorship for a long, long time and was very lucky that their junta was civilized enough to give up some power. They could still take over if there was a need, but the blossoming of SK is a beautiful thing to behold. There is not reason to think that any other country given the right circumstances could not follow that path.
And North Korea is still a military dictatorship.
What states in similar styles to North Korea have followed such a path?
>US markets and Japan and cheap labor had a lot to do with that, as well as Taiwan. Look at the countries we have embargoed, and then realize it is not the political systems they have which have made the difference, it has been the US threatening and strangling their economies to bring them in line with our global corporate view of the world.
And a Communist (Juche) Korea under the thumb of the USSR/PRC would not have had any access to US markets, and would not have gone down the same path. If the US had not intervened in the Korean War, it wouldn't have treated the resulting peninsula under the DPRK like they did South Korea.
>I haven't seen them, but maybe not so much in your replies and hectoring or me here.
My disagreements with you are rooted in my opinions.
> My disagreements with you are rooted in my opinions.
But your comments do not reflect opinions. They are almost all the most open-ended irrelevant tail-chasing BS on MC, like ...
> What states in similar styles to North Korea have followed such a path?
That's when I cut it off with you. Waste of time. You have an opinion underneath that which you are afraid to express, so you ask inane questions.
>That's when I cut it off with you. Waste of time. You have an opinion underneath that which you are afraid to express, so you ask inane questions.
It's a question demonstrating the point: Almost all ex-USSR or PRC aligned states that remained in the wider Russian/China influence are the same. The PRC has not democratised. Vietnam has not democratised. Cuba has not democratised. Laos has not democratised.
I see no reason to think that a united Korean peninsula under the DPRK would be any different.