Is Vladimir Putin a better leader than Obama

  • 117 results
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Avatar image for shadowsilver
ShadowSilver

453

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Share your thoughts.

Avatar image for frozen
frozen

40350

Forum Posts

258

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 14

#2 frozen  Moderator

No.

Avatar image for dngn4774
dngn4774

5622

Forum Posts

41

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 22

Um...no. Being assertive doesn't necessarily make you a better leader, especially when you combine that trait with rigging elections.

Avatar image for sc
SC

18454

Forum Posts

182748

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 25

User Lists: 0

#4  Edited By SC  Moderator

Avatar image for erik
Erik

32502

Forum Posts

284

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

War is brewing.

Avatar image for frozen
frozen

40350

Forum Posts

258

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 14

#6  Edited By frozen  Moderator

@erik said:

War is brewing.

No Caption Provided

Avatar image for karazor-el
KaraZor-el

1799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Wtf???. NO.

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

#8  Edited By BatWatch

Putin is not the better leader because he's leading Russia in a worse direction than Obama. I think the direction Obama is taking the nation if disastrous, but Putin is a flat out murderer who is darn near a dictator.

In terms of which leader is better at getting people to do as he wishes, it's kind of apples and oranges since again, Putin is darn near a dictator.

The only quality of Putin I would like Obama to emulate is his strong international image. I don't want Obama invading Crimea, but I would like him to stop drawing red lines and then doing token gestures.

Avatar image for bruxae
Bruxae

18147

Forum Posts

11098

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 6

Of course.

Avatar image for pharoh_atem
Pharoh_Atem

45284

Forum Posts

10114

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 13

#10  Edited By Pharoh_Atem
No Caption Provided

Avatar image for ostyo
Ostyo

14103

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

I'm sure Ukraine thinks so.

Avatar image for russellmania77
russellmania77

17601

Forum Posts

1

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

No, obama has to run a real country

Avatar image for comicace3
comicace3

12438

Forum Posts

1465

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 1

Lana is that you?

Avatar image for callous_adherent
Callous_Adherent

324

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Share your thoughts.

As much as I think Obama is more of the same as Bush, Putin went from a miracle worker with the Russian economy to a petty Gay bashing tyrant who invades countries on pretexes as trumped up as that used in Iraq and bullies the former USSR into kowtowing to his every word.

Avatar image for callous_adherent
Callous_Adherent

324

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@erik said:

War is brewing.

World War 3 is likely never going to happen, Nuclear weaponry means that the moment anyone tries it, mutually assured destruction would mean that nobody would win the ensuing war unless you consider being slightly less radioactive than the other guy to be victory.

Avatar image for makkyd
MakkyD

6989

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#16  Edited By MakkyD

He's a more efficient leader, the rest is subjective.

Avatar image for biteme_fanboy
BiteMe-Fanboy

8951

Forum Posts

454

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#17  Edited By BiteMe-Fanboy

No. He sucks. And the whole Russian tough guy thing is stupid.

Avatar image for callous_adherent
Callous_Adherent

324

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

I'd go as far as to say that hope for Russian liberal democracy died with Gorbachev's Soviet Union, because Yelstin and Putin have certainly done their best to ensure Russia slid right back into authoritarianism.

Avatar image for spitfirepanda
SpitfirePanda

2573

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

In terms of running a nation Putin has Obama beat. Obama is an academic, not a leader.

Avatar image for judasnixon
judasnixon

12815

Forum Posts

699

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

No Caption Provided

Avatar image for superguy1591
Superguy1591

7539

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@batwatch: Arent you supposed to be showing me Obama's defense of radicals in Muslim countries?

@spitfirepanda: In what way is Putin better?

@maccyd: in what way? you guys keep saying he's more effective or better, but youre providing no evidence.

@callous_adherent: Miracle worker? He just sold oil; he didnt do anything special.

Avatar image for callous_adherent
Callous_Adherent

324

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@batwatch: Arent you supposed to be showing me Obama's defense of radicals in Muslim countries?

@spitfirepanda: In what way is Putin better?

@maccyd: in what way? you guys keep saying he's more effective or better, but youre providing no evidence.

@callous_adherent: Miracle worker? He just sold oil; he didnt do anything special.

He hextupled the Russian economy and prevented Russia's impending total collapse under Yelstin's drunken idiocy.

Then he decided he wanted to play at Brezhnev.

Avatar image for erik
Erik

32502

Forum Posts

284

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

@erik said:

War is brewing.

World War 3 is likely never going to happen, Nuclear weaponry means that the moment anyone tries it, mutually assured destruction would mean that nobody would win the ensuing war unless you consider being slightly less radioactive than the other guy to be victory.

... I was talking about this thread.

Avatar image for superguy1591
Superguy1591

7539

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

Avatar image for karazor-el
KaraZor-el

1799

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25  Edited By KaraZor-el

For those of you who think he is better, why dont you go live over there to confirm or deny that he is. Let us know how that goes.

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

@callous_adherent:

Nuclear weapons prevent major international conflicts? The invented of the machine gun said the same thing.

Avatar image for callous_adherent
Callous_Adherent

324

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@erik said:

@callous_adherent said:
@erik said:

War is brewing.

World War 3 is likely never going to happen, Nuclear weaponry means that the moment anyone tries it, mutually assured destruction would mean that nobody would win the ensuing war unless you consider being slightly less radioactive than the other guy to be victory.

... I was talking about this thread.

You could have made that more obvious.

Avatar image for callous_adherent
Callous_Adherent

324

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#28  Edited By Callous_Adherent

@batwatch said:

@callous_adherent:

Nuclear weapons prevent major international conflicts? The invented of the machine gun said the same thing.

There's a reason why there hasn't been a third world war.

And machine guns don't immediately pulverize a nation's civilian base nor are they capable of completely eradicating an entire army a division at a time.

Avatar image for makkyd
MakkyD

6989

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@superguy1591: He did more than just export oil, he reformed and improved a lot of sectors. Turning what was once a bankrupt country 3 decades ago into a world power again isn't as easy as you make it out to be.

Avatar image for dimitridkatsis
dimitridkatsis

3019

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#30  Edited By dimitridkatsis

Guy's a f@cking a$$hole, people are dying and he's asked to stop acting all high and mighty so there can be a solution and what's the king sh?t do? Tha's right he stops importing goods from other countries to show us all how he runs things. F@ck him and his natural gas.

Avatar image for mandarinestro
Mandarinestro

7651

Forum Posts

4902

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 1

Avatar image for callous_adherent
Callous_Adherent

324

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@callous_adherent: Not all modern war weapons are nuclear.

And they'd be irrelevant in a war between Nuclear powers as it'd take only one bomb to blow them away. Then the retaliation starts and before you know it modern civilization is LARPing fallout.

Avatar image for swordmasterd
swordmasterD

2620

Forum Posts

15

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Was gonna post michael Jackson with his popcorn, this is better

Avatar image for judasnixon
judasnixon

12815

Forum Posts

699

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 4

Avatar image for erik
Erik

32502

Forum Posts

284

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

@erik said:

@callous_adherent said:
@erik said:

War is brewing.

World War 3 is likely never going to happen, Nuclear weaponry means that the moment anyone tries it, mutually assured destruction would mean that nobody would win the ensuing war unless you consider being slightly less radioactive than the other guy to be victory.

... I was talking about this thread.

You could have made that more obvious.

Or you could have assumed less? Your assumption makes no sense in the context of this thread.

Avatar image for superguy1591
Superguy1591

7539

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

@maccyd: True, but oil is important.

Avatar image for callous_adherent
Callous_Adherent

324

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@erik said:

@callous_adherent said:

@erik said:

@callous_adherent said:
@erik said:

War is brewing.

World War 3 is likely never going to happen, Nuclear weaponry means that the moment anyone tries it, mutually assured destruction would mean that nobody would win the ensuing war unless you consider being slightly less radioactive than the other guy to be victory.

... I was talking about this thread.

You could have made that more obvious.

Or you could have assumed less? Your assumption makes no sense in the context of this thread.

Given that just about every thread about Putin on the internet leads to wild paranoia about a possible third world war and this is a Putin thread yes, I'd say it makes perfect sense.

Avatar image for pyrogram
Pyrogram

46168

Forum Posts

13113

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 1

@erik said:

War is brewing.

World War 3 is likely never going to happen, Nuclear weaponry means that the moment anyone tries it, mutually assured destruction would mean that nobody would win the ensuing war unless you consider being slightly less radioactive than the other guy to be victory.

Not even remotely true. Not all war is nuclear wtf lol

Avatar image for spitfirepanda
SpitfirePanda

2573

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@superguy1591: While I could list quite a few of the president's failings, I think it's easier to simply say that he isn't leading. President Obama is following crisis after crisis rather than trying to stave them off and prevent them, or at least be on top of them when they happen. Instead he behaves like he expected everything to go his way and he's still in a state of shock that all of these problems are cropping up. Ancient war wisdom says that no plan will survive contact with the enemy. President Obama clearly hasn't heard this or taken it to heart.

Putin, on the other hand, is leading. I don't like his goals or his methods, but he is in control of the situations around him. He has strategies set in place, and backup strategies as well. He knows how to deal with world leaders and he doesn't have a pie in the sky mentality. He does what is necessary to reach his goals, and he's succeeding.

Avatar image for makkyd
MakkyD

6989

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

Avatar image for callous_adherent
Callous_Adherent

324

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@pyrogram said:

@callous_adherent said:
@erik said:

War is brewing.

World War 3 is likely never going to happen, Nuclear weaponry means that the moment anyone tries it, mutually assured destruction would mean that nobody would win the ensuing war unless you consider being slightly less radioactive than the other guy to be victory.

Not even remotely true. Not all war is nuclear wtf lol

The moment a Nuclear power feels it's losing a total war it'll pull out the nuclear weapons. France for example, has the explicit policy that it will use Nuclear force if it feels that any of it's territory is about to be overrun and there's nothing it can do about it conventionally.

Israel will just flat out nuke *everyone* if it's about to be conquered rather than face a second holocaust.

While Britain, America, China, India, and Pakistan may not have outlined their policies as publicly as France has, it's safe to assume that they have similar policies set in place in case they are facing imminent loss.

How trigger happy with nukes are the world powers?

You know the cold war nightmare scenario of the Soviets rolling across eastern europe into the west?

The instant that a single Soviet tank moved across the East German/West German Border France would have nuked every city in Russia and Eastern Europe into ash.

If Brazil invaded the French Guyana tomorrow and France was unable to throw Brazil back to it's borders, they'd nuke Brazil's army and even cities in retaliation until Brazil surrendered.

Russia has a policy in place that if even one nuke is used against it in anger, it will immediately go to full scale nuclear war against the other guy no matter how small the nuke used on them was.

Basically the Nuclear Bomb has ensured peace between the great powers.

Avatar image for dimitridkatsis
dimitridkatsis

3019

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

Putin, on the other hand, is leading. I don't like his goals or his methods, but he is in control of the situations around him. He has strategies set in place, and backup strategies as well. He knows how to deal with world leaders and he doesn't have a pie in the sky mentality. He does what is necessary to reach his goals, and he's succeeding.

What kind of thinking is that anyway, these people are elected to adjust people's financial, social problems etc. not to show off their big patriotic b@lls. That's exactly the kind of thinking that causes problems in the world, it's cool for a fictional supervillain not a real life politician.

Avatar image for pyrogram
Pyrogram

46168

Forum Posts

13113

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 1

#43  Edited By Pyrogram

@callous_adherent: Not true at all. Nobody would retaliate with nuclear warfare because that would undoubtedly cause more pain and suffering upon their country. Being invaded is better than being nuked. No country with any sense of logic would use a nuclear weapon against anybody. In an imminent loss they would not make themselves lose even FURTHER as that's just plain stupid. Sorry, don't see it happening.

Avatar image for batwatch
BatWatch

5487

Forum Posts

274

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 238

User Lists: 1

@callous_adherent:

There are many reasons why there has not been a Third World War and nuclear weapons are but one.

I doubt nuclear war would be started by the Western world, but I can see the Western world going to war and refusing to use nukes. I can also see a place like Iran, who holds little value for life, using them and the rest of the world taking sides.

Avatar image for makkyd
MakkyD

6989

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

@dimitridkatsis: Quoted from Wikipedia: During Putin's first premiership and presidency (1999–2008), real incomes increased by a factor of 2.5, real wages more than tripled; unemployment and poverty more than halved, and the Russians' self-assessed life satisfaction rose significantly.

Avatar image for callous_adherent
Callous_Adherent

324

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#46  Edited By Callous_Adherent

@pyrogram said:

@callous_adherent: Not true at all. Nobody would retaliate with nuclear warfare because that would undoubtedly cause more pain and suffering upon their country. Being invaded is better than being nuked. No country with any sense of logic would use a nuclear weapon against anybody. In an imminent loss they would not make themselves lose even FURTHER as that's just plain stupid. Sorry, don't see it happening.

This is official policy.

If the Communist and Capitalist blocks weren't absolutely certain that they'd be reduced to atomic ash the instant they crossed the border of east and west Germany world war 3 would have happened in the sixties at the very latest.

You may not be able to see it, but the cold war remained cold purely because everyone was perfectly willing to nuke the other guy the instant any formal state of war was declared rather than face occupation from the other side.

Hell the Soviets even planned to; after the nuclear war; keep a reserve of nuclear bombs so they could nuke anyone they saw was recovering faster than they were just so they'd recover first.

Your own country was so ready to nuke Soviet Russia in the event of war that they planned on planting nuclear land mines in west germany and flat out lied about what they were going to put there (they told them that they'd be installing generators) and only called it off when West Germany found out about it.

Mutually Assured Destruction works and was the entire basis of cold war politics and is also the main reason why Pakistan and India (both Nuclear armed states) haven't gone to full scale war with each other since 1971 despite hating every atom of the other's existence.

Avatar image for dimitridkatsis
dimitridkatsis

3019

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#47  Edited By dimitridkatsis

@maccyd said:

@dimitridkatsis: Quoted from Wikipedia: During Putin's first premiership and presidency (1999–2008), real incomes increased by a factor of 2.5, real wages more than tripled; unemployment and poverty more than halved, and the Russians' self-assessed life satisfaction rose significantly.

Well then the whole world should be happy, specially Ukraine.

Avatar image for callous_adherent
Callous_Adherent

324

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

@batwatch said:

@callous_adherent:

There are many reasons why there has not been a Third World War and nuclear weapons are but one.

I doubt nuclear war would be started by the Western world, but I can see the Western world going to war and refusing to use nukes. I can also see a place like Iran, who holds little value for life, using them and the rest of the world taking sides.

Iran isn't capable of MAD, it would be capable of causing severe damage, but not the total destruction of any of the great powers, a position also held by North Korea and pre-Mandela South Africa.

In addition, while the American Anti-ballistic missile theater would provide about as much protection as duck and cover against the nuclear arsenals of any of the serious nuclear powers (the ones with more than a hundred nukes) it would stop the tiny arsenals of rogue states dead in it's tracks.

What is stopping an invasion of these countries however, is that any such invasion would result in a catastrophic loss of human life, vietnam on steroids, and in North Korea's case; Seoul being turned into a sarin gas poisoned crater.

Avatar image for makkyd
MakkyD

6989

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 2

#49  Edited By MakkyD

@dimitridkatsis: Well Putin did save Crimea from the anarchy that is ****ing up the rest of Ukraine.

Avatar image for pyrogram
Pyrogram

46168

Forum Posts

13113

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 1

#50  Edited By Pyrogram

@callous_adherent:

Like "official policy" has never been broken LOL We both know that's the truth. Official policy is broken all the time in nearly every country on a minutely basis at all numbers of level. Let's not try and pretend otherwise. You keep talking about the cold war but this is not the cold war. In the cold war people were TERRIFIED of going into nuclear war. They had so many changes to go to war and they had so many viable excuses.

But they didn't.

No normal country with a logical leader will ever enter nuclear war. It's stupid, and you don't win anything. You lose EVERYTHING.

But people will still go to war normally, as we have done for 100s of years. People have not gone to mass war because we now live in a generation and era were the western powers frown upon war in favor of economical sanctions and such. Nobody wants to fight. Fighting is a thing of the past, empires, all of that, it's meaningless now. Money is the battleground.