President Vladimir Putin's New York Times Puff Piece - No Compassion Just Lecture
Shame on our US Congress for letting the Syrian genocide fall into the trap of domestic quarreling. Now, as a result of the US Congress not having the benefit of an anti-genocide lobby, paid legal help for Syrian civilians, their legislative failure gave way to a New York Times lecture on world leadership from the Russian President Vladimir Putin. He speaks like he's the mythical partner of Snow White's nemesis. You remember the Snow White egotist who said, "Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the best leader of them all?". Well, that evil witch in the Snow White fairy tale could be Putin's partner; or, maybe, his fictional (or not so fictional) mentor.
Russian President Vladimir Putin accomplished something with his egotistical lecture to Americans in The New York Times. Congratulations to The New York Times! Putin's op-ed lecture has certainly brought international attention to your newspaper's website and that's a very good thing. Otherwise, however, the lecture itself is a puff piece intended to get Putin's name on the front page of international news. Too bad Putin didn't have a fish to kiss where his name is in the op-ed by line.
Most disturbing in the lecture Putin gave us was his complete lack of compassion for the Syrian civilians who were killed in the Sarin gas attack on August 21, 2013.
Although Republicans are now self-righteously outraged about Putin's audacity, giving the US a lecture in The New York Times, the fact is, the lack of support for President Obama's retaliation initiative caused this unexpected reaction from Russia's leader.
Undoubtedly, Putin writes with smooth apologetics about the Syrian crisis:
"Relations between us have passed through different stages. We stood against each other during the cold war. But we were also allies once, and defeated the Nazis together. The universal international organization — the United Nations — was then established to prevent such devastation from ever happening again."
But, this cunning is "touché", when he writes:
"It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan 'you’re either with us or against us'.”
Well, President Putin has no business speaking about American interventions, when Russia has basically annexed Syria for their own greedy ambitions to control energy from Syria's natural gas pipeline.
Most disturbing is the lack of compassion President Putin provides for the dead Syrians who were killed by Sarin poison gas. This omission undermines President Putin's premise in the op-ed column. If, as Putin says, it's extremely dangerous to see Americans as "exceptional", then he should lead by giving up his "mirror, mirror on the wall" egotism and do something, quickly, to remove chemical weapons from Syria.
Meanwhile, Putin used America's freedom of speech and the press to give President Obama a chance to regroup on the Syrian crises. Putin's puff piece was surely good for The New York Times, but he needs to demonstrate how "God's children" need compassion.
Russian President Vladimir Putin accomplished something with his egotistical lecture to Americans in The New York Times. Congratulations to The New York Times! Putin's op-ed lecture has certainly brought international attention to your newspaper's website and that's a very good thing. Otherwise, however, the lecture itself is a puff piece intended to get Putin's name on the front page of international news. Too bad Putin didn't have a fish to kiss where his name is in the op-ed by line.
Most disturbing in the lecture Putin gave us was his complete lack of compassion for the Syrian civilians who were killed in the Sarin gas attack on August 21, 2013.
Although Republicans are now self-righteously outraged about Putin's audacity, giving the US a lecture in The New York Times, the fact is, the lack of support for President Obama's retaliation initiative caused this unexpected reaction from Russia's leader.
Undoubtedly, Putin writes with smooth apologetics about the Syrian crisis:
"Relations between us have passed through different stages. We stood against each other during the cold war. But we were also allies once, and defeated the Nazis together. The universal international organization — the United Nations — was then established to prevent such devastation from ever happening again."
But, this cunning is "touché", when he writes:
"It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it. Millions around the world increasingly see America not as a model of democracy but as relying solely on brute force, cobbling coalitions together under the slogan 'you’re either with us or against us'.”
Well, President Putin has no business speaking about American interventions, when Russia has basically annexed Syria for their own greedy ambitions to control energy from Syria's natural gas pipeline.
Most disturbing is the lack of compassion President Putin provides for the dead Syrians who were killed by Sarin poison gas. This omission undermines President Putin's premise in the op-ed column. If, as Putin says, it's extremely dangerous to see Americans as "exceptional", then he should lead by giving up his "mirror, mirror on the wall" egotism and do something, quickly, to remove chemical weapons from Syria.
Meanwhile, Putin used America's freedom of speech and the press to give President Obama a chance to regroup on the Syrian crises. Putin's puff piece was surely good for The New York Times, but he needs to demonstrate how "God's children" need compassion.
Labels: President Obama, Sarin, Syria, The New York Times, Vladimir Putin
posted by Juliana L'Heureux | 3:49 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home