Does Putin only have yes-men for advisors, or does he have staff that give contrary opinions?

Let’s forget about good and evil for once and simply ask the question: is Putin a smart and thoughtful man? Are we better off viewing his behavior through the cloud of our emotions? If you were in his shoes, would you employ smart and capable henchmen, particularly if confronted by the power and reach of the United States? Does anyone believe Putin is actually in the same mental category as Trump?

I guess you haven’t seen him burning down the boss of the intelligence service some days ago.
He only has da men.

@HP In my opinion, Putin is far more dangerous than Trump. Trump seeks affirmation and attention but he was not an autocrat or a psychopathic monster. He was just a jackass. Putin has only yes men, he has gotten away with incursions before and he thinks he has this under control. If this does not go as planned as we are seeing now it actually creates an even worse situation. Putin is close to losing his authority and that will make him unpredictable. This is not good.

@rebbel
Here is the video of that exchange
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o9A-u8EoWcI
He is surrounded by yes-men.
Anyone who was not, would get to taste polonium.

He is surrounded by yes men. Anyone daring to say no gets a poison cocktail when they least expect it

I think I’m getting ready to smell a Russian troll

@ragingloli You don’t believe Putin has smart men from which he welcomes opinions other than his own? I’m not asking you if he wants those opinions publicized or acted upon against his will but whether you believe such men and opinions are listened to and considered?

Dah, or more accurately, Duh!

@HP
I believe the video speaks for itself.
What I am seeing is a man so scared of his boss’ reaction to his words, that he timidly tries to find the right ones as to not trigger his ire, which eventually leads him to accidentally slip, that the annexation of Donetsk and Luhansk regions was planned from the start, and the so called recognition of independence just a front.
So no, I do not believe that Putin welcomes opinions differing from his own, at least when it comes to strategic goals.

Again, he might not want his laundry dried in public, but do you believes he refuses to listen to or weigh counsel counter to his own?

He might listen to different opinions on where to place his battallions for best effect, but when it comes to strategic goals, it is clear to me he does not consider opposing views, for example “Let us not invade Ukraine”.
Remember all the talks with western leaders to get him to not invade.
It was all a big charade, because none of it mattered.
Putin invaded right when western intelligence agencies said he would, with merely a week’s difference. Clearly he did not listen to or weigh their “counsel”.
And in general, someone can be both smart and thoughtful, and still be compromised by their emotions, their ego, their base impulses and their ideology.
Both Hitler and Stalin were intelligent and thoughtful. They would not have risen to power otherwise, but look how that turned out in the end.

Do you believe he may have been “counseled” “we better invade Ukraine before NATO can get there”? Then ask yourself, which is most likely to close with the end of the world——the seizure of Ukraine before NATO is entrenched or the attempted eviction of NATO once it is in place? Do you suppose these things might have been discussed?

@HP How many ways and how many times do you want @ragingloli to answer your question? I’m pretty sure he has clearly stated his opinion.

OK What’s your answer? And is loli a he?

MAD is still in place. Both the colonies and Russia have each on their own enough nuclear weapons to sterilise the planet several times over.
The colonies are no threat to Russia’s sovereignty.
As a defensive pact, NATO is not a threat to Russia’s sovereignty.
None of its direct non-NATO neighbours are a threat either.
He knows that.

Except maybe China.
If you think about it, that is likely why he plays nice with China (because they actually might be mad enough to pull the trigger), and antagonises the west, as he thinks he can push them around with little consequence.

If it is Ukraine’s resources he wants, for the “prosperity of Russia”, he could get them through peaceful relations and trade agreements. But of course Russia’s prosperity is not something he actually cares about. The rampant corruption and poverty in his country, and the concentration of wealth among a small group of oligarchs attests to that.
So really, if he had rational goals, the invasion of Ukraine is not rational.

No, what his goal is, is the reestablishment of the Soviet Union, probably under a different name, for his own personal glory, and so that he can leave his mark on history.
Hence his ludicrous demands of “security guarantees”, which prominently featured the demand that NATO remove all troops from former soviet states, current NATO members included, so that he would have an easier time conquering them later. (Of course, after fomenting rebellion by seeding and funding insurrectionists like in Ukraine’s separatist regions, which, lacking NATO forces, would have an easier time toppling extant governments and installing pro-russian puppet dictators like Belarus’ Lukashenko, who would then initiate the countries’ withdrawal from NATO, opening the countries up for either vassalisation, or outright annexation)
And the real answer to the question, which course of action would have the least chance of ending in global nuclear fire, is neither invading Ukraine before NATO admission, nor invading Ukraine after, but to not invade at all, and instead establishing peaceful relations and mutually beneficial trade agreements. That would have been the “rational and thoughtful” course of action.
Which he did not take, because in the end, he is not.

Do you sincerely believe Russia has no grounds for regarding the motives of the colonies with suspicion? Have you looked at a map or globe of U.S military bases recently? Do you believe Putin might view the breakup of the Soviet Union with the same skepticism as Lincoln did when the “colonies” erupted into secession? How does one defend and deify Abe and relegate Putin to demonhood? Do you believe there are legitimate grounds for the Russian view Putin as evil and corrupt yet still a patriot?

See above.

There’s no reasonable going back to a Soviet Union. Not as long as the West has all the prosperity and all the money. Everybody knows this, which is why the leadership in virtually every former Republic is following Russia’s lead in selling off the resources of their respective countries, then confiscating the profits to hide in the West. The former Soviets FULLY understand capitalism at its roots, and functionally exhibit its naked mastery to the fullest. And in the case of Ukraine, Russia gave the West the open choice of exempting Ukraine from NATO or facing the wreckage and economic ruin of the place. And when those Ukranian refugees start piling up on YOUR border we can discuss again who was right.

1. It is not a choice, but an ultimatum.
2. NATO does not force countries into itself. It is up to countries to choose to apply for membership.
3. Therefore, that ultimatum, that threat, was directed against Ukraine.
4. It is the same threat that Putin has just recently thrown against Finland and Sweden. If they try to join NATO, they will face “consequences”. Ironically, the invasion of Ukraine has caused Finland/Sweden to now fast track their application to NATO, after being historically against it.
5. The EU fully expects millions of Ukrainian refugees, and has opened its borders for them. They don’t even need valid passports.

My thinking is that Putin made some really piss-poor assumptions when he started his operation, and that lack of forethought and anticipation is starting to bite him in the butt.

This doesn’t mean he can’t (or won’t) overcome them, but on a macro level, things are not roses and butterflies for Vlad.

Back to my original point – if he had someone in the room that could throw out advice and objections, Putin might have planned a better operation.

No It’s going to cost the Russians dearly. Who wants a wrecked basket case for a neighbor? But for a nation whose history is defined by invasion from the West, wreckage will always be preferable to U,.S. surrogates at its border and armed to the teeth.

It doesn’t matter. Putin rules by fear and I’m sure some respect him, but fear is always in the front of their mind. So it doesn’t matter how smart they are if they are afraid of displeasing him in any way. Their tactics become ineffective because either they try to lead him in a way thats not obvious and hope he properly deploys their plans because it makes him look clever, or they just agree with everything to stroke his ego, too afraid of overstepping. A great leader leads with the knowledge that they don’t know everything and they don’t knee cap their advisors with fear and suspicion. Putin is former KGB. I think he is as paranoid as Trump and easy to kill anyone that he thinks may want his power. He was once a sly fox but now he’s more of a rabid fox. Like Trump the more he got away with the more he wants and damn be the consequences.

@HP “US surrogates at its borders armed to the teeth”. Are you referring to Ukraine? Surely Putin’s forces are the better armed and it is Putin’s army that has moved into Ukraine. And remember, Ukraine voluntarily relinquished its nuclear weapons in 1994.

@flutherother People keep saying that but Ukraine shares a border with Russia, it would be foolish. Nuclear war would be bad for Russia.

He did however just put Russians on nuclear alert. Hopefully, this means he is going nuts and his generals will finally step up and just take him out. I guess he really does hate looking bad. Big baby.