As the audience went from laughter to applause, Vladimir Putin responded to the question that he had just read out on a televised debate in Russia. What was the question? Quite simply it asked if the Russian leader believed that President Obama would save him and throw him a life buoy if he were drowning. The question was all prepared to win Putin the people’s hearts; adept skills of spin-doctoring and creative marketing. But it was the answer that won the Russians over more than anything on the Q&A session broadcast on RT television network.
The English translation provided by RT said: “In addition to intergovernmental relations, there are some personal relations. I don’t think I have close personal relationship with Obama. I think Obama is a courageous and good person and he would for sure save me.”
Let it be said that President Obama would certainly not save him from drowning. He would more than likely not save anyone from drowning in the true fashion of a political leader. Why would you save someone from drowning? Unless of course they became eternally indebted to you! Except Vladimir Putin would not be indebted to anyone, would he? Politicians don’t get to the top-notch places with the cushy offices and the tea-serving masses that work, scuffling around, vying for favors unless they have knocked a few people off, held their heads under the water as they see them gasping for air. Who gets to the top these days without actually trampling on the underlings that are scurrying around in the dark recesses of the nation? No, Mr. Putin, Mr. Obama wouldn’t save you and nor would you save him. Given half the chance you would both probably look over your should to check if anyone were around, then push the other into the water, knowing full-well that they couldn’t swim a stroke.
Hypothetical altruism is a wonderful thing. Politicians can use it until the cows come home and sit back reveling in the beauty of looking and sounding like the ‘nice guy’. Altruism and politics don’t go hand in hand. It’s self-interest, Mr. Putin that drives the leaders that you are.
There’re hardly grounds for saving either of them today. Given the recent clashes over Syria, the Edward Snowden and the National Security Agency, then the anti-gay question catapulted to the forefront of the Olympics, followed by Crimea and now Ukraine, it’s hardly going to be buddy-system between the two. Now, there is a brewing crisis that will leave thousands as refugees, displaced and forced to move due to partition of the country. Add to that list the fact that Putin sent a Russian jet to fly over a US Navy ship in the Black Sea (a dozen times), just to let them know that they were willing and able. Vladimir Putin complained not so long ago at the chastising patronizing way of talking in the West whenever they mentioned the word Russia. Today, it’s Obama that is looking more like the guy that does the tough talking, but it’s Putin that’s the action man. What happens next? One of them will give in and it’s doubtful that it will be Putin. Just two days ago Putin said that he hoped he would not have to use force, underlining that East Ukraine was once part of Russia. He reminded the world that he has been granted the power by the parliament to use military force if the situation is deemed to need it. In the face of escalation, it very much seems as if this will be the case. He has already donned theMonomakh Cap by referring to Eastern Ukraine as Novorossiya (New Russia, the Tsarist name for that part of the country).
Even Edward Snowden called in to the TV show. “A really sensational, really outrageous video message from a person who revolutionized the world by leaking information to the world about American secret services” was how the call was dubbed by RT as Snowden called in. Lucky he was tuned in, wasn’t it really? The question? “Does Russia intercept, store or analyze in any way the communications of millions of individuals?” Putin’s answer was that the Russian secret services were financially poorer than the US’s and also that they were strictly controlled and guided by the law which forbade that. Nice spin-doctoring by both Snowden and Putin. A little like the question “Are you going to raise taxes”, with the political answer “I have no intention at the present time of doing so” we can easily understand that it’s the “present time” bit that counts the most. Perhaps the Russians aren’t analyzing millions, but billions of communications. Pull the other one, guys, everyone spies.
Just a few days ago the White House issued another statement suggesting that President Obama had tut-tutted and told Vladimir Putin off for escalating the situation in Ukraine.
Admittedly, it was the innocence (if we believe the story to be true, that is) of a six-year old boy that asked the question on RT.
Should either Putin or Obama be saved from drowning? Would you be altruistic enough to throw them a life-line today if you came across them coming up for air? Or would you just let them sink to the bottom?
Originally posted: Putin Would Save Obama From Drowning!