Ukraine

All of this is just nuts. We need to elect gay guys to President and Prime Minister for every major country. They're secure in their sexuality and don't need to be such macho f&*('s.
What makes you say this? Throughout history, gay leaders have not outshone straight leaders. How many gay leaders can you identify? LoisA lot. Look up "gay leaders throughout history".

There’s not much you can do about things over there. I totally favored the pro-European demonstrations when they started, but the Ukraine is a split nation. Unless there is genocide going on, which I don’t think will happen, I think everybody should stay out of this.
Not sure where I read that, but Russian philosophy, Putin’s philosophy, allows for nothing other. It’s a paranoid philosophy similar to the Roman Empire. You conquer before you are conquered. Russia believes itself to be the savior of the world, protecting it from evil Western capitalism (with which I partially agree). Russia is not Western nor does it ever want any Western ideas. Talking to Putin is like talking to a wall. (Possibly Germany’s matriarch can talk to him, but that’s about it. She’s probably the only person that dude takes seriously, given their pasts, hers in East Germany, his in East Germany.)

All of this is just nuts. We need to elect gay guys to President and Prime Minister for every major country. They're secure in their sexuality and don't need to be such macho f&*('s.
What makes you say this? Throughout history, gay leaders have not outshone straight leaders. Alexander the Great? Richard the Lionhearted? That's off the top of my head, any real look at history is probably going to find many prominent gay leaders. How about Abraham Lincoln? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/sylvia-rhue-phd/a-family-history-provides-more-evidence-that-lincoln-was-gay_b_2169482.html Humans are far more complex than some people want to allow them to be.

What in hell does a leader being gay have anything to do with the Ukraine situation?

I think the US and the EU will rattle its collective sabers, make a bunch of noise, probably impose a few more ineffectual sanctions and then the whole thing will be ignored.
I mean really, what options are there? Large modern military powers rarely (if ever) want to battle other large modern military powers.
Take care,
Derek

What in hell does a leader being gay have anything to do with the Ukraine situation?
LOL, who knows, I just joined in a conversation already in motion.

See post #11 above on page 1. of this thread by Cuthbert.
Occam

That’s off the top of my head, any real look at history is probably going to find many prominent gay leaders. How about Abraham Lincoln?
Ok, I'm calling total BS on this one. This story, because that's what it is has never been corroborated by ANY of his family members including his oldest and surviving son Robert, the only one who actually made it into the 20th Century and none of his personal papers even hint at an actual homosexual affair with Herndon or any other acquaintance for that matter. And believe me that Mary would have been aware of ANY indiscretion on his part, in fact she was intensely jealous of any woman (including Gen'l Grant's wife Julia whom she all but cussed out for "flirting" with him) let alone a man. Most of the supposed "evidence" from this article is purely anecdotal anyway which is why most Lincoln historians give it a wide berth. Show me a CDV of Lincoln and his lover in a lip lock and I'll believe it. That being said, yes there is a former president who might have been gay. Lincoln's predessor James Buchannon, the only Batchelor in the Whitehouse (he used his nice Harriet Lane as first hostess) was considered a "dandy" and may have had a familiar relationship with a former cabinet member. Look up "Aunt Nancy and Miss Fancy" if you're interested. oh, and another gay leader from antiquity, The Roman Emperor Hadrian. He had a male lover. Nero was a crossdresser, and a later emperor, Elagabalus was transgendered. Cap't Jack
What in hell does a leader being gay have anything to do with the Ukraine situation?
LOL, who knows, I just joined in a conversation already in motion. Cuthbert suggested "...We need to elect gay guys to President and Prime Minister for every major country. They’re secure in their sexuality and don’t need to be such macho f&*(‘s." So the thread has taken this odd course. The suggestion seems faulty, to me. I don't know whether all gay guys are not "macho". I suspect some are. A better suggestion along these lines, I think, to limit the influence of "macho f&*('s", would be to only elect females as the leaders of nations.
Ok, I'm calling total BS on this one. This story, because that's what it is has never been corroborated by ANY of his family members including his oldest and surviving son Robert, the only one who actually made it into the 20th Century and none of his personal papers even hint at an actual homosexual affair with Herndon or any other acquaintance for that matter. And believe me that Mary would have been aware of ANY indiscretion on his part, in fact she was intensely jealous of any woman (including Gen'l Grant's wife Julia whom she all but cussed out for "flirting" with him) let alone a man. Most of the supposed "evidence" from this article is purely anecdotal anyway which is why most Lincoln historians give it a wide berth. Show me a CDV of Lincoln and his lover in a lip lock and I'll believe it... Cap't Jack
Next you'll be telling us that Lincoln was not really a vampire hunter.

Sorry to break it to you Tim, but his second cousin’s mother’s husband’s descendant told me just the other day, (we’re related by celestial marriage you know) that Lincoln was actually a WEREWOLF hunter. He has an actual lock of real werewolf hair wrapped in a signed document in Lincoln’s own handwriting to prove it. He tried to sell it on Pawn Stars but Rick turned him down when he demanded a thousand dollars for it.
Cap’t Jack

Cuthbert suggested "...We need to elect gay guys to President and Prime Minister for every major country. They’re secure in their sexuality and don’t need to be such macho f&*(‘s." So the thread has taken this odd course. The suggestion seems faulty, to me. I don't know whether all gay guys are not "macho". I suspect some are. A better suggestion along these lines, I think, to limit the influence of "macho f&*('s", would be to only elect females as the leaders of nations.
I'd question that assumption as well. As for Lincoln, does it really matter what his sexuality was, he was a great President in many people's opinion. If he was also gay that doesn't change his accomplishments unless you think that being gay is somehow wrong.

In an attempt to bring this queerly evolved thread back towards topic, I suspect that it went off-topic based on an assumption that Putin is a “macho f&*{” who is insecure in his own sexuality. (I guess we could reasonably suspect that of a world leader who has pictures taken of himself, shirtless, riding a horse.)
But all that is speculation. We don’t really know if Putin’s actions in Crimea were based on some underlying drive to demonstrate his personal prowess.
But if so, and we can keep him contained for 10 or 20 years (until his testosterone levels naturally decline), we should be okay.

Just a thought - Russia has gone into the Ukraine not only because a large part of the population there is Russian but possibly even more important to them is that they have a major naval base there. The Us would do the same in the Philippines, Okinawa or the middle-east if one the control or access of our military bases was threatened.
I'm not sure most Ukranians would agree with that. Most consider themselves a different ethnic group with different ethnic origins than Russians. They also have their own language, which, though it has similarities, is different from Russian. The Ukranian language is the recognized language of Ukraine. Ukranians were treated badly, deported and and starved by Soviet Russians, some calling it a Ukranian holocaust, called the Holodomor. Many Ukranians are not ready to forgive ethnic Russians for their treatment and would be unwilling to allow the Russians to govern Ukraine. I think they would fight fiercely any attempt by Russians to take over their country. Lois

Okay this is silly, but I heard this the other day on a cooking show my wife was watching.
The guy in the Ukraine (I don’t remember his name and couldn’t spell it anyhow) who was thrown out of office and ran off to Russia when all this got started is now known as Chicken Kiev. :ahhh:

Lois:

I’m not sure most Ukranians would agree with that. Most consider themselves a different ethnic group with different ethnic origins than Russians
I don't disagree with that, and I know Hitler used the same arguments for his "expansion plans" I don't like what the Russians are doing. The main point I was trying to make is that the Russian's view access to these ports as critical to their national security and are taking action to ensure their control of them and the area around them. I know the U.S. would do and have done the same when it perceives its national interests are threatened. How many dictators have we supported over the years? How about overthrowing the elected leader of Iran and setting up the Shaw, we are still paying for that one. Hopefully the Russian actions will not lead to war, and realistically their is very little we can do about their actions it at this time. We cannot have another Russo-European war with all the nukes rattling around.
Lois:
I’m not sure most Ukranians would agree with that. Most consider themselves a different ethnic group with different ethnic origins than Russians
I don't disagree with that, and I know Hitler used the same arguments for his "expansion plans" I don't like what the Russians are doing. The main point I was trying to make is that the Russian's view access to these ports as critical to their national security and are taking action to ensure their control of them and the area around them. I know the U.S. would do and have done the same when it perceives its national interests are threatened. How many dictators have we supported over the years? How about overthrowing the elected leader of Iran and setting up the Shaw, we are still paying for that one. Hopefully the Russian actions will not lead to war, and realistically their is very little we can do about their actions it at this time. We cannot have another Russo-European war with all the nukes rattling around.
All that I agree with. Lois
In an attempt to bring this queerly evolved thread back towards topic, I suspect that it went off-topic based on an assumption that Putin is a "macho f&*{" who is insecure in his own sexuality. (I guess we could reasonably suspect that of a world leader who has pictures taken of himself, shirtless, riding a horse.) But all that is speculation. We don't really know if Putin's actions in Crimea were based on some underlying drive to demonstrate his personal prowess. But if so, and we can keep him contained for 10 or 20 years (until his testosterone levels naturally decline), we should be okay.
Not that there's any direct evidence, but one of Putin's biggest critics, Alexander Litvenenko claimed among other things that Putin was a child molester. Litvenenko is the fellow who was most likely killed by a Russian agent using radioactive Polonium 210 laced tea who is now being protected by Putin in Russia. http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=18244
Because, shortly before his graduation, his bosses learned that Putin was a pedophile. So say some people who knew Putin as a student at the Institute. The Institute officials feared to report this to their own superiors, which would cause an unpleasant investigation. They decided it was easier just to avoid sending Putin abroad under some pretext. Such a solution is not unusual for the secret services. Many years later, when Putin became the FSB director and was preparing for presidency, he began to seek and destroy any compromising materials collected against him by the secret services over earlier years. It was not difficult, provided he himself was the FSB director. Among other things, Putin found videotapes in the FSB Internal Security Directorate, which showed him making sex with some underage boys.
So who knows to what level Putin's creepiness extends. It's also possible he was involved in state sponsored terrorism in Russia at the start of his political career. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/nov/22/finally-we-know-about-moscow-bombings/
But Putin was unknown to the Russian public. If elections were to take place—and this apparently had yet to be decided upon—his chances were by no means certain. In order for the Family’s “operation successor" to succeed, something would have to occur to boost Putin’s public image and demonstrate his capacity for strong leadership. The invasion of Dagestan by Chechen rebels failed to have the desired effect of arousing widespread anti-Chechen sentiment. As Dunlop’s sources said, more violence was needed to justify a war against Chechnya, which would unite people around the new prime minister. The Moscow Bombings makes it clear, first of all, that the FSB had advanced knowledge that the bombings would take place. As we have seen, rumors of impending terrorist attacks had surfaced as early as June 1999. Even more significant is the fact that a respected and influential Duma deputy, Konstantin Borovoy, was told on September 9, the day of the first Moscow apartment bombing, that there was to be a terrorist attack in the city. His source was an officer of the Russian military intelligence (GRU). Borovoy transmitted this information to FSB officials serving on Yeltsin’s Security Council, but he was ignored. At least one other credible warning of an impending attack was reported to law enforcement agencies in Moscow that same day and not acted upon.
Who's going to stop them? The American superman? Lois
http://i145.photobucket.com/albums/r220/joseph_the_red/Wallpapers/CaptainAmericaWallpaper9.jpg That's him! Lois

Whatever kind of dastardly creep Putin is, he has to have the support of a large bulk of the Russian people. So far, it appears he does. A tongue in cheek, but actual interview of some individual citizens on the Daily Show (during the Olympics) suggests that their ideologies would fit in nicely with those of some of our radical Tea Partiers.