AC,

The United States Bill of Rights stands in protection of
the individual against the capriciousness and overwhelming
power of the state. Their Constitution has guaranteed the
individual certain fundamental rights and protections. Their
laws are based on the principle that law serves the individual,
not the state, and that state political interests cannot
outweigh the interests of the individual, who must stand in
law as a free man.

In contrast, V.I. Lenin made it clear that, in his political
philosophy, law has one primary goal: "A law is a political
measure, it is politics." No Soviet authority or communist
leader has abandoned this concept.

It has been applied in
the territories "liberated" by the Bolsheviks during the
October revolution. In the captive nations occupied by the
Red Army during World War II, and in the lands won by military
force or "wars of liberation" in Asia, Africa, the Far East,
and the Caribbean.

The American Revolution was fought to establish a man's right
to liberty and to restrain the power of his rulers. The
American Revolution thus created a concept of law which was,
and is, foreign to the system resulting from the Bolshevik
revolution in communist controlled lands. The distinction is
one between freedom, liberty, and the right to the pursuit
of happiness as opposed to the interest, control, and domination
of the state over the individual.

Lenin's perception of law
is so repulsive to the legal traditions of Western democracies,
that they have long been complacent in the belief that the
specter of Lenin's concept of law was confined to the sphere of
communist influence and control.

The conceptual differences between democratic legal traditions
and totalitarian communist systems which use law as a political
weapon are so great, that it is inconceivable that the two
systems would work for their mutual benefit in any matter
involving international political issues and human rights.

You claim that there are free elections - and that Russia
has changed today? How many dissidents and journalists and
politicians who oppose Putin
are still alive? And how successful are anti-government
demonstrations in Moscow?

Armchair critic, you have my thanks, you insulting rant saves me from ever having to consider anything you say as worthwhile,no one posting here is more anti communist than me,however like more than half of America I will not remain blind to Trumps very real danger to democracy, are you related?or just another he has conned?

Toni,

" Surely nobody needs more nukes than is required to entirely reduce the other side's country to molten glass?"

Absolutely agree. But that wasn't the point what was being made. The maintenance of these arsenals has a cost. For the US that cost is a rounding error in their defence budget. For Russia, with an economy smaller than Italy's, its a significant cost.

Hence, Russia would like to reduce their overall numbers but can't do it unilaterally without loss of face and/or perceived strategic power. Consequently Putin would like to negotiate a reduction in the overall numbers.

Now, if Trump were in Putin's pocket the way the TDS crowd claim, he'd facilitate those negotiations. Even the TDS crowd would find it hard to criticise that...well probably not. (When you have people like rache whose main form of argument is 'Trump is a fool because I said he's a fool and that proves he's a fool' then the actual facts no longer count).

That such negotiations aren't even mooted (should) be seen as another (of many) examples that Trump isn't in the least beholden to Putin. But that'd be tooooo logical for the TDS crowd.

Hi Foxy,
I respect that you have taken the time to write a lengthy response.
I must ask though, and don't take this the wrong way; do you think I am not aware

AC,

I've only got your posts to go on.

Yet more proof that Trump is completely obedient to Putin...

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/07/20/pentagon-announces-200m-in-military-support-for-ukraine-as-it-fights-russia/

Because Putin really really wants Ukraine to have a better military.