Keep in mind that Bin Laden was responsible for an attack against USA citizens and infrastructure. Putin did a lot of shit to several of Russia’s neighbors (Ukraine is just the biggest target), spied on several countries, but never openly attacked USA territory, citizens or soldiers, nor that of any NATO allies.
If the USA did put a bounty on him, it’s likely Putin and Russia would receive public support from currently neutral countries, because here goes USA playing world sheriff, pretending to own the entire fucking place and ignoring nations’ rights to sovereignty again
SolOrion@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
Because A: putting a bounty on the leader of a nuclear power is drastically different from the leader of a… terrorist rebel organization(I’m not entirely sure what to call al qaeda).
And because B: it would change basically nothing. Putin already can’t travel in most places internationally because there’s an ICC warrant out on him for war crimes. The bounty isn’t going to be relevant in Russia or allied places, and it’s not going to be much of a motivator to an entire government.
Lost_My_Mind@lemmy.world 1 month ago
No no. You got it right.
Makhno@lemmy.world 1 month ago
What’s the difference between that and a government other than the size/capability of violence?
FuglyDuck@lemmy.world 1 month ago
When in doubt, I usually go with “asshole”.
HappycamperNZ@lemmy.world 1 month ago
They were right. Until they won.
NeoNachtwaechter@lemmy.world 1 month ago
He can travel as a proper national leader to all the places he wants to travel (and of course there are places where he does not want to)
SolOrion@sh.itjust.works 1 month ago
Unless he wants to travel to a place willing to enforce the ICC’s arrest warrant. Afaik he’s only been to Mongolia and South Africa since the warrant was issued, and both were criticized pretty heavily for not enforcing it.
Realistically, he’s not going anywhere that even might arrest him.