I transcribed Putin's portion. Here they are together.

JOHN SIMPSON: Western countries almost universally now believe that there’s a new Cold War and that you, frankly, have decided to create that. We see, almost daily, Russian aircraft taking sometimes quite dangerous maneuvers towards western airspace. That must be done on your orders; you’re the Commander-in-Chief. It must have been your orders that sent Russian troops into the territory of a sovereign country – Crimea first, and then whatever it is that’s going on in Eastern Ukraine. Now you’ve got a big problem with the currency of Russia, and you’re going to need help and support and understanding from outside countries, particularly from the West. So can I say to you, can I ask you now, would you care to take this opportunity to say to people from the West that you have no desire to carry on with the new Cold War, and that you will do whatever you can to sort out the problems in Ukraine? Thank you!

VLADAMIR PUTIN: Thank you for your questions [to John Simpson]. You mention that Russia played its part in the development of tensions that we are seeing in the world. Russia did play its part, in the understanding that it is standing up for its national interests- more firmly in so far as the situation calls for it. We are not attacking anyone, in the "political sense" of that word. We are not invading anyone. The disdain our Western friends have comes from the fact that we are doing just that: standing up for our national interests. It does not come from us initiating something that instigates these tensions in the world. Let me explain.

You mentioned our aviation. Geostratetic aviation, that is. It is known to you that, Russia, in the 90's halted completely (as did the USSR) any strategic aviation in the "further afield regions of patrol" i.e. not in the closer abroad (far away territories vs. central to Russia). We halted such activity completely. U.S. geostrategic aviation however, with nuclear weapons on-board, they continue to encircle us. What for? Who are you concerned about? Or why are you threatening us? We continued with the non-patrol, year after year. It is only since about 3 years ago that we restarted aviation patrol further abroad. Which party is the provocateur here? Is it us?

We have only 2 military bases abroad. They are in areas of known terrorism dangers. One in Kyrgyzstan, and only after rebels from Afghanistan started operating in that territory. We were asked to be there by the Kyrgyzs authorities. Akayev was President then. The second one is in Tajikistan, also on the border with Afghanistan. It is even in your [American] interests to know everything is calm there.

U.S. bases on the other hand are all over the world and you are telling me that I am the aggressor? Have you any common sense? What are the U.S. forces doing in Europe, including nuclear weaponry?! What business have they got there?

Listen to me...our military budget, while increased slightly from last year, in the dollar equivalent is about $50 billion. The military budget of the Pentagon is almost 10 times that amount. $575 billion, I think Congress signed off on. And you're telling me I'm the aggressor here? Have you no common sense at all? Is it us putting our forces on the border of the U.S.? Or other states? Is it NATO, or who, that is moving their bases close to us? Military infrastructure!

It's not us. Does anyone even listen to us? Or try to have some kind of dialogue with us? The repeated answer we get is 'mind your own business,' and 'each country can choose its own security measures.' Very well, so will we. Why is the same forbidden to us?

And finally...on the anti-ballistic missile defense system. Who was it that exited from the treaty that was vital to the entire system of international security? Was it us? No. It was the States. In a one sided way they simply withdrew from the treaty. Now they are threatening us, turning their missiles toward us. Not only from Alaska, but from Europe too: in Romania, in Poland...we are right next door! And I am the aggressor here?

Do we want a fairer relationship? Yes we do, with our national interests taken into account. Both in matters of security, and in economics. We held talks with the WTO [World Trade Organization] for 19 years. We agreed to many compromises. We proceeded on the understanding that the WTO conditions are set in stone upon joining and then...I won't get into the Ukrainian question today. Of course, I consider my position to be the just position, while our Western friends are in the wrong, but we will leave that for the purposes of this discussion.

So we joined the WTO. There are rules. In contravention to them, and in contravention to international law, sanctions have been imposed on the Russian economy. This is illegal. Is it us that's in the wrong again? We want to develop normal relations in the sphere of security, in the fight against terrorism, in the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons, we want to work together with you on threats such as drug trafficking, organized crime, the spread of infectious diseases, including Ebola. We want to work together with you. As well as in the economic sphere, so long as you want that too.

The question of me invading a sovereign country and taking parts of it over, we won't address that now.

Foreign dictator who has literally MURDERED all political opposition, put into affect anti gay legislation and shit down free press being cheered by American cucks. You people are truly sad.

This is really profound. I will have to share it with some peers in the US even though they'll probably buy into the next propaganda anyways.

He's an idiot.

Well if there are credible cited sources to back up Putin's claims...then it makes the states once glossy shine, even more dull.

So he's basically saying: Hey, if you guys are doing this stuff, so can we!

That's not a valid argument.

Very well put together points.