Buzzflash
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Mixx it!
RedditRussia is flexing its muscle in central Asia, and the Obama administration had better pay attention.
Today's Wall Street Journal headlines: "Moscow Moves to Counter U.S. Power in Central Asia." It cites as evidence, quite correctly, two major steps by Russia:
Russia is reasserting its role in Central Asia with a Kremlin push to eject the U.S. from a vital air base and a Moscow-led pact to form an international military force to rival NATO -- two moves that potentially complicate the new U.S. war strategy in Afghanistan.
Together with Russia's war against Georgia last summer, and the more recent Russian muscle-flexing over gas pipelines that transit Ukraine, the Russian actions in central Asia reflect a no-nonsense message to President Obama that Moscow expects major changes in US policy toward Russia -- and that Moscow is prepared to play hardball to make sure it happens. In addition, in another corner of the former Soviet world, Russia and Belarus are creating a joint air defense system, too.
The central Asia base is the US air base at in Kyrgyzstan, established at the start of the Afghan war in 2001, when the Bush administration bullied its way into central Asia on the pretext of fighting the War on Terror. The Manas air base has been crucially important as part of the US air war in Afghanistan, and losing it could severely weaken the US effort there. To persuade Kyrgyzstan to oust the Americans, the Russians agreed to provide the country with a $2 billion loan, $150 million in direct aid, write off $180 million in debt, and build a $1.7 billion power plant for the electricity-starved nation.
Notes the Journal:
The loss of the Manas base would be a major blow to the escalating U.S. war effort in Afghanistan. In 2008, 170,000 American personnel passed through Manas on their way in or out of Afghanistan, along with 5,000 tons of equipment."We have contingencies, and it's not fatal, but there's no way around the fact that this would be a real blow," said a senior Pentagon official. "It could also leave us more dependent on Russia, which is not a place we'd like to be."
The Russians have offered to support the US war effort by allowing NATO to ship fuel and supplies over land from Europe to Afghanistan. That's become more important as the Taliban shuts down supply lines through Pakistan and over the mountainous border into Afghanistan. But it also would give Russia great leverage over the US-NATO war in Afghanistan.
At the same time, as the Journal notes, Moscow announced the formation of a rapid reaction force, jointly with former Soviet states:
Russian paratroopers are to form the core of the new military force, which is planned to be about 10,000 men. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said the force will be ready "to rebuff military aggression," fight terrorism, drug trafficking and organized crime, and handle natural and technological disasters."These are going to be quite formidable units," Mr. Medvedev said. "According to their combat potential, they must be no weaker than similar forces of the North Atlantic alliance."
The AP reports what happened at the meeting of the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization:
Russia sought to strengthen its security alliance with six other former Soviet nations Wednesday by forming a joint rapid reaction force in a continuing effort to curb U.S. influence in energy-rich Central Asia.The summit of the Moscow-dominated Collective Security Treaty Organization came a day after Kyrgyzstan said it would end the U.S. lease of an air base that supports military operations in Afghanistan. The eviction of U.S. troops would mark a victory for Moscow in what it considers its historical backyard.
Russia, Armenia, Belarus and four Central Asian nations - Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan - agreed Wednesday to set up a joint rapid reaction force. The force is expected to have about 10,000 members and function under a central command, replacing the existing force, which has 3,000. It is not under unified command.
The move would strengthen the military dimension of the alliance, which has served mostly as a forum for security consultations. A Kremlin adviser said Russian paratroopers would form the core of the force.
Russia's envoy to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, said Wednesday that Kyrgyzstan may host some of the newly formed rapid reaction forces at the base now leased by the U.S.
The Russia-Belarus deal is also reported by AP:
Russia and Belarus will create a new military system to monitor and defend their airspace, the Kremlin said Tuesday - strengthening cooperation between the two uneasy allies who are deeply suspicious of U.S. plans to put a missile defense shield in Europe.The deal reflects the former Soviet neighbors' mistrust of Western intentions. It also reflects their shared opposition to NATO's expansion into former Soviet turf and U.S. efforts to build missile defense sites in Belarus' neighbor Poland and the Czech Republic.
Obama ought to be paying attention not only because Russia can make or break US efforts to negotiate a deal in Afghanistan, but also because Obama needs Russia to help persuade Iran to find a solution to the conflict over Tehran's nuclear program.
Share this article
Robert Dreyfuss
A chronicle of America's adventures in foreign policy and national security.
RSS
They probably just want us to cut a deal and kill the missile system in Poland and Czechoslovakia.
The old barter method....going back to the Jupiters in Turkey in 1962.
Posted by Mask at 02/05/2009 @ 09:16am
How 'bout that ... Russia behaving in its region almost the way the US behaves towards the Caribbean & Latin American nations ... however with fewer Russian invasions.
Posted by sloper at 02/05/2009 @ 11:05am
Or Russia is moving, ever slowly, to reconstitute some of its old ...territories and appears to have no fear of Obama or his potential reactions..which probably will include a willingness to sit down and negoiate as we are shown the bumbs rush door out of the country..
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 11:14am
Why are we surprised? Wow what a revelation. Maybe we will rejoin the world of diplomacy.
Posted by julien38 at 02/05/2009 @ 11:25am
Schumer Is Criticized By Prague, Poles, Romanians Op-Ed Is Called 'Hard to Believe' By ROSS GOLDBERG, Special to the Sun | June 6, 2008 http://www.nysun.com/national/schumer- is-criticized-by-prague-poles-romanians/79466/
'Senator Schumer is coming under sharp criticism from the government of the Czech Republic and from Polish-American and Romanian-American leaders in America after writing an op-ed piece in the Wall Street Journal suggesting that America should accommodate what he called Prime Minister Putin's "dream of eventually restoring Russian hegemony over Eastern Europe."
Diplomats and community leaders who read the Journal article in response to inquiries by The New York Sun said they were taken aback by the suggestion by the New York Democrat that America should try to gain Russia's backing for tougher sanctions on Iran by abandoning NATO plans to build missile defense sites in Poland, Romania, and the Czech Republic.'
The NOOSE begins to tighten. Georgia was the start. Operation Enduring Freedom? Not by a long shot. For a taste of what it is like to be dependent on Russian beneficience, check out the stories on the gas crisis in Ukraine this winter.
"Obama ought to be paying attention not only because Russia can make or break US efforts to negotiate a deal in Afghanistan, but also because Obama needs Russia to help persuade Iran to find a solution to the conflict over Tehran's nuclear program."
At what cost Mr. Dreyfuss? So, Israel's safety (read monopoly over nukes) is more important than former Soviet satellites that we spent billions and billions and billions of dollars to free?
Horsecrap!
Posted by OneVote at 02/05/2009 @ 11:30am
Or Russia is moving, ever slowly, to reconstitute some of its old ...territories and appears to have no fear of Obama or his potential reactions..which probably will include a willingness to sit down and negoiate as we are shown the bumbs rush door out of the country..
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 11:14am | ignore this person | warn this person
Or maybe a little horsetrading - Russia gets the Baltics back and a coveted pipeline route as well as reestablishing the Paldiski nuclear sub base and control over the Baltic Sea in exchange for noninterference in Afghanistan.
Wonderful "Cold War" type intrigue......the wet dream of our political and military elite, and of course, justification for escalating military spending.
You got it JM. My money is on your hypothesis.
Posted by OneVote at 02/05/2009 @ 11:40am
well, gee...if we had not been distracted by iraq, perhaps we could have largely concluded our mission in afghanistan and been on the way out or already out by now.
who knows? one revelation of the disasterous results of incompetance of the mushmouth-satano-aynrando-fundyvangelist interregnum after another continues to pop up.
but hey folks...if russia wants to get belligerent in its own backyard with the cooperation of her former republics...
what are we really really really gonna do? what CAN we do?
better to cozen up to the bear beware playing too close to his den...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/05/2009 @ 12:16pm
And who can blame Putin for taking any of these steps! American instigated NATO aggression in the form of missiles to be placed in two former Warsaw Pact nations and the support given Georgia by both Bush while in office and Obama during the campaign respecting Georgia's invasion of those two pro-Russian enclaves last Summer left him with no choice.
The pursuit of neo-con/Israeli interests is clearly at the heart of these aggressive steps. To the neo-cons, Russia had been at best neutral in their drive to emasculate Iran, something completely unacceptable to their grand strategy, so she must be either neutralized or kicked into submission. Since Israel couldn't possibly achieve a result like that on its own, the neo-con coup running the Bush regime and AIPAC interests operating prospectively within the Obama campaign saw to the United States acting as Israel's proxy, now an all-too-obvious pattern. The problem the United States is having with Russia is entirely a problem Israel is having with Russia and simply shouldn't be an American problem at all. Putin is doing only what a responsible Russian leader should do in these circumstances: Resisting. Are you ready to go to war with Russia, a nuclear power of the first rank, for the sake of Israel? Ask yourself.
Posted by john lowell at 02/05/2009 @ 12:51pm
what are we really really really gonna do? what CAN we do?
better to cozen up to the bear beware playing too close to his den...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/05/2009 @ 12:16pm
We are perceived as weak and Obama will increase that perception as he demonstrates a softness to talk anytime, anywhere, with anyone...which..almost everywhere, is perceived as weak and in some areas as a precursor to surrender...on the battle field or in influnce..see Armyjihad pronouncements after Obama said he wants to talk...Armyjihad starts laying down his preconditions to talk...and declares victory, where as in the past years since Carter the Iranains were given a hard stance..a position of strength,with no comprimise in interstws, even in perception..but thats is gone now...we should sharpen our plows, as we might need them down the road.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 1:05pm
There have been comments in this magazine against the expansion of NATO into Russia's sphere of influence, and this is the main cause for this dispute. As to the missile defense issue, tank traps would be more useful, as the former members of the Warsaw Pact are more likely to face a ground invasion rather than a missile attack . Certainly, questions about Spheres of influence has been subject to debate in the countries around Afghanistan between Russia on one side and possibly Pakistan and India as "heirs" of the British Empire. The "Great Game" continues with different players. The U.S. has not, historically, been a player in the region, except to cause the former Soviet Union some distress in Afghanistan, and, more recently, as a response to 9/11. For ordinary Americans, any interest in Afghanistan will disappear with al-Qaida. U. S. governments have a tendency to think they can fix everything in the world, and the world sometimes suffers from the delusion that we can fix everything. This can create problems. Certainly, it is in everyone's national interest to help, if possible, to resolve any conflict between the nuclear armed countries of India and Pakistan. As to Iran, the U.S. played with the big boys during the Cold War, I am not overly concerned if they have nuclear weapons, missiles, or satellites. We have more! The best way to prevent countries from wanting or using nuclear weapons is to reduce tensions between countries through diplomacy. Send Mitchell in to have a quiet chat!
Posted by P. J. Casey at 02/05/2009 @ 1:11pm
Does anyone really care what the Wall Street Journal's opinion is on central Asia?
It's no secret that Putin has for years been working to reestablish Russia's influence in what is considered its historical sphere of influence, and that Russia is making grand strides in reconstituting its military, in part as a reaction to Bush administration foreign policy in the region and globally.
So this action in the "Stans" is hardly surprising. And the timing furnishes an additional advantage: it sends a powerful message to the new administration that Russia does not intend to tolerate any further encroachment in its traditional sphere, politically or otherwise, or any other meddling in its affairs in general.
Obama should be focusing on partnering with Putin instead of trying to intimidate or undermine him. He is not easily intimidated.
Posted by jackwells at 02/05/2009 @ 1:17pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 11:14am
Where as Russia was terrified of the President who said he "looked into Putey-Pute's soul".....right?
Posted by Mask at 02/05/2009 @ 1:21pm
Posted by Mask at 02/05/2009 @ 1:21pm
Compare Russia's world behaviors...and watch it and lets revisit the question in 4 or 8 years from now.....then compare...
Who cares what politicians say...it is what they do that is the measure...
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 1:29pm
Obama should be focusing on partnering with Putin instead of trying to intimidate or undermine him. He is not easily intimidated.
Posted by jackwells at 02/05/2009 @ 1:17pm | ignore this person | warn this person
'January 19, 2009, Kabul, Afghanistan - Russia is ready to cooperate on defense matters with Afghanistan, the Afghan president said Monday. The announcement coincides with increasingly public tensions between Afghan and Western officials, as well as Russia's heightened efforts to assert itself on the international stage.
In a letter, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said cooperation on defense issues would "be effective for both countries and also effective for maintaining security in the region," Afghan President Hamid Karzai's office said in a statement.
"As a friendly government to Afghanistan, Russia is ready to offer its cooperation to an independent and a democratic Afghanistan," the statement quoted Medvedev as saying.'
Excerpt: veteransforcommonsense.org
Looks like Karzai has beaten us to the punch.........
Posted by OneVote at 02/05/2009 @ 1:34pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 1:05pm | ignore this person | warn this person
i just look at the power ratio, the spread out nature of our forces and the economic turd sandwich we are currently chomping.
and i don't think we can continue, especially if the big bear starts throwing its weight around in its own backyard.
actually, a raproachment with the russkies that would lead them to become involved (they are no friends of islamic fundamentalism) in the region again...might...not...suck too much...
but i agree about our "fix all the problems" with every craphole whose world we rock.
heck...wanna get all the terrorists together in one place so we can periodically blow them up?
let the taliban return to afghanistan if the afghani's wont stop them, then tag team strike with the russkies (and maybe) the iranians every time they act up.
or try to suck iran and russia into that craphole and bug out...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/05/2009 @ 1:40pm
Who cares what politicians say...it is what they do that is the measure...----Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 1:29pm
Oh? And what has Obama DONE that makes you think Russia wouldn't take him seriously?
Remember, your standard..."It is what they DO that is the measure".
BTW, odd now that Dubya is "a politician". Is that some attempt to pretend he never existed????....heheh
Posted by Mask at 02/05/2009 @ 1:42pm
The problem the United States is having with Russia is entirely a problem Israel is having with Russia and simply shouldn't be an American problem at all. Putin is doing only what a responsible Russian leader should do in these circumstances: Resisting. Are you ready to go to war with Russia, a nuclear power of the first rank, for the sake of Israel? Ask yourself.
Posted by john lowell at 02/05/2009 @ 12:51pm | ignore this person | warn this person
Resisting....and waiting patiently for the spoils of our failed war I might add. And yes, Putin's opportunism is not the problem, it is our incredible foreign policy stupidity that gives him leverage for such opportunism. Back at home, he is looking pretty darn good to the old guard right now, and neo-nationalists to boot.
Posted by OneVote at 02/05/2009 @ 1:45pm
or try to suck iran and russia into that craphole and bug out...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/05/2009 @ 1:40pm
That would be interesting..but in the end the two would just share the place...
see Poland in 39..Germwan/Russian split...
..after all the Russians know the lay of the land in Afganistan...they have been there "helping" before.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 1:57pm
'I read bin Laden's writings and I take him at his word. He and his followers hate us because of specific aspects of U.S. foreign policy. Bin Laden lays them out for anyone to read. Six elements: our unqualified support for Israel; our presence on the Arabian peninsula, which is land they deem holy; our military presence in other Islamic countries; our support of foreign states that oppress Muslims, especially Russia, China and India; our long-term policy of keeping oil prices artificially low to the benefit of Western consumers but the detriment of the Arab people; and our support for Arab tyrannies who will do that.'
‘Our Country Is in Trouble' An ex-bin Laden hunter on why the U.S. hasn't beaten Al Qaeda.
By John Barry | Newsweek Web Exclusive Feb 13, 2008
Excerpt: Interview with Michael Scheuer
It is going to very interesting indeed to see how our "new partnership" with Russia is going to be perceived by the Muslim world. Not too well is my guess.
Posted by OneVote at 02/05/2009 @ 2:04pm
Mask,
"Oh? And what has Obama DONE that makes you think Russia wouldn't take him seriously?"
Simple puts forth the image so far, at least, that everything is negoiable..
...which is a straying from the American norm as I understand it...
That being...one never talks or goes to meet a foreign leader unless something is already agreed to, signed and meated out on paper..the rest is PR.
Obama statements that he would meet anyone anywhere...never hurts to talk..all sound good and fine...but the rest of the world may not see and interpret things the same as an unexperienced community organiser who wants to be successfull to a population back home of progressives..a natural Socialist or marxist ally,
...as compared with a conservative(and all previous US presidenst and amins of both partys) who starts out not trusting those same types based on 100 years of their behavior..
you trust but verify ..as opposed to I trust you...I do need to verify cause I want to show you I trust you...
As it pertains to "watch what I do.." model..Obama is off to an inexperienced and bumbling start begining with his cabinet to the "stimulus pork spending bill"...
Off to a fast start loses its admiring quality as you run off the road at the first curve.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 2:27pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 2:27pm
And did he "put forth that image" by SAYING something, MAASCH...or DOING something?
Posted by Mask at 02/05/2009 @ 2:55pm
And did he "put forth that image" by SAYING something, MAASCH...or DOING something?
Posted by Mask at 02/05/2009 @ 2:55pm
At this point, since he has not been on the job...saying he would meet....
but watching what he is doing now may give the weekness i magae or assumption and the Soviets have always pushed first and apologised later...
In all fairness we will have to wait..but I would refer you to all the Iranian statements as an example...
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 2:58pm
but watching what he is doing now may give the weekness i magae or assumption and the Soviets have always pushed first and apologised later...----Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 2:58pm
And what is he DOING now...specifically?
(BTW, there aren't any "Soviets" anymore, Prof. Groeteschele.)
Posted by Mask at 02/05/2009 @ 3:14pm
Russians...I know...they have changed .
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 3:32pm
BUT...that ALSO means you consider the abortion clinic protesters "nut cases" and "loons"....doesn't it???
Posted by Mask at 02/05/2009 @ 3:06pm
Specificly,
Has three of his picks to run the HIs governemnt so far, if they were you and me...would have already been in court, fined, garnished, or in jail...
Has Armyjihad laughing at him..
Has the congress trying to spend us into the next millenium with a bankrupt program that even apparachiks would evny in it's scope.....with no one really readingit the fine print as they add their own personal pork...
I bet even the Russians know this will not work, since they have been there..broke and spending from central commitee to special depts of favor..and no growth possible.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 3:37pm
The world needs a fresh beginning in international relations, based on the UN Charter, which is a great recipe for the harmonic coexistence of different systems and powers. NATO must be dissolved, as its original purpose disappeared 18 years ago. There should not be any other military alliances, but a clear restatement of every single country to respect and observe the UN Charter, which is the Constitution of the internatiuonal community, and as such is mandatory and binding on all, small and powerful alike. A special ceremony should be organized for this purpose, during which the dismantling of the existing, outdated alliances should be announced. Military bases installed outside the borders of any country should be dismantled. By sticking to a militaristic viewpoint and to the stupid notion of the "War on Terror", the US under Bush strained its relations with almost all the rest of the world, including Russia. I just hope that Obama will adopt a completely new approach. He seems to be timidly doing this when he calls for a drastic mutual reduction of nuclear warheads with Russia. Next thing should be to press Israel to sign the NPT and to revise the agreement to supply nuclear technology to India, a nuclear power that refuses (like Israel) to sign the NPT.
Posted by Onca at 02/05/2009 @ 3:50pm
Posted by Onca at 02/05/2009 @ 3:50pm
You have forgotten 2 very imporatnt items...
1. You forgot to have the UN set a time where we all hold hands and sing, KUMBIYA.
2. Where would you like to be buried?
For the world never has existd this way and never will...but it does feel good...I would try to join a progressive group somewhere and apply for funds...I am sure you will get it...call it a job created to bring paece to the world..
after all...look what the Save the PLanet loons have done with a little imagination and MSM...ALGORE himself made over $ 100 million...green money, of course...could take lessons from him in your endevours.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 4:02pm
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 4:02pm
Would that be the UN whose "17 resolutions" we had to uphold at the cost of $650 Billion in debt and 4100+ dead GIs?
It seemed so IMPORTANT to you guys back in 2002-2003?!??!?!??
Posted by Mask at 02/05/2009 @ 10:07pm
see Poland in 39..Germwan/Russian split...
..after all the Russians know the lay of the land in Afganistan...they have been there "helping" before.
Posted by YourJomamma at 02/05/2009 @ 1:57pm | ignore this person | warn this person
yeah, cept that afghanistan is no poland. poland was a civilized member of the modern world. afghanistan is one of the last great strongholds of the barbarians, and always has been and...
so go iran and russia! play the great game! our time as "britain" may be nearing its whimpering end.
oh well, we tried.
i really do think that our military presence in that part of the world is something we should seriously reconsidered. cost analysis...hornets nest of angry barbarians and even in a modern world far away.
i DO think we need to put resources into REAL homeland security.
Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/06/2009 @ 12:04am
I'll bet every time the word "Ruskie" appears in WSJ or any other major newspaper in the US, Mcdonald Douglas' stock goes up.
Posted by koroviev at 02/06/2009 @ 01:27am
I'll bet every time the word "Ruskie" appears in WSJ or any other major newspaper in the US, Mcdonald Douglas' stock goes up.
Posted by koroviev at 02/06/2009 @ 01:27am | ignore this person | warn this person
LOL...
Posted by ibbleblibble at 02/06/2009 @ 08:44am
Posted by koroviev at 02/06/2009 @ 01:27am
Well, actually...
1. It's "McDonnell-Douglas"
2. They got taken over by Boeing in 1997.
But as noted above with JOMAM/MAASCH...we still got a few oldsters who think in terms of "Soviets" for the Russians. Old Reaganites who supported Dubya, but who "forget" how Bush thought he could "see into Putin's soul" and called him "Putey-Pute". (A liberal Dem tried that and it'd be Limbaugh fodder for 25 years!)
Posted by Mask at 02/06/2009 @ 09:10am
RAPTOR!
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/06/2009 @ 10:03pm
Bush thought he could "see into Putin's soul" and called him "Putey-Pute". (A liberal Dem tried that and it'd be Limbaugh fodder for 25 years!)
Posted by Mask at 02/06/2009 @ 09:10am
Yeah, you can make lite of the situation, but Putin and later on Medevd(sp?), had 5 years to undermind the war in Afghanistan, but they didn't because knew what Bush was capable of.
So tell me, why did Russia wait until Obama got in office to muscle in on Asia? My answer would be: they're doing to him what Nikita Khrushchev did to JFK - intimidate him!
Posted by ACook at 02/06/2009 @ 11:17pm
The Russians obviously didn't get the "Obama is now president of the US" memo.
We are no longer under the control of hawkish thugs.
Russia VOTED for Obama in the WORLDWIDE electoral count.
They better get with the program.
We've CHANGED!
Posted by bleedingheart at 02/07/2009 @ 07:45am
gotta love this story - check it out!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7875372.stm
Posted by liamers at 02/07/2009 @ 08:45am
No, no, no---you guys don't get it at all.
Reagan made the Russians (at that time, the Soviets) irrrelevant, once and for all, defeated, chastened, semi-Asiatic legions sent back somewhere east of the Urals, militarily neutered. Reagan made the Evil Empire tremble in their boots, dontcha know. Just by staring them down at the Berlin Wall.
Uh, yeah, that's right, had nothing to do with the fact their economy couldn't effectively produce toilet paper at the time and was ready to cave in at the slightest wind gust. Or that smartassed Vatican with its commie-pinko ally, Solidarity (always like to throw that one out to our rightie anti -trade -unionists here, since Ron loved 'em.)
Gone forever was thee concept of spheres of influence and delicate balances of power, said the Reaganites of the time. It was all our baby now.
Posted by schnellerheinz at 02/07/2009 @ 3:25pm
Ah, yes, the pure MYTHOLOGY that was Ronald Reagan.
Posted by schnellerheinz at 02/07/2009 @ 3:34pm
Russia is in a much worse economic situation than we are what with oil prices under $50 a barrel. I would not really worry too much by anything they are saying right now. Give it a few months or a year. This may be a two prong fake - tweak the new administration and play to Russian domestic politics.
Posted by pyeatte at 02/07/2009 @ 7:29pm
<i>Posted by schnellerheinz at 02/07/2009 @ 3:25pm </i>
It's difficult to know where to start, with this interesting combination of strawmen and just bad arguments. All right, here...we...go.
1) Was the Soviet economy about to cave in the 80's? Well...it seems like the answer is...no. Why? Because they had an awful economic system since their beginning and still managed to not only trudge along but build a pretty substantial military on top of it. I guess they might not have had enough money to feed their people...wait, they never did that anyway. The collapse of the Soviet Union required actual stimuli (such as, being forced to compete with us).
2) Was Solidarity liberal? Yes. Does this have any real impact? No.
3) Who had any expectation that the Soviet Union would collapse on its own in the 70's? No one. Who thought it might just go on for another century? Lots of people. Who thought it could be brought down? A President elected in 1980. Which prediction ended up correct?
And one preemptive move against a "point" made before by a completely different poster. Did Reagan have Alzheimer's? Yes. Did it show up before his second term? Not really, no. Is there strong evidence that he knew about Iran-Contra? The jury is actually still out on that one. Is mocking him for Alzheimer's anything other than obnoxious cruelty? No.
Posted by Thrawn at 02/08/2009 @ 11:53pm
Solidarity had no impact. Gotcha.
:)
Posted by schnellerheinz at 02/09/2009 @ 12:04pm
Part 1-of-2
We, America, are once again late to the starting line. It's our National Malaise to react to crisis 20 to 30 years after crisis has begun. In fact we became acutely aware of this crisis in 1974. The Oil Economy, with its attendant Oil Wars, Oil Profiteering, Oil Corruption, Oil Lobbying & Oil (National) Debt, must be brought to an end. This has little to do with Afghanistan, except that as long as we remain 'in Country' we continue to waste precious resources we must conserve for purposes of effecting this conversion. The Petroleum industry and the Military Industrial Complex will do anything in their power to prevent the Green Conversion. It's in their (short term) best interests to maintain the status quo and their quarterly balance sheets. America's top Five suppliers of oil are: Canada, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Venezuela & Nigeria. The next Five are: Iraq, Angola, Algeria, Kuwait & Brazil. This has nothing to do with Afghanistan and all the other 'Stans'. We need to avoid further entanglement in this theater as we stabilize Iraq and draw down on the hemmoraging of money and life our imperial adventurism has wrought. In the final analysis, this area is the Orient. These resources are the Orientals'. Fighting this losing battle will only sap us further.
Posted by Fathom at 02/09/2009 @ 4:07pm
Part 2-of-2
We need to get out; assure the World we aren't going to dive into another 'adventure' any time soon, and tend to our own garden. To this end we must pass a stimulus package as follows: 1 Trillion Dollars, 80% spending, 20% tax cuts, 50% of the 80% ($400 Billion) spent on converting America to an entirely Green Economy. Our foreign (Chinese, &c.) creditors will tolerate floating us for the Ten years it will take (Eight if we do it right) to complete the transition to a self-sustaining economy. They know it's in their best interest, as we will then have the capital to meet our existing (National) debt obligations and our population will have the capital to consume their products. This is what needs to be done to stabilize the World Economy. Europe is well ahead of us in the push to Green. I'd truly hate to see the U.S. descend to Second-World status. If we allow panic and lobbyists to dictate our course, that's what will occur. It's time to put a weather-eye to the horizon and sail our Ship-of-State out of this storm of our own creation, back into friendly waters. This is within our grasp. It's time America emerged into the 21st Century from our present Pipe Dreams of Empire. The way to lead the World is by example; not at the barrel of a gun.
Posted by Fathom at 02/09/2009 @ 4:09pm
no, reagan should be mocked for being a fraud.
Posted by frosty zoom at 02/09/2009 @ 4:30pm
President Obama must radically change the way within which Washington understands its leading role in the world. From the authoritative monocracy, the enforcement of military power, the disregard of the international institutions accompanied with fictions of the type «the coalition of the willings», the unconcealed cynicism of having a double standard, US must head towards a multipolar world, based upon cooperation, international law and on the functioning of the institutions of the international community. In order for the planet to move to the next day, US have to cooperate closely and on an equal basis with Europe and they have to face Russia as a strategic partner, setting aside the Cold War syndromes. Especially for Russia, US must abandon the rationale of "encirclement" with the bigger expansion of NATO and with hostile strategies, as the one that has taken place in South Ossetia, last summer. There was a genocide committed by the Saakashvili regime. It is a story of horror, with US supposed partner being the guilty! US don't need such partners: all these do represent a discredit for this great country! If you want to see what has happened last year in Caucasus, visit the web site www.whitebook2008.com. It's really breathtaking…
Posted by ilias at 02/09/2009 @ 9:05pm