FMBI Posted July 8, 2008 Report Posted July 8, 2008 Link This has been the most transparent offensive move since (as Putin compared it to) the Cuban missile crisis. I especially loved the part about basing the interceptors in Lithuania. Why base something in Azerbaijan (where it would block any Iranian offensive attempts) when you can base it in Lithuania (where it would be useless)? Really gives you that good old-time happy feeling, doesn't it? Also, beyond the mere fact that this will alienate and threaten Russia (and it's a very clumsy attempt to dominate the new EU states), Bush apparently isn't considering that, unlike in the 90s, when Russia was scared to death that we would perform an invasion using conventional forces, they now have the edge in eastern Europe. Naturally, they won't use nukes, but those SS-26s can be used for non-nuclear war as well. Also, they have 3 potential forward bases for any assault, if they decide to actually carry out an attack - Kaliningrad, Serbia, and Belarus. The Czechs seem to think they'll be safe since they're not bordering Russia, but I'm not so sure. Ultimately, although Russia doesn't strike me as dumb enough to cross Polish or Slovakian airspace, they could easily justify a missile attack or two on the radar sites.
AstroProdigy Posted July 8, 2008 Report Posted July 8, 2008 I'm waiting for the day Europe drops NATO for the useless US tool that it is and forms its own defense organization that's just as effective. That's pretty much the only way to get the US to quit trying to control Europe. If given a choice between a partnership with Western Europe or the US, Eastern Europe would pick Western Europe who they will have to live with over a dying empire. A European defense organization would also naturally be more accommodating to Russia and could conceivably be joined by Russia one day.
Bak Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 the comments under that article are priceless. missile defense ftw
NBVegita Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 Anyone who thinks the cold war actually ended in the 's is simply gullible. I personally don't see where this missile defense system (on either side) is even being considered/talked about. With all of the weapons we have aimed at each other and the minor effect this missile system would have, this is simply the U.S. poking at Russia with a big stick, hiding behind NATO support, hoping they poke back with a bigger one, which would be a big problem for Russia.
AstroProdigy Posted July 9, 2008 Report Posted July 9, 2008 Russia thought the Cold War was over, but the US didn't like peace and prosperity so it helped rape Russia of its resources in the 90s and then demonized Russia after 9/11 despite the clear common ground for oil interests so now Russia is an adversary again. We've been trying to make sure Russia under no cir!@#$%^&*stances could ever be a threat again. That's why we insisted on the Soviet Union's collapse and tried to turn all the other post Soviet states into US client states and completely collapse Russia to the point where its economy was in ruins and could pose no threat. Unfortunately it recovered and we're adversaries for it. This happened entirely as a US construct as is this bull!@#$%^&* that Bush is pulling now.
FMBI Posted July 9, 2008 Author Report Posted July 9, 2008 I could go on and on about this, but the simplest way to put it is that the old wisdom - "Russia is nothing outside of the cities, even though it's always been a rural society" - isn't as true as it used to be. Russia's actually started investing more in local agriculture, and, of course, Siberia's resources - so while it's still an urban-rural colonial system, it isn't as bad as it was. Also, Russia has hundreds of billions of dollars worth of foreign exchange (not all in dollars) that it's investing in infrastructure, finance, and, of course, their military. It's still recovering from the worst parts of firesale capitalism, but as far as everyday life goes, Russia isn't as bad anymore.
Recommended Posts