Russia announces intention to deploy missiles near Poland
[QUOTE]MOSCOW – Russia will deploy short-range missiles near Poland to counter U.S. military plans in Eastern Europe, President Dmitry Medvedev warned Wednesday, setting a combative tone that clashed with global goodwill over Barack Obama's election less than 24 hours ago.[/QUOTE]
Maybe Biden's 6 month timeline was too long - The international community may test the will of our new President pretty quickly.
[QUOTE=jetstream23;2844823]Maybe Biden's 6 month timeline was too long - The international community may test the will of our new President pretty quickly.[/QUOTE]
Yeah. Saw this earlier on TV. I would think that it's incumbent on Bush to make the initial response and U.S. position. Whether this will be done with Obama's input is another question. I'm not sure how this works prior to a President taking office.
[QUOTE=Jordy;2844827]Yeah. Saw this earlier on TV. I would think that it's incumbent on Bush to make the initial response and U.S. position. Whether this will be done with Obama's input is another question. I'm not sure how this works prior to a President taking office.[/QUOTE]
While it doesn't have to be, it usually is somewhat consultative. Obama is getting his first Secret Intelligence briefing tomorrow morning as the President-elect. The Presidential decisions made in the next 70 or so days will have to be lived with, and presided over by Obama. During a time of transition the U.S. government must appear coordinated and have a consistent message.
This move by Russia is NOT totally unexpected. The timing is somewhat telling though and could be done to catch the U.S. flat-footed. I expect some kind of statement of condemnation or disappointment by Bush but nothing too far out there. We'll see...
Last edited by jetstream23; 11-06-2008 at 12:33 AM.
The Russians are taking advantage of the fact that in the US politically, Bush, as like any President at the end of his term when he is not re-elected is a lame duck.
The Russians are betting that the missiles deployed now during the lame duck period will be accepted by the Obama Administration after it is inaugurated in January. It Obama follows through on his statements to cease or reverse the deployment of ABM's to Poland as they produce tensions in Russo-US relations, the Russians then will be able to declare that they were able to pressure Obama to concede.
They are also hoping to pressure its former republics to reconsider their NATO aspirations; such an Obama decision as above wold convince them that a US led NATO would be an unreliable ally and leave them vulnerable to Russian pressures.
Obama's closest Foreign Policy advisor is Dr. Zbigniew Brzezinski, a man who I studied under and respect very much. He has long been a very staunch advocate of resisting Russia's historic desires to dominate the republics of the former Soviet Union. I think Obama will pay heed to his counsel.
Last edited by Equilibrium; 11-06-2008 at 11:19 AM.
[QUOTE=bitonti;2845233]equilibrium let's face facts we aren't going to war with Russia, so why do they have to listen to any of our requests? That doesn't change for an Obama Presidency or a Bush Presidency.
Russia does what it wants, our moves are limited to complain and watch.[/QUOTE]
I don't know why you would want to go to war with Russia? Do you know that engaging into such a conflict would put humanity at great risk of annihilation?
If, according to your response, the only choice we have is war or abandonment of our allies and interests, then we as a nation are doomed. All any potential adversary has to do is force our allies to submit and have us abandon our interests while not threatening us directly. then, when the threat becomes obvious, present such a massive military threat as to claim that the cost to us would be too great to fight for our survival.
War is not the answer to Russia's challenge. They also have no interest in seeking a war. Their armed forces are weak and their economy an political system would collapse. Brzezinski nor myself believe that by enabling the former republics to have stable domestic economies and societies will neutralize Russian temptations toward interventions. Álso, there has always been historic tension between Russia and China for influence in Asia- they almost went to war with each other over Russian expansionism in the late 60's. The tensions still simmer under the surface.
If you read Asian political history, Russia has never been in stasis, it has always expanded and contracted and used xenophobia to justify its expansionist policies. They were able to to this by conquering its weaker neighbors. When thier neighbors have been strong economically, politically and militarily, the Russians have been deterred.
We don't have to fight for all these nations, but we have an obligation to ensure that they have an opportunity to guarantee their own self-determination. The stability of Asia and by extension, the world depends on it.
[QUOTE=Equilibrium;2845302] Brzezinski nor myself believe that by enabling the former republics to have stable domestic economies and societies will neutralize Russian temptations toward interventions.[/QUOTE]
In other words, this is never going to end? Or is China's rise going to be the great equalizer?
[QUOTE=RutgersJetFan;2845318]In other words, this is never going to end? Or is China's rise going to be the great equalizer?[/QUOTE]
1st I made a typo, Brzezinski and myself [B]agree[/B] on creating policies to help these nations achieve domestic and economic stability.
Rutgers, this has always been the situation in Asia. China and Russia (and Japan up until 50 years ago and Turkey until the 18 century) have long competed for strategic political dominance of the landmass. The only times that this did not seem to happen was when one power shrank (China until recently Century and the collapse of the Soviet Union) or one's power was so preponderant none of the others challenged it (The Soviet Union and pre-17 century China)
Strategically, right now Russia and China are on two different trajectories, Russia's influence has long been in decline as China's has increased. Russia is trying to stop the fall with increasingly aggressive policies, while China, anxious to avoid tensions is just waiting for it while lobbying the Eurasian nations with economic incentives. The challenge for the US is to not allow either to dominate the landmass. The ability to accomplish this policy is to allow the smaller nations in question to have internal stability to allow them to pursue their independent interests without heavy Russian or Chinese influence.
Tensions in international politics never go away. In the US, we are so accustomed to resolutions to fights, disputes or crises- we have legal judgments, shaking of hands, personal forgiveness and the passage of time to end all disputes. Bu tin international relations, crises only end with the end of a war, the submission of one faction or as a reflection of the relative power between the nations in question (i.e. each country is sufficiently powerful to to raise the cost of escalating tensions).
[QUOTE=bitonti;2845483]that's a great personal attack but do you have an idea?
equilibrium changes Henry Kissinger's diapers and he doesn't have an idea?
do you have one smart guy?[/QUOTE]
Its not a personal attack pal. But laying down and letting Russia do what they want is not the answer. As with any threat there is a line drawn somewhere. When that line is crossed there will be consequenses. We treat it like we did any threat against us or our allies in the past. They dont want war as much as we do. But sitting back and letting them do what they want as you said...is not the answer.
By the way your theory that the market got a boost because Obama was going to named president is working out well for you. Since he has been OFFICIALLY elected the market is down almost 800 points in a day and a half of trading. Lol.
[QUOTE=sec.101row23;2845514]Its not a personal attack pal. But laying down and letting Russia do what they want is not the answer. As with any threat there is a line drawn somewhere. When that line is crossed there will be consequenses. [/quote]
like war? you mean war right? that's my point. We aren't going to war with Russia, if anyone has any REALISTIC idea's im all ears.
By the way your theory that the market got a boost because Obama was going to named president is working out well for you. .[/QUOTE]
it wasn't my theory and the first post happened before the polls closed, before the exit polling was available and DIDNT have the word Obama in it.