My statement about "not offending the Russians" was SARCASM (which should have been clear from the tone of my entire post)...theres your problem lack of understanding.
My point was that the U.S. have been the geopolitical aggressors in the regions, from Russia`s point of view. They don't see your recent movement as the U.S. yeilding to their power, but as the U.S. lowering one of the multiple gun pointing their head.
Russia is unique in it's geography: they don't have any real natural borders. In order to properly defend their territory, they need buffer zone to slow down and slowly crippling an invading army (that's how they have beaten both Napoleon and Hitley).
Unbelievable!! This is the same mantra that Stalin used to attack/occupy (parts of) Finland, the Baltic States, and Poland. has Canada's love of socialism made you a little red under the skin? You give a free pass to current Russian aggression, in the name of buffer zone, with a total disregard for the Independence (and freedom to choose their friends).
Please note that I am not condoning nor condemning Russia for these actions. I am not saying that Russia is treating fairly its client-states, nor that they have a right to oppress these nations.
What I am trying to make you understand is the motivation behind Russia`s action. Wether they are "fair" or not is irrelevant to the discussion at hand; they are acting like this, and this is treathening USA's geopolitical interest (funny: when I argue with people about US's reasons for intervening around the world and acting like you do, saying that you usually have an underlying reasons, they label me as a pro-American Imperialist.)
Now, let's take morality out of the equation, and concern us with the core geopolitics at hand. First of all: Georgia, Ukraine, etc... has, technically, every right to choose their allegiance. But Russia is deeply concerned and feels itself treathened. Are they right or wrong about that? Irrelevant. They feel treathened, and they will act on that feeling by re-creating the chessplay they have played against the U.S. during the Cold War. They have the feeling the U.S. are weak, but you have a bigger economy than you had at your best time of the Cold War, and they cannot hope to match the USSR's GDP.
Ukraine has been the target of intelligence operations since the Orange REvolution. They will probably freely choose to turn away from EU and NATO in the next 5 years, because of Russia's involvement in slandering the Pro-western politicians and backing up the pro-western organisation. It was a textbook intelligence operation. you will probably blame it on Obama's policies when it's gonna happen, but the trend had started ever since the Orange REvolution, because of a simple fact: Right now, Russia has a hundredfold more influence over Ukraine than the U.S. ever had, because of its proximity.
I am not sure about Georgia, however. But then again, the U.S. cannot DO anything about them. As said earlier, Russia has deployed tentacles around the world to upset you, and that gained leverage over you. Such tentacles are expensive, and Russia cannot finance them too much, or too long.
It has been reported in recent days that Iran can field a device now. Can they? I don't know. And since Obama has the CIA afraid to do their jobs, I'm sure he doesn't either. As a person with some military experience (unlike others that never had or will), I know you just don't snap your fingers and your missile defense system is in place when you want it to be. It is estimated that it would take 5 years to build the MD system. Where will Iran be in 5 years with their nuke weapons program? Who knows. You don't wait for the enemy to get the upper hand---is that simple enough for you.
Actually, it has been reported that they are farther away from achieving a delivery-able bomb than we initially though. The treath is less dangerous, but this is irrelevant to Israel.
As for your "We should not wait for them to have so", well, I did not really said that we should, or shouldn't. I just said that Israel feels itself treathened, and they will act on it. It wasn't a jugement of right and wrong, it was a statement of fact. Israel wants sanction or military muscle-up against Iran, Obama is trying to achieve just that, but he wants to avoid a shooting war that will drive Oil and Gas prices incredibly high and further increase Russia's national power.
The only way of avoiding a shooting war is to impose sanctions on Iran, or Israel will take matters in their own hand, whatever destructive consequence for the world economy (and for the U.S.) the action will have. Are they right or wrong? I don't care, that's what's gonna happen.
Not sure if you get the news up your way but the US economy isn't good. And it will get worse if the government gets into the heath insurance business. It is a typical of liberal thinking to throw money at a problem, nothing new here. Imagine that defense strategy---we'll just out spend the Russian if they try something---how moronic and naive. What was done in the past was done, it worked, but that doesn't make it the ideal approach.
Even if your economy is shaken up, you saved it's blood; the financial system. It is only a matter of time before you recover, and you will recover. The United States has incredible (INCREDIBLE
) geographical advantages to its economy over any other countries on the planet. It is destined to be rich, and have a lot of ressources. You represent 25% of the World`s GDP. You represent 25% of the World's production. The size of your economy is bigger than the size of the next 3 biggest countries combined.
And guess what? It's only the beginning of your economical strenght. You don't have borders to defend against aggressive rivals, you are one of the main ressource producers of the world (Oil and Gas included). You overproduce food. The U.S. is only starting to tap on its potential, and has the capacity for even more than what it is doing. You don'T have large demographic strategic problem, like China.
Funny how I've heard you rail in the past about the US's military involvement in the world, yet here you are advocating a return to the cold war. Russian has it's own problems to worry about (Chechnya) without getting involved in the Eco-politics of its former subjects. They rejected Russia's "influence" by leaving the USSR. What is it you don't understand about that? The US is not pushing NATO on them they are asking for it. Same with the EU membership.
I have learned quite a few things about geopolitics in the past year (STRATFOR helped a lot about that). Russia has much less internal troubles now since Putin shaken things up and reduced Russia's internal instability. Actually, since Russia waken up (Orange Revolution), their internal problem have lessen and their economical/strategical strenght have been bolsteren.
The U.S. is not pushing NATO on Western Europe or its new allies, off course. Nor are these countries will receive U.S.'s backing just for their pretty eyes. It is in both their interest to ally for now. Or it was, anyway. Ukraine was happy to turn toward the West when Russia was in shamble, but things have changed.
As for U.S.`s military involvement around the world, I decided to take a neutral stance about it, since there is little say I can have in the matter, and they are usually not done on a whim. There is usually a good reason for U.S.'s strategic involvement, usually arisen out of concern for your safety, but I will not condemn other power's reaction to these involvment, as I can understand their concerns too.
Anyway, for the matter at hand, Poland's safety, I will quote STRATFOR's most recent analysis on the topic:
Word that the United States was ending its current plans to park ballistic missile defense (BMD) interceptors in Poland and an X-band radar in the Czech Republic emerged late Sept. 16, and was confirmed Sept. 17, even as U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates announced potential alternatives for the future. STRATFOR takes stock of the remaining defense arrangements between the United States and the two countries.
Washington signed nearly identical Declarations of Strategic Defense Cooperation with Warsaw and Prague in August 2008 and September 2008, respectively. The same day in September, the Czech Republic signed a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) with the United States; Poland is still negotiating its SOFA. The declaration agreements with Poland and the Czech Republic stipulated not only cooperation and information sharing but also coordination on BMD matters. These agreements remain in effect, at least on paper.
Of the two, the Czech Republic is more insulated from Russia than is Poland (and Moscow is considerably less concerned about U.S. relations with Prague than with Warsaw), but most of its recent military modernization efforts have involved European or old Soviet hardware. The emphasis here appears to have been more on science and technological development rather than arms transfers (the last major arms deal to be completed with the United States was the sale of 24 air-to-air missiles).
U.S. dealings with Poland have been much more geopolitically significant — more extensive in terms of arms sales and much more disconcerting to Russia. The most significant was the sale of 48 late-model F-16C/D fighter jets. The delivery of these fighters was completed late last year; AIM-9X Sidewinder and AIM-120C AMRAAM air-to-air missiles, laser guided bombs, GPS-guided Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAMs), AGM-64 Maverick air-to-ground missiles, Sniper ER targeting pods and DB-110 aerial reconnaissance pods have already arrived. Joint Stand-Off Weapons (JSOWs) are also on contract. Overall, this gives Poland’s air force considerable offensive strike capability (at least in hardware terms), and one that deeply troubled Russia as a potential sign of Washington’s extensive arming of Warsaw. Sales of so many technically complex aircraft, ordnance and subsystems include a number of provisions for maintenance and training, and there is no sign that the United States is backing away from F-16 training and support (some of this will take place with Polish pilots in the United States, other portions will be fulfilled largely by civilian contractors).
In addition, the delivery of five refurbished C-130E Hercules transport aircraft has already begun and will continue into 2010.
Despite the scrapping of current U.S. plans for placing ground-based interceptors in Poland and a radar system in the Czech Republic, American ballistic missile defense efforts will continue in Europe, according to U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates. Just what those efforts will look like is still uncertain
The title of this thread is a complete load of bullshit. It's fueled by anti-Obama resentment, and has no basis in reality. It is not a capitulation, and it's not even a complete concession on the part of the United States.
Personnaly, I think "Socialist" is becoming the new "Nigger" in the United States. The opposition Obama is receiving is so irrational on so many front, it's surreal. There might be a few core issue where opposition is legitimate, but COME ON! The notion that Death Commitee had been risen up? The protest against Obama's speech to the students that they should work hard at school?
And now, THIS? How can bystanders not believe that this is fuelled by racism? I wasn't believing the initial reports on the matter, as I understand many of the conservative wing's concerns. But the more it goes, the more irrational the accusations against your president are.
Maybe it's not racism (or at least, not in it's entirely - there IS racism present). But there is certainly irrationality fuelled by some resentment against what Obama is. After all, he is the first Urban president since a loooong time.