Russia Making Threats Over Missle Shield

[charlietwo]

Originally Posted by Jack Moroney

Right now I would not be surprised to find out that France is building yet another Arc d' Triumph for the Russians to march under when Europe folds.

Haha! I think that is the crux of the matter in Europe right now. The European core states have no leadership, no spine, and therefore no respect from other nations that are looking to fill the vacuum. If countries like Germany and France had a collective mind between them, they would see the writing on the wall and realize that resources are dwindling and they have a vested interest in reacting, or even becoming proactive.

Richard - Great article. Doesn't give me a warm and fuzzy, but nothing much does these days. It looks and feels like America is in a slow bleed, and we lack the leadership to stop the wounds. I only hope McCain is up to the task... if he drops the ball with any policies and allows too much breathing room for our enemies within, we're going to be in serious trouble, imho.

[greenberetTFS]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

I say "woof-woof".

The missile shield threatens Russia in no way. Even after built, they can throw way more missiles than we can shoot down, and it only takes a few to make a big impression.

My personal belief is that the quality of the Russian military is not all it is cracked up to be, and that the Poles are not Georgia. I suspect that if we flew air cover and provided CAS, the Poles could hold their own, especially since the Russians are short on strategic projection, and would have to come through Lithuania, Belarus, or the Ukraine, none of which are likely to look upon this favorably.

Just my .02, YMMV.

TR

I personally agree with Reaper....The Russian military is not what it once was! "woof,woof" is all that they can do right now....

[rourke]

Any thoughts on the "woof-woof" coinciding with our upcoming election and the possibility of electing BHO, an appeaser? Could Putin be banking on this and the fact that there would be one less obstacle to stand against his maneuvering?

[afchic]

Originally Posted by rourke

Any thoughts on the "woof-woof" coinciding with our upcoming election and the possibility of electing BHO, an appeaser? Could Putin be banking on this and the fact that there would be one less obstacle to stand against his maneuvering?

If polls are any indication, if this was their intent it backfired. The same as Osama Bin Laden offering up his support to Kerry right before the election. McCain has taken a bounce and Obama has dropped in the polls, and many believe it is this issue that has done it.

The whole Russia/Georgia issue has bolstered McCain in the eyes of many. He was quick to point out that he thought the Russians were wrong, and that we should be seeking to deter them in their aggression. Obama on the other hand waited a couple of days, and then took what amounted to "a wait and see' attitude about what was going on.

If this hasn't pointed out to people that Obama lacks the experience necessary to even crawl into the International Arena, let alone walk, it will. In my opinion that is why Biden will be his VP candidate. No others that he has vetted have the foreign relations experience Biden does.

But Joe Biden as VP scares the hell out of me. He would walk all over Obama every chance he got, and he would be the one really running the White House which is as scary or scarier than Obama in and of himself.

[rourke]

I agree. If he wanted BHO in there he might have waited a little longer, instead of helping to bolster McCain's numbers.

[Richard]

Here's something to ponder in all this.

Richard

Blame Everyone But Russia
Victor Davis Hanson

Everyone is distracted by the Olympics. The squabbling here on the campaign trail consumes the media. Two presidential candidates and a lame-duck president all are weighing in on foreign policy. No wonder Vladimir Putin thought it was a good time to invade Georgia.

Apparently the Russian prime minister knew exactly what he was doing but assumed no one in the West did. And he was right.

Our pundits and politicians are all over the map as Putin is variously portrayed as villain, victim, patriot, tyrant -- and more still.

The neoconservatives: We must make Russia pay a terrible price for subverting a democracy. Our policy of promoting liberal governments among the former Soviet republics, with integration into Europe and relations with NATO, was sound, and it cannot be allowed to be aborted by Putin.

Bottom line: Form a ring of democracies around Russia until it sees the light and likewise evolves into a constitutional state.

The paleoconservatives: Putin is only protecting his rightful national interests in his own backyard, which don't really conflict with ours. You have to admire the old brute for taking care of business. Neocons -- and no doubt Israelis in the background -- provoked that Georgian loudmouthed dandy Saakashvili to stick his head in a noose -- so he deserved the hanging he got.

Bottom line: We should cut a deal with our natural ally Putin to keep out of each other's proper sphere of influence -- and let each deal as it wishes with these miserable little third-party troublemakers.

The realists: Don't poke sticks at the Bear. We should define what our strategic interests in the region are. Maybe we can protect Eastern Europe, the Baltic republics and the Ukraine -- but only if we accept that Georgia just isn't part of the equation. We need to back out of the saloon with drawn pistols, and save as much face as we can.

This is a reminder that we forgot the role of honor and fear in international relations when we encouraged weak former Soviet republics merrily to join the West and gratuitously humiliate Russia.

Bottom line: Don't get caught again issuing promises that we can't keep!

The left wing: Putin's unilateral pre-emption was just like our own in Iraq. His recognition of South Ossetia's independence was no different from our own in breakaway Kosovo. So America is just as bad. Russia's attack is the moral equivalent of America arbitrarily removing the tyrant Saddam. It's all about Big Oil and pipelines anyway -- along with Bush, Cheney, Halliburton et al.

Bottom line: Another long overdue comeuppance for the American Empire.

The liberal mainstream: Both sides are at fault. We understand Georgia's plight, but also sympathize with Russia's dilemma. We should consult the United Nations, involve the European Union and encourage European diplomacy. We can learn from the multilateral NATO teamwork in Afghanistan.

Bottom line: Make sure that international institutions don't confuse an empathetic America with cowboy George Bush.

The Europeans: Prioritize! 1) Don't jeopardize gas supplies from, and trade with, Russia; 2) Avoid any confrontation in any form; 3) Make sure that Bush does not do something stupid to draw us too far in, but at least does something to avoid leaving us too far out.

Bottom line: Luckily, Tbilisi is still a long way from Berlin and Paris!

The rest of America: My lord, Putin is acting just like Brezhnev! But they told us that he just wanted to democratize and reform Russia, integrate with NATO and the EU, and help fight radical Islam! So why did he get angry with Georgia when it just wanted to do the same things he was supposed to be doing? That backstabber wasn't honest with us!

Bottom line: Now what?

The more Russia promises to leave Georgia, the more it seems to stay put. One reason may be that Putin keeps counting on us either to be confused, contradictory or angrier at ourselves than at Russia over his latest aggression. And given our inability to speak with one voice, he seems to be absolutely right.

[Surf n Turf]

Originally Posted by Richard

But we also must remember that Russia remains an enigma not only to us, but to the Europeans who struggle with the idea that a country which produces such great literature, music, ballet, poetry, etc can be so corrupt and industrially inefficient, and cannot even safely manage its own capitol's airport (which is outsourced to a German firm) to Western standards. And even though Russia has concerns over the many splinter states now surrounding its borders, it still 'fears' NATO-- .

Originally Posted by Richard

This has been going on for several years. One has to remember that Russia's defense of the Rodina (Motherland) is based on the historical precedents of trading space for time...and anything encroaching upon their space (including any barrior space between them and Germany--and now NATO) is suspect to them. Period.

Originally Posted by Jack Moroney

Absolutely. The Russian psyche has always been part of this equation and I would not be surprised if the leadership is not playing to that part of its population to quell the discontent of all the money being poured into the military for the defense of the motherland while ignoring more pressing social problems at home. I look at this adventure in Georgia more like a recon by fire to see exactly what the west a very weak EU and deteriorating NATO would do. Russia does not need to exercise its military force to bring EU to its knees, they are heavily engaged in Europe's energy profile and that alone will dampen any adventure by the fledgling EU military. .

Sorry, Late to the forum -
Richard and the COL Moroney are correct about the “intense” feelings of the Russian people for securing the Motherland. I am not sure how Putin really feels (world-wiew), but he is playing this message perfect to the citizens --- Most Russians view any encroachment with fear. They still talk about Napoleon / Hitler’s marches into the interior with horror. Both Napoleon / Hitler were eventually defeated by “General Mud & General Winter”, and a great deal of Russian blood. The experience of invasion is still real to the Russians. Remember the siege / encirclement of Leningrad (St. Petersburg) lasted 900 days, with a total over 1.2 million Russian dead. Stalingrad (Volgograd.) lasted 240 + days) with combined dead at over 1.7 million . These were just two battles in Operation Barbarosa (Unternehmen Barbarossa). It is said that Josef Stalin only learned three words in english --- Twenty (20) million dead – That was the Soviet war deaths from WWII, and Stalin used these three words over and over at Yalta to pressure Roosevelt & Churchill to accede to his demands for control over a buffer zone between the Motherland and Europe (Churchill afterward called it the “iron curtain”)

With the invasion of Georgia, I agree that Putin made a calculated move to eliminate the “defensive missile shield” that was just signed with Poland, while diminishing American influence, and to fight a war of terror within the former Soviet sphere of influence (including Ukraine, Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania) to increase Russian aims. After all, what would NATO do? --- it turns out NOTHING. The Russian Bear has stood down his adversaries, and is in the process of reasserting itself. I don’t think they will have the international clout of the former USSR, but will have an increasing role in frustrating the EU / NATO / USA.

Good Article
Quote - President Dmitry Medvedev spoke at the Foreign Ministry. “I would like to use this opportunity for an open and pragmatic conversation,” explained Medvedev to the assembled diplomats. “Russia is indeed stronger and able to assume greater responsibility for solving problems on a regional and global scale.” You see, the Cold War was not an American victory. Medvedev reminded his colleagues that they had “survived the Cold War.” And now Russia is prepared to establish “a new equilibrium.”
Medvedev explained Russia’s overall diplomatic strategy: “I have focused on these aspects because Europe today needs a positive rather than negative agenda.” In other words, the invasion of Georgia is not an end in itself. The real purpose of this operation, the Russian president hinted, was to highlight the dangerous obsolescence of NATO and Europe’s unrealistic expectations with regard to Russia”
http://www.financialsense.com/stormw.../analysis.html


We are perhaps a little hasty to move the US Military in Harms way in “relief efforts” in Georgia. I believe that most of the material will have to move thru Turkey ---- and Russia will certainly prod Iran to “do something”.
Quote --“The American move raises the stakes for everyone. It has its share of risks. But it puts the onus back on the Russians. Surely even Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin at his most reckless would hesitate before killing US troops. It's one thing to attack Georgian soldiers and to murder Georgian civilians. It's another thing altogether to do that to the US Army or Marine Corps.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au...-25377,00.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...he-Crimea.html

SnT

[charlietwo]

This is becoming a solid picture. It seems to me that America's best move at this point is to light a fire under the collective asses of NATO. We're tertiary parties in this conflict and it would make sense for us to put our state department to work at challenging NATO to make some steps towards keeping Russia and it's satellites in check.

Good post, Surf.