not 1/2 way. such throwing out of measurements is simplistic.
Think beyond mono-polarism (zero sum) - that only the west has legitimate security needs.
Graham unloads on Trump: Blind spot on Russia 'undermining his entire presidency'
- Thread starter anatta
- Start date
Think beyond mono-polarism (zero sum) - that only the west has legitimate security needs.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
I wish Graham would share the evidence with us.......
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
Barry & Hillary were just fine with various relationships and business dealings with Vlad as long it served their agendas and purposes. Now they want his head on a spike because a different party's Prez wants to try and get along and not start WWlll.
the demmycrats were even okay with the Russians"hacking the election" until they realized Hilliary lost........
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
they didn't take any action........
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
so Putin attacked both the Obama elections?....
Last edited:
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
agreed......but its only the demmycrats and lib'rul media he's laughing at.......
I am actually somewhat concerned for my country.
I am pretty sure Putin thinks Trump is a chump. A mark. Putin is cunning and manipulative. Years of being a KGB strongman taught him all the tricks of the trade. And Mr. "Global Warming is a Chinese Hoax!" strikes me as someone completely out of their league with respect to Putin.
I am pretty sure Putin thinks Trump is a chump. A mark. Putin is cunning and manipulative. Years of being a KGB strongman taught him all the tricks of the trade. And Mr. "Global Warming is a Chinese Hoax!" strikes me as someone completely out of their league with respect to Putin.
What is the point of NATO if not to push back against Russian aggression? Putin's end goal is to re-assemble the Soviet Union, and he is at war with the ideology of Western democracy. Far moreso than Iran, for example.
I think Putin absolutely has security needs, similar to Kim Jong Un and every tin-pot dictator. Putin wishes to rule Russia in perpetuity so that he can continue to rob the Russian economy for himself and his oligarchs -- which he has already done, personally, to an estimated tune of 200 billion dollars.
Cold war 2.0: how Russia and the west reheated a historic struggle
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...sia-and-the-west-reheated-a-historic-struggle
...Many acknowledge the west must take its share of the blame for the collapse of relations. The mistakes are real, notably the scale of Nato expansion to the east and in the Baltics. Russia also feels deeply that it was duped into accepting a UN resolution criticising Muammar Gaddafi in Libya in 2011, only to find it was used as cover for regime change. Hillary Clinton, then at the State Department, did little to mange the Russians. Russia has not voted for humanitarian action at the UN since.
Britain acknowledges errors over Ukraine and Syria. The former Foreign Office permanent secretary Sir Simon Fraser recently accepted: “With hindsight we might have foreseen in 2013 that the combination of formally signing a deep free trade agreement [with Ukraine], with the internal unrest facing President Putin on his return to office, and the perception that had arisen of greater reticence in western foreign policy, could result in a more aggressive Russian response in Ukraine, and opportunism in Syria.”
Others such as Sir John Sawers, the former head of MI6, warned: “We are moving into an era that is as dangerous, if not more dangerous, as the cold war because we do not have that focus on a strategic relationship between Moscow and Washington.” But unlike the cold war, there are now “no clear rules of the road” between the two countries.
The German foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, an advocate of dialogue, made the same point: “It’s a fallacy to think that this is like the cold war. The current times are different and more dangerou
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...sia-and-the-west-reheated-a-historic-struggle
...Many acknowledge the west must take its share of the blame for the collapse of relations. The mistakes are real, notably the scale of Nato expansion to the east and in the Baltics. Russia also feels deeply that it was duped into accepting a UN resolution criticising Muammar Gaddafi in Libya in 2011, only to find it was used as cover for regime change. Hillary Clinton, then at the State Department, did little to mange the Russians. Russia has not voted for humanitarian action at the UN since.
Britain acknowledges errors over Ukraine and Syria. The former Foreign Office permanent secretary Sir Simon Fraser recently accepted: “With hindsight we might have foreseen in 2013 that the combination of formally signing a deep free trade agreement [with Ukraine], with the internal unrest facing President Putin on his return to office, and the perception that had arisen of greater reticence in western foreign policy, could result in a more aggressive Russian response in Ukraine, and opportunism in Syria.”
Others such as Sir John Sawers, the former head of MI6, warned: “We are moving into an era that is as dangerous, if not more dangerous, as the cold war because we do not have that focus on a strategic relationship between Moscow and Washington.” But unlike the cold war, there are now “no clear rules of the road” between the two countries.
The German foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, an advocate of dialogue, made the same point: “It’s a fallacy to think that this is like the cold war. The current times are different and more dangerou
Of course he does. He moves 10 steps forwards, gets a love slap on the hand, and is forced to move one step back to renew relations with the Trump administration.
Meanwhile, Putin keeps the gains he has scored -- all but inviting him to continue his behavior without significant consequence.
The US: ‘We took our eye off the ball’
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...sia-and-the-west-reheated-a-historic-struggle
Throughout his presidency, Barack Obama has viewed Russia largely through the prism of its ailing economy and early on concluded Moscow was essentially a weak adversary trying to compensate for its impotence with shows of military bravado. Putin was “pursuing 19th-century policies with 20th-century weapons in the 21st century”, the president told at least one foreign visitor.
During his 2012 re-election campaign, when his opponent Mitt Romney suggested Russia might be the country’s “No 1 geopolitical foe”, the president led the derision.
“The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because the cold war’s been over for 20 years,” Obama said in one of the presidential debates.
More recently, he has adjusted his rhetoric to claim Putin was over-stretching Moscow’s capacity and would ultimately become trapped in Syria as the US was trapped in Iraq and Afghanistan. The word “quagmire” began to appear more frequently in the talking points being distributed by senior administration officials.
A President Clinton would take a more hawkish view, and she would find support in the Senate.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...sia-and-the-west-reheated-a-historic-struggle
Throughout his presidency, Barack Obama has viewed Russia largely through the prism of its ailing economy and early on concluded Moscow was essentially a weak adversary trying to compensate for its impotence with shows of military bravado. Putin was “pursuing 19th-century policies with 20th-century weapons in the 21st century”, the president told at least one foreign visitor.
During his 2012 re-election campaign, when his opponent Mitt Romney suggested Russia might be the country’s “No 1 geopolitical foe”, the president led the derision.
“The 1980s are now calling to ask for their foreign policy back because the cold war’s been over for 20 years,” Obama said in one of the presidential debates.
More recently, he has adjusted his rhetoric to claim Putin was over-stretching Moscow’s capacity and would ultimately become trapped in Syria as the US was trapped in Iraq and Afghanistan. The word “quagmire” began to appear more frequently in the talking points being distributed by senior administration officials.
A President Clinton would take a more hawkish view, and she would find support in the Senate.
Translation:
"I know I voted for an ill-informed doofus to be leader of our great country! But, I am hoping some dudes in the State Department can keep my doofus from being totally outmaneuvered, outsmarted, and manipulated by Putin!"
Something that obviously did not come true for Obama. Guess he needed to pick better doofuses than Clinton and Kerry.
Darth Omar
Russian asset
I am starting to hope Trumps presidency lasts.
Trump got de-pantsed.