Bush's Shrinking Safety Zone

[SamIam]

Well, aren't we planning on more missles in various spots in Eastern Europe? Its the same old, same old, and, as I understand it, the US is the country that started the latest face-off, not Russia. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by SamIam

Its the same old, same old, and, as I understand it, the US is the country that started the latest face-off, not Russia.

Was that before or after the Head of the KBG became thier leader?

[tw]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Was that before or after the Head of the KBG became thier leader?

That was when America kept doing things that made Russian security threatened. America was building bases that surrounded Russia. NATO forces were being deployed closer to Russia. America would unilaterally 'Pearl Harbor' nations (ie Iraq) and threatened to attack others. The United States would unilaterally cancel international treaties intended to create mutual trust between Russia and America. All this started with George Jr whose staff had even written a memo saying that the United States should be ready to unilaterally attack Russia, Germany, or India. Why? The objective was to keep the United Stated number one at all costs.

Is this a nation that Russia could trust? Of course not. Putin had been repeatedly warning that actions of the United States threaten to restart the Cold War. How many Americans - especially the 'big dic' types who blindly support George Jr - ever heard these warnings even from many in the United States?

Under George Jr, the United States has repeatedly acted in ways that only worry Russia. My god. This American government is so wacko extremist as to even justify torture, extraordinary rendition, imprisonment without judicial review, nuclear weapons even for conventional warfare, unlimited wiretapping, nuclear proliferation, a fear of enemies who were even once friends, a population that even believes wacko extremist lies (propaganda) from their government, and even ‘Pearl Harbors’ nations using outright lies. Leaders who would even go to war over a silly spy plane. A nation that had no problem even destroying the Oslo Accords. Russians looking at history would recognize what preceded 1938.

What does Russia do when threatened externally? It consolidates domestic power. What is Putin doing? Consolidating power after having repeatedly and publically warned about American actions restarting the Cold War.

The damage done by George Jr to America's international reputation will be our legacy for at least the next 10 years. Even worse are the so many Americans who so hate America as to deny the damage.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by tw

Russia Good! Commies Good! Russia should be Trusted!... US BAD! Evil Empire! Down with America! Make US like Russia all will be GOOD! All evils in the world are fault of US! Down with America!

WTF?

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Was that before or after the Head of the KBG became thier leader?

Ah, but our president has examined his soul and found it acceptable.

PRESIDENT BUSH: I will answer the question. I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straightforward and trustworthy. We had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul; a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country. And I appreciated so very much the frank dialogue.

I don't know what is a bigger surprise, that President Bush thinks he is a good judge of mens souls or that he appreciates 'frank dialogue'.

President Carter used to be considered a wimp for talking too much about feelings. Yet I doubt that he would have used this kind of language for Putin. Maybe President Bush is getting a free pass on the wimpiness since he is responsible for two wars (and wore a flight suit).

Anyway, it is an interesting philosophical argument whether a tyrant can also be a patriot.

We always talk about democracy and patriotism, but we always seem to ignore the fact that in many cases the democratic and patriotic goals of other countries are in conflict with our goals. It's like saying to a five-year-old "I know I told you that you can have what you want for dinner, but you don't want pizza, what you really want is broccoli".

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by richlevy

We always talk about democracy and patriotism, but we always seem to ignore the fact that in many cases the democratic and patriotic goals of other countries are in conflict with our goals. It's like saying to a five-year-old "I know I told you that you can have what you want for dinner, but you don't want pizza, what you really want is broccoli".

Yea, I know. We will always be in a position of making decisions which favor US interests on the stage of international politics which will always conflict with other nations interests. I guess it's what makes the world go round. Of course we could just abdicate all our interests to the UN and let there be One World Government. Or we can treat 5 year olds like 5 year olds. I am really not interested in allowing other countries to tell us what is in our best interest.