Cramming Bush's "democracy" down the throat of the world

[iamthewalrus109]

With yesterday's meeting between Bush and Putin, a new gruff, and unsure relationship shift has happened between Bush and the Russian leader. With increasing pressure from members of the US Congress, Putin has become agravated with the US stance on his country's progress towards democracy. This type of revelry has to end. We are not the last word on what "democracy" is. This type of neo-con rhetoric is harming arms agreements and negotiations to limit the proliferation of nuclear weapons, which is obviously more essential to world security than shoving American conventions of goverance in the face of a emerging free state. Bush has found his broken record, one that doesn't make him look so much like a bumbler and has set off on it like a school boy. What we need now is hard nosed pragmatic foriegn policy to limit the spread of weaponry. This is a foriegn policy disaster waiting to happen, I hope someone in the adminstration can take this Russian version of democracy at face value and start to get to work on getting them integrated into the WTO and become full partner in the effort to limit the proliferation of arms.

-Walrus

[Beestie]

I read that this morning. Its becoming eye-rollingly obvious that Bush fancies himself a new Ronald Reagan. Bush, on his absolute best day, couldn't carry Reagan's jock strap.

[iamthewalrus109]

Reagan had PR savy, Bush has nothing except the advice of others. He is not a purvyeor like Reagan was, he is just a store minder. Accordingly, Reagan's principles were clearer and more pragmatic. Bush's mamsy-pamsy approach to this freedom bull shit is going to far.

-Walrus

[smoothmoniker]

So, just to clarify, Bush says to Putin:

"Hey, here's a thought - it would be a good idea if maybe you didn't seize dictatorial control of the Duma in a bloodless coup, shut down any dissenting voices in the media, and nationalize the most successful companies in your country. It's just this crazy-ass notion I have that balance of power, freedom to dissent, and free markets are essential for democratic institutions to succeed."

This has your panties in a wad how? Seriously, what is it that's bugging you? Either you think:

1) Putin's actions are insignificant or appropriate, and don't warrant comment, or
2) Putin's actions are dangerous and ultimately destabilizing to Russia, but we shouldn't point this out in any way because then they might not like us.

I think Bush's actions were measured and well delivered. It mirrors the interaction we've established with China; measured comments against human rights violations, but progressive movement toward stabilized economic relationships and international cooperation.

-sm

[Beestie]

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker

This has your panties in a wad how?

I think humiliating Putin in a Press Conference setting is a collossaly stupid thing to do. He's an insecure man who needs to be publicly supported and privately rebuked. And you never criticise the leader himself when attempting to bridge gaps, you criticise the policies. Bush is giving everyone a clinic in how not to hold negotiations with other world leaders.

Sure, Bush needs to tell him those things and he's man enough to tell him to his face. But you don't do it on national television unless you have no idea who you are dealing with.

Bush's diplomatic skills are pitiful. My point wasn't that W should keep quiet about these important issues. I was comparing how remarkably effective Reagan was at getting results in similar theatres and how god-forsakingly awful W is.

[iamthewalrus109]

For Bush to deliver a lecture to Putin on American style tennants is ridiculous and ill-timed. Setting about finishing some Clinton era arms agreements, and limiting the spread of AK-47's and shoulder rockets should be the talk of the day. Bush's little lecture constitued nothing more than the furtherance of a PR startegy hammered out towards the end of his 1st term. It's plain disrespectful, insulting, and brazen. Even Reagan stepped back from scenes like this, resorting to speeches to dispense his freedom rhetoric, ie "tear down this wall" etc. Accordingly, this mirrors our relationship with China how? We allow them to hold currency and pound us with the yen, with no response, but we'll pay lip service to "human rights abuses", spare me. I think a relationship with the Russians at this point needs to be managed with more caution. It's not about if they like us or not, but pick your battles. IF the US gets on its high horse we risk loosing the ablity to solidfy ongoing non-proliferatinon agreements, to jeapordize this right now, is plain stupidity, to think that giving US style freedom to regular Russians is the key to security is foolish. Working with the leadership is far more important than a stupid speech on American civics. This was just another way for Bush to stick to his guns, appease Republican critics in the US Senate, and further the rhetoric mentioned in his innagural speech.

-Walrus

[smoothmoniker]

For Bush to deliver a lecture to Putin on American style tennants is ridiculous and ill-timed.

You don't think it's sad that free speech, free enterprise, and freely elected officials are "American-style" tennets, and not universal mandates?

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by iamthewalrus109

Accordingly, this mirrors our relationship with China how? We allow them to hold currency and pound us with the yen, with no response, but we'll pay lip service to "human rights abuses", spare me.

Chinese currency is the yuan. Japanse currency is the yen.

[iamthewalrus109]

Yuan, sometimes my fingers are a little too fast, still, regardless this hasn't been properly addressed.

-Yuan, duly noted

-Walrus

[Undertoad]

Setting about finishing some Clinton era arms agreements, and limiting the spread of AK-47's and shoulder rockets should be the talk of the day.

well it turns out they worked on that too

[Griff]

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker

You don't think it's sad that free speech, free enterprise, and freely elected officials are "American-style" tennets, and not universal mandates?

I basically agree with the Bush crowd on this one, with the glaring exception of painting America as a bastion of free enterprise. That is bullshit.

[hot_pastrami]

Taking democracy advice from Bush is like taking financial advice from someone who owes you money. There ain't a grain of salt that's big enough.

True, he may accidentally taint his bullshit with truth once in a while... but as they say, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

[xoxoxoBruce]

and limiting the spread of AK-47's

That's a tough, since everybody in the world has one, already.

[tw]

These posts about the American Russian relationship remain invalid or myopic without first taking the other perspective. What does Putin see? Has anyone taken notice of what Putin now has to fear? Americans are now on or close to Russia's western borders. Major American military units sit just off the Russian east coast. And now Americans are building a chain of military bases from Bulgaria to Tajikistan as well as meddling in the politics of so many Russian 'satellite' nations such as Georgia, South Oddessa, Uzbekistan - only partly because the pipeline from the Caspian sea to the Black Sea requires 'stable' governments. This is new American presence on Russia's southern borders.

From Russian perspectives, US military power is surrounding Russia. It is completely irrelevant what you think. This is what Putin's people see. It does not help that the new American foreign policy is to see everything in only black and white. Historically this eventually leads to intolerance and war. You don't have to be Russian to see that part.

What is Putin doing? When a nation is threatened from outside, then its government becomes dictatorial inside. Russia has very good reason to be fearful since the US has demonstrated that it will invade anyone without any justification (other than religious extremist reasoning) and can do so even with world wide objection. The US no longer acts as an honest friend.

You tell me. What has Tony Blair gotten in return for his support of America? Nothing. What has Russia gotten after working with the US to end to cold war. The US then unilaterally declares all previous treaties null and void.

Again, did you ask first, what is Putin's perspective?

[iamthewalrus109]

Putin's perspective is exactly what makes Bush's comments so pitifully ill-timed. Of course you have to ask yourself that, its why one can become alarmed with the Bush approach on this one. But from an American foriegn policy perspective, acknowledging Putin's view point, should only be for the purposes of greater world stability and US geo-political strategy. You shoot for the top, the ideal, but when a country isn't exactly like us, you have to keep watch, but don't go about humilating necessary allies in the effort to thwart arms proliferation, this should be a bigger policy objective. Both us and Russia need to have an understanding at this crucial period to manage arm issues effectively.

-Walrus