Russia blames US in missile row

[Happy Times]

Russia blames US in missile row

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6708459.stm

[CCIP]

I don't quite follow the title of the thread. The US wants to install stuff at Russia's back door and wants Putin to be all happy about it? Or blame someone else - like who, Canada? :doh:

I think the guy made a good and rational response. If the US is developing new missile technology, updating their own is certainly a fair move. The US wants strategic security, Russia wants strategic security.

Or is this one of the cases of "What is allowed to Jupiter is not allowed to a bull?" :hmm:

PS - is anyone actually naive enough to believe that the US is setting up defenses against Iran and North Korea (and not Russia) in Eastern Europe? Don't they have friendly bases a little closer to the 'axis of evil', like, say, Iraq/Kuwait/Saudi Arabia/Turkey or Japan/South Korea, or even Tajikistan for crying out loud? Makes no sense to me. If nothing else, they should at least say the truth - I think anyone who thinks the US doesn't have reservations about Russian strategic interests and is not seriously considering Russia in its strategic deterrent plans is fooling themselves.

[waste gate]

Why would Putin be upset about defensive missles being on european soil unless he and his government has some alterior (domination of europe) motive?

From what I can discern it is the former 'eastern block' counties which want the defensive missles. Perhaps they know something the rest of you don't.

[PeriscopeDepth]

PS - is anyone actually naive enough to believe that the US is setting up defenses against Iran and North Korea (and not Russia) in Eastern Europe?

Most Americans are I would say. Just look at what this administration has gotten away with when it says it's for the war on terror. Not that I think this whole missile defense thing is a bad idea, I'm just saying the administration has gotten pretty used to using that line.

Oh, and nice sig CCIP. You have excellent taste in games. :)

PD

[Happy Times]

Off course they can have their own missiles and develop them all they want.. I dont care if they use all their money on weapons, ordinary Russians dont seem to.
But why make a fuss about it, the US missiles arent a cabable defence against the Russian arsenal. So they cannot be seen as a threat. The onlyone benefiting from the rising tension is Putin. To strenghten the picture of him being the protector of Rossia against Estonian fascists, Georgian cabbage traders, Oligarch Jews, MI6, CIA....

[PeriscopeDepth]

Why would Putin be upset about defensive missles being on european soil unless he and his government has some alterior (domination of europe) motive?

Because it upsets the strategic balance. And the Russians are inherently nervous about any Western influence in their traditional sphere of influence (read forced domination), let alone military installations.

PD

[waste gate]

Why would Putin be upset about defensive missles being on european soil unless he and his government has some alterior (domination of europe) motive?

Because it upsets the strategic balance. And the Russians are inherently nervous about any Western influence in their traditional sphere of influence (read forced domination), let alone military installations.

PD

So we agree.

[PeriscopeDepth]

Why would Putin be upset about defensive missles being on european soil unless he and his government has some alterior (domination of europe) motive?
Because it upsets the strategic balance. And the Russians are inherently nervous about any Western influence in their traditional sphere of influence (read forced domination), let alone military installations.

PD
So we agree.

More or less. I would disagree that Putin is bent on dominating the former Soviet Republics though. I don't think it's domination so much as keeping NATO/the West out of his back yard.

PD

[SUBMAN1]

Are people seriously arguing this point? That is plain stupid. Russia can unleash 1000's of nukes on the US, and we can shoot down what? 6 of them? Get real people and get a life!

-S

PS. Putin is using this for propoganda - something that has an alterior motive. So what is that motive? An excuse for developing their latest missile? I bet it has something to do with that.

[Happy Times]

Why would Putin be upset about defensive missles being on european soil unless he and his government has some alterior (domination of europe) motive?

Because it upsets the strategic balance. And the Russians are inherently nervous about any Western influence in their traditional sphere of influence (read forced domination), let alone military installations.

PD
The missile system doesnt do anything to the ICBM balance between US/NATO and Russia. But Russians are pissed that they have lost their former colonies to the "West". They still have a hold on Belarussia and the Central Asian states. I think they will go to any means to get Ukraine back as a part of Russia. They are playing the situation to be ripe to present their terms at some point. Funny thing is that the western border could be the most peaceful for them, and they could focus on the Chinese one. It seems they just like to get the attention of Europe to feel selfworth.

[PeriscopeDepth]

When I said strategic balance, I meant political. Not nuclear missile balance. Obviously we can flatten each other several times over, BMD system or not.

PD

[waste gate]

Are people seriously arguing this point? That is plain stupid. Russia can unleash 1000's of nukes on the US, and we can shoot down what? 6 of them? Get real people and get a life!

-S

I don't think it is about the old MAD theory SUBMAN. That may come into play in the future but I think it is about what PD was saying. Influence. As before western europe will be the battleground. I may be cinical, no I am cinical, this will keep the climate change and socilists at bay fo a while. After all the european continnent is at stake. Who are they going to call?

[SUBMAN1]

When I said strategic balance, I meant political. Not nuclear missile balance. Obviously we can flatten each other several times over, BMD system or not.

PD
Then what is the point? The BMD system is pretty much worthless between the US and Russia and is only protection against cash pressed counties like Iran - possibly a country that is very likely to launch at some point!

So the point is - all this BS is propoganda as an excuse to do something in Russian eyes. They are using it, probably to break one of the START treaties in building their new missiles. That is complete utter BS because I don't think for a second that the US wouldn't launch a BMD weapon to save Russia in the event of an attack by a country like Iran, or even China! It is even for Russia's benefit!

For those that don't think the US wouldn't defend Russia - think again. A Russia in a chaotic mess from a rogue nuke strike is not in the best interest at all for the US or the rest of the world. Myself over here wants a stable Russia and their potentially devastating technologies in safe and controlled hands!

-S

[Happy Times]

More or less. I would disagree that Putin is bent on dominating the former Soviet Republics though. I don't think it's domination so much as keeping NATO/the West out of his back yard.

PD

Im sure, that if they could, they would take them all back. He doesnt want them in the NATO because that makes it hard to invade them back at some point. This is not a joke, you just have to understand how they think. Its very 19th century, maps open in the Kremlin, they love their geopolitical theories that can get pretty wild..
I would bet everything i have on this being a 100% accurate image i painted..:lol:

[PeriscopeDepth]

The point has already been stated in this thread point blank several times. Former Warsaw Pact countries are abandoning their Russian protectors and letting the Western countries, particularly the US court them. Even build military installations in them. Russia will never, ever be happy about NATO/Western influence in states that were formerly under the Soviet Union.

PD

[PeriscopeDepth]

More or less. I would disagree that Putin is bent on dominating the former Soviet Republics though. I don't think it's domination so much as keeping NATO/the West out of his back yard.

PD
Im sure, that if they could, they would take them all back. He doesnt want them in the NATO because that makes it hard to invade them back at some point. This is not a joke, you just have to understand how they think. Its very 19th century, maps open in the Kremlin, they love their geopolitical theories that can get pretty wild..
I would bet everything i have on this being a 100% accurate image i painted..:lol:

I agree with you 100%. But Putin is smart enough to know domination can't be an option on the table for the foreseeable future. So he'll do what he can to counter western influence, including knocking off (or at least trying to) heads of state that may be receptive or even solicit Western overtures.

PD

[ASWnut101]

Here's the Global Security Article on the RS-24/SS-X-29

-->Link (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/rs-24.htm)<--


Personally, I don't see how creating a ABM site in Poland and the Czech Radar is a "threat to Moscow." Of course, him being Putin in all, he's probably just using it as an excuse to continue Russia's Nuclear-Ballistic Missile program.


Time to re-activate the Peacekeeper, mabye?:hmm:

[Happy Times]

More or less. I would disagree that Putin is bent on dominating the former Soviet Republics though. I don't think it's domination so much as keeping NATO/the West out of his back yard.

PD
Im sure, that if they could, they would take them all back. He doesnt want them in the NATO because that makes it hard to invade them back at some point. This is not a joke, you just have to understand how they think. Its very 19th century, maps open in the Kremlin, they love their geopolitical theories that can get pretty wild..
I would bet everything i have on this being a 100% accurate image i painted..:lol:

I agree with you 100%. But Putin is smart enough to know domination can't be an option on the table for the foreseeable future. So he'll do what he can to counter western influence, including knocking off (or at least trying to) heads of state that may be receptive or even solicit Western overtures.

PD

I agree with you 100% :lol:

[PeriscopeDepth]

Here's the Global Security Article on the RS-24/SS-X-29

-->Link (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/rs-24.htm)<--


Personally, I don't see how creating a ABM site in Poland and the Czech Radar is a "threat to Moscow."
Read the thread.

Of course, him being Putin in all, he's probably just using it as an excuse to continue Russia's Nuclear-Ballistic Missile program.
He doesn't need an excuse. The strategic rocket forces are not going to go away anytime soon.

PD

[bradclark1]

When you are trying to cold start a cold war you grasp at whatever excuse you can to ratchet things up a bit.

[ASWnut101]

[quote=ASWnut101]Here's the Global Security Article on the RS-24/SS-X-29

-->Link (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/rs-24.htm)<--


Personally, I don't see how creating a ABM site in Poland and the Czech Radar is a "threat to Moscow."
Read the thread.

I did. I just made a statement on his statement. That is, unless he didn't make the statement, which means that there is no statement, which means...:hmm:

...I'm crazy.:o

Of course, him being Putin in all, he's probably just using it as an excuse to continue Russia's Nuclear-Ballistic Missile program.
He doesn't need an excuse. The strategic rocket forces are not going to go away anytime soon.

PD

Never said that. I just said that (nearly like Subman's post) he's using it to improve his forces, breaking any treaties along the way.

[Heibges]

Are people seriously arguing this point? That is plain stupid. Russia can unleash 1000's of nukes on the US, and we can shoot down what? 6 of them? Get real people and get a life!

-S

PS. Putin is using this for propoganda - something that has an alterior motive. So what is that motive? An excuse for developing their latest missile? I bet it has something to do with that.

Bingo.

This BMD System sounds like a pork barrel project to me.

[elite_hunter_sh3]

i back russia 100%... america doin dumb things like their missile defences... now who the hell would put missile defences in europe when the threat is north Korea and Iran, which everyone knows thatthey dont have the technology to fire stuff that far:roll::roll:..

[ASWnut101]

`Cause neither has the technology to do anything, yet.

Why put a huge amount of BMD equipment when you could just drop a penetrating GBU-28 on their "Launch Pad?" AEGIS DDGs and CGs are patrolling off Japan, and the new X-band radar installed south of Alaska gives us plenty of protection there.

Remember, the NK's couldn't even get thier Tapodong 30 seconds into flight. Their "nuclear test" was a failure (mostly; it did explode, but not with any truly damaging force, about 1/2 kiloton or less). Iran, to our knowledge, does not have nukes, either.

[PeriscopeDepth]

[quote=ASWnut101]Here's the Global Security Article on the RS-24/SS-X-29

-->Link (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/rs-24.htm)<--


Personally, I don't see how creating a ABM site in Poland and the Czech Radar is a "threat to Moscow." Read the thread.
I did. I just made a statement on his statement. That is, unless he didn't make the statement, which means that there is no statement, which means...:hmm:

...I'm crazy.:o

Of course, him being Putin in all, he's probably just using it as an excuse to continue Russia's Nuclear-Ballistic Missile program. He doesn't need an excuse. The strategic rocket forces are not going to go away anytime soon.

PD
Never said that. I just said that (nearly like Subman's post) he's using it to improve his forces, breaking any treaties along the way.

My apologies, ASW. Guess I miss interpreted your post. Oh, and the part about statements makes me think my head's going to explode. :)

PD

[PeriscopeDepth]

i back russia 100%... america doin dumb things like their missile defences... now who the hell would put missile defences in europe when the threat is north Korea and Iran, which everyone knows thatthey dont have the technology to fire stuff that far:roll::roll:..
Because US defence policy is NOT to counter the known threat. It is what's called "full spectrum dominance". This means, basically, US defense policy is to counter all /imaginable/ threats.

PD

[CCIP]

"Putin using this for propaganda purposes" - yep, totally agreed. Any administration can take lessons on how to use anything for propaganda purposes from Putin. He is a consummate politicians and has gotten away with using far, far worse things for propaganda. Most propaganda for him has been internal.

I disagree with assessing him as a threat in some sort of Cold War sense. He's not a threat, not a partner, he's just a guy with a huge country and a heap of historical baggage. He and his people are much smarter than that. Russia has real power and strategic interests and has no less right to them than anyone else. As it stands, Russia is neither a democracy, nor a USSR, nor a Russian Empire, and they're certainly not threatening your countries or ways of life in ways that some, ahem, other elements today might be. I would rather the West recognized them and worked with them more pragmatically; frankly I don't think you'll be seeing Soviet tanks anywhere in Europe anytime soon, but European tanks might well be need to run on Russian-produced gas for the foreseeable future.

I think the West is in the causeless-revenge-mode (for what?) again. In that same mode, they blew the chance to help a real democracy get established in Russia; now it's too late. It's not too late not to antagonize the current state though and work with them on peaceful terms.

[The Avon Lady]

i back russia 100%... america doin dumb things like their missile defences... now who the hell would put missile defences in europe when the threat is north Korea and Iran, which everyone knows thatthey dont have the technology to fire stuff that far:roll::roll:..
http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/87/iranmissilesxj2.jpg
http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/4325/maplongsp7.gif

[CCIP]

LOL

"ESTIMATED ranges of POTENTIAL missiles from a POTENTIAL source with a margin of error of 2250km"

Could you be any more certain? :roll:

[cobalt]

bring back the CCCP!

[cobalt]

i back russia 100%... america doin dumb things like their missile defences... now who the hell would put missile defences in europe when the threat is north Korea and Iran, which everyone knows thatthey dont have the technology to fire stuff that far:roll::roll:.. http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/87/iranmissilesxj2.jpg
http://img354.imageshack.us/img354/4325/maplongsp7.gif

Too bad Iran doesnt even have those missiles ?


The best thing they have to my knowledge is the Shahab-3 which has a range of 2,000km

[The Avon Lady]

The best thing they have to my knowledge is the Shahab-3 which has a range of 2,000km
Possibly the Shahab 3D (http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iran/iris.htm), with a range of 3000KM.

And they're not finished yet.

[Yahoshua]

Too bad Iran doesnt even have those missiles ?

The best thing they have to my knowledge is the Shahab-3 which has a range of 2,000km

Even so, 2,000 km puts a good portion of Europe and Russia under Irans' guns.

[XabbaRus]

I see the usual suspects making the usual comments without really understanding why.

[Skybird]

bring back the CCCP!CCIP is better.

[Skybird]

I see the usual suspects making the usual comments without really understanding why.
Russian ICBMs are aging, their replacement is being planned since the arly 90s. You just don't sit down with an intention for a new missiles, and one year later you are done, so the US missle plan (surely a provocation, and an intent to strategically isolate Russia by a chain of tripwires) is used by the Russians to deflect incoming fire for replacing their old ICBMs with new ones.

But as a matter fo fact that mondernization was in the making since long, and started even before the US basis in Europe have been brought up again some years ago.

That's all there is in that story, and if you ask me - big deal. I assume that is what Xabba was meaning.

[GakunGak]

I back Russia 100% and I do not agree with US policy of "imaginable threats"...
What, they would start "war on terror" in Russia? Launch nukes? Although I consider a situation damn serious, I still designate this as a provocation from the US goverment. A bad move that is... I just wonderL what do they do to the aging missiles while new ones are built... God have mercy...

[dean_acheson]

Are people seriously arguing this point? That is plain stupid. Russia can unleash 1000's of nukes on the US, and we can shoot down what? 6 of them? Get real people and get a life!

-S

PS. Putin is using this for propoganda - something that has an alterior motive. So what is that motive? An excuse for developing their latest missile? I bet it has something to do with that.

well, we all know that Bush is the only guy in history to use fear mongering to solidify the base...

I am not sure why this is a really big deal, SDI does not not, nor ever has had the capabliites to stop a large scale exchange, I'm also sorry, but the ABM treaty isn't exactly something sacred. The US needs to be able to stop the PRK from turning Pearl Harbor into a glowing mass, that is what the SDI is for.

Putin is kicking Bush at the end of his Presidency to win cool points with the Iranians I guess. It isn't like anything he says will make the folks in Warsaw trust the Sovi..... the Russian government. I wish SecState Rice would have patted Vladimer on the head and said 'oh, you get so cute when you are mad!'

Isn't Putin busy enough suppressing free speech in Russia to have time to call us imperialists? Is this throwback to his KGB "Western Imperialism 101" course he took at Karl Marx University?

[CCIP]

Putin is kicking Bush at the end of his Presidency to win cool points with the Iranians I guess. ?
I'm sorry, but that's just a plain stupid statement. If anything it'd be the other way; it'd be pretty pathetic for Russia to stoop to the level of wooing a good-for-nothing rogue state. They might get a few bucks selling stuff that the Iranians want but, I assure you, Russia could (and in my view, should) do without Iran.

I repeat: Putin is good at spin, but most of it is directed internally.

[Heibges]

It would make more sense to destroy the missles themselves, then waste one penny on something that will never work.

How much of this is being researched in Murtha's district?:rotfl:

[dean_acheson]

I think the West is in the causeless-revenge-mode (for what?) again. In that same mode, they blew the chance to help a real democracy get established in Russia; now it's too late. It's not too late not to antagonize the current state though and work with them on peaceful terms....

I'm sorry, but that's just a plain stupid statement. If anything it'd be the other way; it'd be pretty pathetic for Russia to stoop to the level of wooing a good-for-nothing rogue state. They might get a few bucks selling stuff that the Iranians want but, I assure you, Russia could (and in my view, should) do without Iran.


Well, I'm sure that my above comments are pretty stupid, I've never really been accused of being very bright. But I did write my thesis for my second master's degree on the I.M.F.'s bailout program vis-a-vis the Russian Government from 1992-96, so I do know a bit about that, even if my knowledge is very imperfect, and how the west was supposed to baby-sit the third Rome into enlightened liberalism is beyond me.

Russia seems to think they need Iran, the former continues to sell the latter nuclear equiptment despite the crazed ruminations of the current glorious leader of Iran. Of course, given Russia's history of pogroms, it probably doesn't bother the Russian leadership very much that an Anti-Semite has such weapons. Maybe Russia thinks that a nuclear Iran might help them out with their security problems, but that would be pretty stupid (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chechnya).

I know that the U.S. government stupidly (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran#U.S.-Iran_nuclear_co-operation_in_the_1970s) sold nuclear tech. to the Shah, but that was the same administration that signed onto the ABM treaty, a lot of bright ideas came out of the Nixon Administation....

Stupid is as stupid does, I guess.

[XabbaRus]

So how would America feel if Russia placed ABM missiles in Cuba and a radar in Mexico?

[Sea Demon]

So how would America feel if Russia placed ABM missiles in Cuba and a radar in Mexico?
Placing defensive missiles of this type on Cuba would not be threatening at all. We Americans could simply destroy Russia completely and efficiently with Trident D-5's if we needed to. No ABM system in Cuba would stop that. And if this hypothetical Russian ABM system was deployed on Cuba and was of the size and scope of our current ABM plans, it wouldn't be able to stop many of our Minuteman land based ICBM's either (we have 500 of those active). Simply put, Putin is paranoid over nothing.

I agree with the others above. The USA is unable to stop a Russian nuclear strike, even with this system deployed.

[dean_acheson]

1. If Russia wants to develop an ABM system (which the US has offered to help them with) then I doubt we would raise too much of a stink about it, as long as we were assured that there were not Mirvs attached to these "ABM" missles.

2. We don't have alot of say if Mexico lets Russia puts up a radar system. I mean, what is Mexico going to do, boo Ms. America or send waves of illegal immigrants across our borders?

[Skybird]

1. If Russia wants to develop an ABM system (which the US has offered to help them with) then I doubt we would raise too much of a stink about it, as long as we were assured that there were not Mirvs attached to these "ABM" missles.

2. We don't have alot of say if Mexico lets Russia puts up a radar system. I mean, what is Mexico going to do, boo Ms. America or send waves of illegal immigrants across our borders?

You certainly mean all that rethoric only, knowing that it all is not so simplistic as you try to make it appear. At no costs your nation would accept without reacting to be encircled by more and more russian bases functioning as spy posts and tripwires, and close to your borders. Through pressure via internationaol fiance system, and eco nomical measures, the US very well has a significant ammount of power to influence middle and south america, althiugh that immense power currently is picked away at a bit by new polticial alloiances forming up in these regions, and directed against the US. And as you already admitted, you would not ignore a Russian ABM set up in a manner that it could put your ICBM-MIRVs in danger - you said "as long as they do not arm them with MIRVs". So you would only accept them to do what does not seriously question your demand for dominance and unilateralism.

Those bases Bush wants to built: the one onclues most modern hightech equipement and radar, both could reach far into the russian territory, second where there are silos, you could put the declared missiles into - or not, and third it means to send more american soldiers to the Russian border, that would function as tripwires. Think of the Russians what you want, but they do not have another option than to see these plans as an intended provocation, and attempt to strategically seal them off a bit more. they also do not have any reason to trust you, since NATO's excessive expansion to the east was against what has been promsied to the Russians in the early nineties - that there would be a relatively neutral bufferzone between both blocks. Instead, they have NATO at their borders now. that the Eatern givernment asked to join NATO is no argument. That somebody asks for something does not give him the right to demand that his question must be given a positive answer. NATO could have delayed or rejected the requests. The growing Russian aggressiveness may be fostered by their new wealth (energy ressources), but it is also motivated by the constant erosion of trust into NATO's political reliability. If I were them, I would have come to exactly the same conclusions like they did. They already sent one reqaction that just days ago I "predicted" - they have made true their threat to block any western plans on Kosovo. And this is only the beginning, there will coming more from Moscow. For example with regard to the UN security council. Cooperation is something that for the forseeable future you can forget. If someone thinks "no problem, let's ignore the UN like we already did", just consider that Russia exports not only energy, but also nuclear technology, and military goods.

If the Americans want their damn ABm, they should opt for the navy version of the two, and sation the according platforms in the Mediterranean. no need to mess with then Russian by placing the so far inferior of the two versions directly at the Russian front door. This showdown is absolutely unnecessary, imo.

If a man shows up at the garden door of my house with a tele and a gun in his hands and time and again sweeping my house with it, I would not care what he would tell me about garden-photography, but show him why it is a good idea not stay too long there.

[fatty]

Not much of a surprise here. The political scientists I have talked to and read re:BMD have hypothesized for a while that developing and deploying BMD would lead to a new arms race. They got it right, I think.

[dean_acheson]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070602.wputin01/BNStory/International/home

http://www.reuters.com/articlePrint?articleId=USBLA32653020070603

[CCIP]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070602.wputin01/BNStory/International/home

http://www.reuters.com/articlePrint?articleId=USBLA32653020070603
I don't think drawing a parallel between those two is fair. I think Putin's motives are far, far different and have little to do with actual intensions. V.V. is certainly no Ahmadinejad.

[Steel_Tomb]

The thing that gets me is that while ordianery Russians are living on the brink of poverty, Putin is more concerned about starting a new arms race than looking after the welfare of his nations citizens. Has the West nuked Russia? NO! So why the frak should he be worried about us? He should be looking down toward the Russian/Chinese boarder, that is where the real problem is. New nuclear subs, new missiles, aircraft (hell they can't even get half of their air force in the air they rely on tourism to pay for flights in foxbats!).

Putin needs to be kicked out of power, Yeltsin must be turning in his grave. Putin's Russia is becoming more oppressive every day, freedom of speach is a thing of the past for Russians now, as is hosting peacful demonstrations, they're arrested before they even get there. I also understand that the US is upsetting the balance of power (both politically and militarily), but Putin needs to face the facts. The West hasn't attacked Russia and has no interest/motive for doing so. History has shown that things only ever got close to war when the Soviets started getting too big for their own boots.

[The Avon Lady]

The thing that gets me is that while ordianery Russians are living on the brink of poverty, Putin is more concerned about starting a new arms race than looking after the welfare of his nations citizens. Has the West nuked Russia? NO! So why the frak should he be worried about us? He should be looking down toward the Russian/Chinese boarder, that is where the real problem is. New nuclear subs, new missiles, aircraft (hell they can't even get half of their air force in the air they rely on tourism to pay for flights in foxbats!).

Putin needs to be kicked out of power, Yeltsin must be turning in his grave. Putin's Russia is becoming more oppressive every day, freedom of speach is a thing of the past for Russians now, as is hosting peacful demonstrations, they're arrested before they even get there. I also understand that the US is upsetting the balance of power (both politically and militarily), but Putin needs to face the facts. The West hasn't attacked Russia and has no interest/motive for doing so. History has shown that things only ever got close to war when the Soviets started getting too big for their own boots.
Elementary clarity that often goes missing. :up:

[CCIP]

The problem is that Putin (despite these terrible failings) has done more for ordinary Russians than anyone else has in the past... decades, really. He's given them stability. I said this and I will say it again: Putin's popularity and approval among Russians is genuine. There is no other realistic popular path; the liberal democratic path has died a quiet death in the mid-90's there. And Russian democracy's downfall started not in 1999 with the rise of Putin, but in 1993 when Yeltsin trampled over it by sending tanks to silence a democratically-elected parliament. Let that bastard turn over in his grave! He's the criminal that is largely to blame for this.

Who do you think will do more for ordinary Russians? That's what I ask. There's noone. All the good guys have either been sidelined or are dead, really. I say this as a former supporter of Yabloko (the prime liberal democratic party that rose in the early 90's, but today is struggling to maintain status as a party), and a sympathiser of General Lebed' (RIP, I'll never believe his death was an accident). And you will never get Russians to support crazies like Kasparov. Or sympathise with Khodorkovski, Berezovski, and all that other trash. Just not gonna happen.

Again, I do not support Putin. But you have to step back and ask yourself 'who else'?
If you think that democracy just happens by overturning whatever current crappy regime is in power, then I point you to Iraq. Putin was right at G8 last year: "We do not want the same democracy as in Iraq." And in general, shocking though it may sound, for most Russians today 'democracy' is a bad word. And I shudder at the thought of what you'll get if you throw out Putin (and the rest of the ex-KGB apparatus that supports him) today. You'll get either another bout of 'oligarchy' where the people will be far worse off, maybe the extreme left, or, most likely - the extreme right. Do you want a fascist Russia? I didn't think so.

As I said, the West had their chance in the early 90's to help Russian democracy and foster closer ties, as they did in many other places (see: Eastern Europe) instead of "LOL we won the Cold War! Yay! Let them squirm in their triumphant failure!" They/you blew it, and the only reason I can explain that is a classic case of Russophobia and a causeless thirst for revenge (why?).

[Tchocky]

Putin playing on Russian fear/anxiety towards the West isn't purely politics or paranoia - The expansion of NATO eastwards looks like one thing only :-?

[XabbaRus]

Again CCIP has hit the nail on the head.

Also Steel_Tomb. About the Foxbat flights, that is alittle unfair. They have those for tourism. AFAIK the Mig-25 has gone into retirement keeping a few of those for tourist flights. I hardly think the revenue from them would count that much towards the budget. Also Putin is no fool in boosting the military. After years of neglect he had to do something. Imagine a pissed of Russian military staging a coup. Then I'd start to worry.

[TteFAboB]

Diversionism: use the pretext to re-arm before you become more vulnerable to China. It's alot better than saying: "Hey Wen, you're running out of check. Get off the high horse and don't even think about it unless you want a rain of fire in your palace.".

What do you think?

[Oberon]

Didn't know anything about Putins warning until I caught the headlines of the Times and Telegraph this morning whilst dropping them outside people doors. Read the interview with interest, and it's classic Cold War stuff he's saying, if someone spots something wrong within Russia, he points to a similar thing within the EU or the US and accuses the West of hypocrisy. It's a tried and tested tactic...

I find it interesting that he says he will target missiles on Europe when, to be perfectly honest, I'd be incredibly surprised if they were not targetted on Europe, or have had their targetting systems pointed elsewhere for the past sixty years! Certainly the nukes in the Western silos and mobile launchers, oh, and the Northern Fleet. The Pacific fleet will no doubt have Beijing on their autodial as well as Seattle, San Fran, etc.

The nuclear forces of Russia are probably the forces in the best shape I should imagine, although if current figures are to be believed (and I personally don't believe them), only just over half of their missiles are currently servicable.

I agree with Skybird though, plonking a load of ABM stuff in former WP territory is asking for trouble, I mean, there's supporting former Eastern Bloc countries, and then there's using them to piss off Russia in the guise of defending from Iran. Put the ABM in Greece and Italy, you can stick the radar in South Poland, and maybe another radar in Greece...it should have enough range. Hell, you could even try to work with Russia to put in place this system, instead of just saying "Yeah, I'm gonna stick this system here in your back porch, sorry about the noise and the E-fields."
Admittedly Russia would probably tell you where to go, but at least the offer would have been on the table.

Yes...it does look like a second Cold War is on the table, doesn't it?

Wonder if ebay has any of the old 'Protect and Survive' leaflets on it... :hmm:

[The Avon Lady]

Wonder if ebay has any of the old 'Protect and Survive' leaflets on it... :hmm:
Next best thing (http://cgi.ebay.com/Facts-About-the-H-Bomb-1955-Cold-War-leaflet_W0QQitemZ270020015294QQihZ017QQcategoryZ13 982QQrdZ1QQssPageNameZWD1VQQcmdZViewItem).

[Heibges]

The thing that gets me is that while ordianery Russians are living on the brink of poverty, Putin is more concerned about starting a new arms race than looking after the welfare of his nations citizens. Has the West nuked Russia? NO! So why the frak should he be worried about us? He should be looking down toward the Russian/Chinese boarder, that is where the real problem is. New nuclear subs, new missiles, aircraft (hell they can't even get half of their air force in the air they rely on tourism to pay for flights in foxbats!).

Putin needs to be kicked out of power, Yeltsin must be turning in his grave. Putin's Russia is becoming more oppressive every day, freedom of speach is a thing of the past for Russians now, as is hosting peacful demonstrations, they're arrested before they even get there. I also understand that the US is upsetting the balance of power (both politically and militarily), but Putin needs to face the facts. The West hasn't attacked Russia and has no interest/motive for doing so. History has shown that things only ever got close to war when the Soviets started getting too big for their own boots.

Elementary clarity that often goes missing. :up:

Unfortunately, if you ask the citizens of many countries, they would rather be powerful than prosperous.

I mean, despite 50 years of trying to discredit him, Stalin is still amazingly popular in Russia.

India, Pakistan, China, North Korea, and even the United States although we are so rich the effect is well hidden. As Ike said, 1 destroyer = housing for 8000 people.

[Heibges]

The problem is that Putin (despite these terrible failings) has done more for ordinary Russians than anyone else has in the past... decades, really. He's given them stability. I said this and I will say it again: Putin's popularity and approval among Russians is genuine. There is no other realistic popular path; the liberal democratic path has died a quiet death in the mid-90's there. And Russian democracy's downfall started not in 1999 with the rise of Putin, but in 1993 when Yeltsin trampled over it by sending tanks to silence a democratically-elected parliament. Let that bastard turn over in his grave! He's the criminal that is largely to blame for this.

Who do you think will do more for ordinary Russians? That's what I ask. There's noone. All the good guys have either been sidelined or are dead, really. I say this as a former supporter of Yabloko (the prime liberal democratic party that rose in the early 90's, but today is struggling to maintain status as a party), and a sympathiser of General Lebed' (RIP, I'll never believe his death was an accident). And you will never get Russians to support crazies like Kasparov. Or sympathise with Khodorkovski, Berezovski, and all that other trash. Just not gonna happen.

Again, I do not support Putin. But you have to step back and ask yourself 'who else'?
If you think that democracy just happens by overturning whatever current crappy regime is in power, then I point you to Iraq. Putin was right at G8 last year: "We do not want the same democracy as in Iraq." And in general, shocking though it may sound, for most Russians today 'democracy' is a bad word. And I shudder at the thought of what you'll get if you throw out Putin (and the rest of the ex-KGB apparatus that supports him) today. You'll get either another bout of 'oligarchy' where the people will be far worse off, maybe the extreme left, or, most likely - the extreme right. Do you want a fascist Russia? I didn't think so.

As I said, the West had their chance in the early 90's to help Russian democracy and foster closer ties, as they did in many other places (see: Eastern Europe) instead of "LOL we won the Cold War! Yay! Let them squirm in their triumphant failure!" They/you blew it, and the only reason I can explain that is a classic case of Russophobia and a causeless thirst for revenge (why?).

I don't think it was revenge, but the West was scared of losing their whole investment like after the 1917 Revolution. There was no real rule of law. A company would have to negotiote with the National, Regional, and Local Government, and still not be sure they had all the proper paperwork etc.

[The Avon Lady]

Russian chess champion Gary Kasparov was in the news back in April when he was arrested during a pro-democracy demonstration his "Coalition for Democracy in Russia" helped organize.

The organization's website is TheOtherRussia.org (http://www.theotherrussia.org/).

See Kasparov's recent article in BusinessWeek, Putin's Critics: A Web Strategy (http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/07_23/b4037094.htm).

[dean_acheson]

And everybody lived happily ever after..... (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PK2V800&show_article=1&catnum=0):rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

[Oberon]

And everybody lived happily ever after..... (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PK2V800&show_article=1&catnum=0):rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

THE END

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/icbm/titan-2-missile2.jpg

[CCIP]

I think Putin nailed it on the head there. Don't go telling me Azerbaidjan isn't better-positioned than the Czech Republic against these threats!

[waste gate]

I think Putin nailed it on the head there. Don't go telling me Azerbaidjan isn't better-positioned than the Czech Republic against these threats!

Certainly in a better position to protect the Russians. Europe will get the short end of this. But they didn't want it anyway, so as dean said 'happily ever after'.

[CCIP]

I think Putin nailed it on the head there. Don't go telling me Azerbaidjan isn't better-positioned than the Czech Republic against these threats!
Certainly in a better position to protect the Russians. Europe will get the short end of this. But they didn't want it anyway, so as dean said 'happily ever after'.

Depends from who. From Iran, certainly in better position, especially give how Azerbaidzhan is on the Iranian border.

And come on, this is a perfect chance to give Ahmadinejad a new reason to worry. I would entirely support this one.

[waste gate]

I think Putin nailed it on the head there. Don't go telling me Azerbaidjan isn't better-positioned than the Czech Republic against these threats!
Certainly in a better position to protect the Russians. Europe will get the short end of this. But they didn't want it anyway, so as dean said 'happily ever after'.

Depends from who. From Iran, certainly in better position, especially give how Azerbaidzhan is on the Iranian border.

And come on, this is a perfect chance to give Ahmadinejad a new reason to worry. I would entirely support this one.

Don't get me wrong CCIP, I have no problem, in principle, with placing the system in Azerbaidjan. But I suspect the EU gov'ts will be asking for something similar soon now that they open their eyes to how vulnerable they are.

Suddenly their last resort and punching bag may not be there to protect them.

EDIT: Azerbaidzhan is probably too close to Iran to ever be of much value however. The system has to have a few moments to track the missle before it can engage it with any certainty. Boost phase is easily detectable but determining what its ultimate heading is requires some time. Make Europe all that more vulnerable. Schadenfreuda

[Oberon]

Wasn't there talk of using this system on ships in the Med? Or hell, Greece or Italy would be the better place, as far southwest in the EU as you can get without hitting Russian soil.

Still...like a friend of mine at work said (and he's from the Czech republic) "My country has always been somebodies bitch, first we were Russias bitch, and now we are Americas."

:hmm:

[dean_acheson]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20070608/D8PKN4J00.html

short update

[dean_acheson]

http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSL0859162120070608?feedType=RSS&rpc=22


http://ak.imgfarm.com/images/ap/GERMANY_G8_SUMMIT.sff_HLD193_20070608083128.jpg

[TLAM Strike]

I think Putin nailed it on the head there. Don't go telling me Azerbaidjan isn't better-positioned than the Czech Republic against these threats! The reason Azerbaidjan is better "Positioning" is because there already a ABM Radar there.

...wait why is there already a ABM Radar in Azerbaidjan? Oh thats right its part of Russia's ABM system from the 80's! :yep: The one we let Russia built to defend Moscow on the grounds that we could build one to defend NORAD. Which we never did... :damn:

IMHO we should slap a big Phased Array Radar on an old CVN (I think Enterprise will be retired soon.) Send one out in the Indian Ocean, another to the SOJ, and another to the Med and put all our ABM missiles on old SSBNs. The Ocean if free to all so no basing deals with other countries. Isn't that such a Republican thing to do? Don't make deals with other Countries do what you want! So why isn't this being done? Oh right Bush Jr. was an Air Force Puke... :roll: (No offense to all the fine upstanding former AFPs here on Subsim.)

[The Avon Lady]

And everybody lived happily ever after..... (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8PK2V800&show_article=1&catnum=0):rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

THE END

http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/usa/icbm/titan-2-missile2.jpg
CLASSIC END
http://img527.imageshack.us/img527/364/strangelovefm6.jpg

[PeriscopeDepth]

I think Putin nailed it on the head there. Don't go telling me Azerbaidjan isn't better-positioned than the Czech Republic against these threats! The reason Azerbaidjan is better "Positioning" is because there already a ABM Radar there.

...wait why is there already a ABM Radar in Azerbaidjan? Oh thats right its part of Russia's ABM system from the 80's! :yep: The one we let Russia built to defend Moscow on the grounds that we could build one to defend NORAD. Which we never did... :damn:

IMHO we should slap a big Phased Array Radar on an old CVN (I think Enterprise will be retired soon.) Send one out in the Indian Ocean, another to the SOJ, and another to the Med and put all our ABM missiles on old SSBNs. The Ocean if free to all so no basing deals with other countries. Isn't that such a Republican thing to do? Don't make deals with other Countries do what you want! So why isn't this being done? Oh right Bush Jr. was an Air Force Puke... :roll: (No offense to all the fine upstanding former AFPs here on Subsim.)

Former SSBN's? Pretty poor launch platform, esepcially considering SM-3 is already there and paid for. Converted carriers into big radar ships? Right...

Oh, and I would hardly give GWB the honor of being called an Air Force Puke, but that's for a different thread.

PD

[TLAM Strike]

Former SSBN's? Pretty poor launch platform, esepcially considering SM-3 is already there and paid for. How? the SSGNs have been modified to launch Tomhawks so launching SM-3s is within the realm of reality and budget constraits. If we end up dealing the a country like Russia or China that has lots of territory and can move its ICBM force around its possable that that country could move their ICBM force to areas where 1st and 2nd stage interception is less likely. Convert SSBNs and they gain the same advantage as the ones carring SLBMs- potental enemyies don't know where they are. Plus it greatly decreses the odds of having SM-3 DDGs taken out by submarines or airstrikes in the early stages of a conflict, those Ohios are damn hard to find after all. Also it adds the possablity of arming NATO and allied SSBNs with ABM systems, remember that France and the UK have a SSBN force with the RNs boats having almost the same system as US SSBNs (both have Trident) making converson easyer. Very few NATO countries have ships with VLS systems (Spain is one that comes to mind) unless the SM-3 has been modified to fire from One Armed Bandits (MK 13s).

Converted carriers into big radar ships? Right... Why not they took the Iwo Jima class hull design and turned it in to a pair of anphib command ships (Blue Ridge Class). Besides that big radar platform that was designed to operated off Alaska is a pile of junk that can't stand up to the operating envorment. A CV Hull gives both the space and the speed to operate where needed.

Oh, and I would hardly give GWB the honor of being called an Air Force Puke, but that's for a different thread.

PD Agreed, but a more apt discription would just end up coming out like %$#& ##%$ @#%$!!! ;)

[The Avon Lady]

Lengthy but very interesting article, discussing Estonian/Russian history and concluding with relevance to the missile placement row:

Erratics in Estonia (http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28696).

[Happy Times]

Lengthy but very interesting article, discussing Estonian/Russian history and concluding with relevance to the missile placement row:

Erratics in Estonia (http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=28696).

He has seen the light.

[Happy Times]

Its funny how most people that use common sense and get these things, come from North America. Most Europeans are either stupid or scared and kiss the ruskies ass as much as they can. Im happy we have a new goverment that wants good relations with USA. The weakness of NATO and EU is clear, some members cant be trusted if Russia is on the otherside of the table.

[XabbaRus]

So I guess I must be stupid then, having a Russian wife.
Your anti russianism is well documented. Well move to America.

[GakunGak]

Its funny how most people that use common sense and get these things, come from North America. Most Europeans are either stupid or scared and kiss the ruskies ass as much as they can. Im happy we have a new goverment that wants good relations with USA. The weakness of NATO and EU is clear, some members cant be trusted if Russia is on the otherside of the table.
:nope: :nope: :nope:
Is that right...:lol:

[GakunGak]

So I guess I must be stupid then, having a Russian wife.
Your anti russianism is well documented. Well move to America.
1. You're not alone.
2. I wish...:sunny:

[Happy Times]

So I guess I must be stupid then, having a Russian wife.
Your anti russianism is well documented. Well move to America.

You have just bought the eternal victim card bluff. When the true victims continue to be harassed and threatened. Your wifes ethnicity is irrelevant. We have already political refugees from Russia in Finland and i welcome everyone of them. They are those people that dont need somebody else doing the thinking for them, or some Khan to worship in serfdom. They are an asset to any country, we had them in 1917 also, funny how history repeats itself sometimes.

[dean_acheson]

So I guess I must be stupid then, having a Russian wife.
Your anti russianism is well documented. Well move to America.


Sooo.... if you agree with the US you need to move there? In this country, if we exhibit the same attitude towards those who jump up and down clammering for a single payer health system, etc. etc., charges of being a neanderthal a bandied about.... but I'm sure that our more sophisticated cousins across the pond couldn't be guilty of such antics....;)

[AntEater]

CCIP's description quite covers what I have heard from "my" russians on Putin and Russia.

Regarding the retargeting of Europe, I suppose the Media got it wrong insofar as Putin did not mean strategic weapons on european targets, but rather specially targeting the missile defence sites in Poland and the CR.
The statement was made in connection with the successful test firing of the "Iskander" theater ballistic missile, which would actually give Russia the conventional precision strike capability and range to do just that.

[Oberon]

Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the Fulda Gap.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6269408.stm

:damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn:

[Heibges]

Just when you thought it was safe to go back into the Fulda Gap.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6269408.stm

:damn: :damn: :damn: :damn: :damn:

Fulda Gap. LOL:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

One of the things I will always regret is not having been able to go on a Reforger.

[USS_shipmaster]

Defensive? dont be naive. it potentially can be used against Russian missles. It brakes strategic balance, firstly political. And of couse they dont want it .Azerbaijan radar station is much closer to Iran. Any agruments that is not modern enough sucks!!! And really Why USA can not use Turkey territory for this defensive stuff?
American foreighn policy sucks. Russian's too...like any other. But USA is very famous for policy named " never put your legs in others shoes". I m naturalized American. But I m not blind. I can evaluate problem from different points of view.

[USS_shipmaster]

http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/spacer15.gif http://www.atimes.com/images/f_images/spacer15.gifWhat they didn't say at Kennebunkport
By Spengler

Nothing like the imagined dialogue below will have occurred at the Bush family compound on the Maine sea coast during President Vladimir Putin's July 1 retreat with US President George W Bush.

Putin, I expect, will have done his best to humor his American counterpart and keep him off his guard. Bush is prepared neither intellectually nor psychologically to understand what a Russian leader must do, and a practical man like Putin would not waste

http://goldsea.com/GAAN/adview.php?what=zone:117&n=a923457d (http://goldsea.com/GAAN/adclick.php?n=a923457d)

words explaining the unexplainable to the uncomprehending. Putin's unenviable task is to persuade Bush of his good intentions, while gaining maneuvering room to take measures that the US will regard as hostile. I have no idea how he tried to bring this off in Kennebunkport. But it is sobering to imagine how the conversation might have gone if Putin had told Bush the unvarnished truth.

Bush: You know, Vladimir, a lot of Americans worry that progress toward democracy in Russia has run into a rough patch. They see journalists being intimidated, businessmen being put in jail, and opponents of your government dying under suspicious http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Front_Page/images/bush-putin.gif circumstances. I want to improve relations with you, but you're getting a lot of bad press.

Putin: Tell me, George - what is your idea of Russian democracy?

Bush: Well, when Boris Yeltsin stood on top of a tank to face down the communists and then had free elections, Americans really got the idea that Russia was on the road to democracy.

Putin: We were on the road to something, that's for sure. Why do you think we went bankrupt in 1998? Everything that wasn't nailed down was going into someone's Swiss bank account. Ask your father about it - he gave a speech to a Goldman, Sachs conference in Moscow in July of that year telling investors what a great opportunity Russia was, a month before we ran out of money.

Bush: You don't need to drag my father into this ...

Putin: I'm not saying he was involved in the looting of Russia, the greatest larceny of all time - I'm pointing out that he was as clueless as the rest of you. If we hadn't cracked down on the crooks and thieves who took the country over and stole everything, we wouldn't be talking right now. There wouldn't be a Russia.

Bush: But can't you keep the country honest by democratic means?

Putin: George, everybody isn't like Americans. If Americans don't like what's going on, they elect a different congressman, sign a petition, take out newspaper advertisements, or whatever. For two generations Russians learned that if you made the wrong kind of joke, you disappeared in the middle of the night. You survived by keeping your head down and drinking your vodka. We used to have political troublemakers - in fact, some of the most enthusiastic ones in the world. They were called "communists". The ones that Josef Stalin didn't kill, he sent to the Gulag. Just who do you think is going to take the lead against crime syndicates with private armies? If the government doesn't do it, no one can - and the means we employ aren't going to be pretty.

Bush: I don't mean to get personal, Vladimir, but I guess you know something about those means.

Putin: You had better believe that I do. Why do you think that the Russian government is in the hands of people who served in State Security? In the bad old days, the only institution that could take initiative was the security services. There was no other place to learn how to exercise power.

Bush: I can understand how bad things were, Vladimir, but you've got to understand how much Americans care about democracy.

Putin: Of course you care about democracy - your population is made up of people who left their countries, forgot their language, abandoned their culture and threw themselves into the melting pot. They believe they have rights. Russians never had any rights to begin with and don't know what it means to defend them.

Bush: I've got to say, Vladimir, that's a hell of a way to run a country.

Putin: Who told you we were a country, George? Russia is an empire. We have 160 different ethnic groups spread across six time zones, and we have plenty of Russians in territories that used to belong to the Soviet Union. Maybe you don't like our history, but you can't run the tape in reverse. Let me give you an example: how many Muslims do you have in the US?

Bush: I don't see why that's relevant, but it's probably 3 million or 4 million.

Putin: That's not even 2% of your population. Do you know how many Muslims we have in Russia? At least 25 million, out of 150 million - and they might be a majority in 50 years, given their birth rates.

Bush: I don't understand your point.

Putin: My point is, do you really want democracy in Russia - one man, one vote? Because if you do, you might end up with an Islamic state half a century from now with more oil than Saudi Arabia and a big nuclear arsenal.

Bush: Vladimir, I don't get what you are driving at. Americans just don't think that way. We're trying to help Muslim countries build democracy so the Middle East can be at peace.

Putin: I don't want to throw cold water on your idea, George, but it doesn't seem to be working out too well in Iraq, or Palestine, or Lebanon, does it?

Bush: Vladimir, I just don't get you at all. If you are so concerned about the Muslims, how come you are making it so hard for us to put sanctions on Iran?

Putin: Did it ever occur to you that you have an insignificant number of Muslims to answer to - and half of them are native-born American blacks who never vote Republican? I have millions of Azeri Shi'ites attending mosques supported by Iran. I don't have the luxury to rap the mullahs on the knuckles and hope they stick their hands back in the pockets. Read what Niccolo Machiavelli had to say on the subject: never inflict a minor injury upon an opponent. Men will avenge themselves against minor injuries, but they can't avenge themselves against major injuries.

Bush: You're not telling me to inflict a major injury on Iran, by any chance, are you, Vladimir?

Putin: If anyone is going to do it, George, it's going to be you - you or the Israelis. I simply can't afford to - at least not for the moment, certainly not until after our presidential elections next March. Maybe you won't have to. Iran is weak. There's still an outside chance that someone reasonable like Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani might replace that lunatic Mahmud Ahmadinejad as president. But there's one thing you can count on: nobody hates the idea of an Iran with nuclear weapons more than we do. Our "near abroad" shares a border with Iran.

Bush: So when push comes to shove, Vladimir, you're going to let me do the dirty work and keep your hands clean?

Putin: Remember, I've got elections six months before you do, and a different kind of succession problem. Your democracy has been around for more than 200 years. We're barely adolescents. I need someone to follow me who's hard and sly enough to prevent Russia from flying apart. We can be tough when we have to be. Or haven't you heard of Chechnya?

Bush: You're not taking into account how tough my problem is - unless I can settle the Iran problem, there's no way I can get US troops out of Iraq without a full-scale war between Shi'ites backed by Iran and Sunnis backed by Saudi Arabia.

Putin: Well, you're on your own there. Don't blame me for that.

Bush: Vladimir, I was hoping we'd come out of this discussion with an understanding of at least one point: Why are you so upset about our putting anti-missile systems into places like the Czech Republic? You know that we can't defend Europe against a Russian missile attack.

Putin: George, it's not just about the missiles. It's about your lily-pad bases in Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and elsewhere in our near abroad. It's about fomenting those pointless color revolutions in Ukraine, Georgia and Kyrgyzstan. You aren't going to get democracy in these places - it's silly presumption. All you will do is foster the centrifugal forces that threaten to tear apart the Russian Federation. Don't you get it, George? We are only three-quarters Russian, and in a generation we might be only half Russian. We haven't recovered from the beating you gave us in the 1980s. Half of adult male deaths in Russia are due to alcoholism. Our women have 13 abortions for every 10 live births. We're fighting for our life. We are not going to let what remains of Russia be torn to pieces.

Bush: Do you think we can find some kind of common ground over Kosovo?

Putin: That's where you are really playing with fire, George. You are proposing to dismember Serbia to add a province to Greater Albania, and you will set a precedent for every breakaway minority that wants to leave Russia. We can't possibly accept this - and I warn you that if you insist on this dangerous and reckless course of action, we will do precisely the same for disputed territories in the near abroad, starting with South Ossetia.

Bush: But Vladimir, how are we going to convince the Muslim world that we can partner up with them for peace if we don't respect the wishes of an overwhelming Muslim majority in Kosovo?

Putin: I hate to put it this way, George, but I think I could teach you a lesson about how to gain influence among Muslims. You aren't particularly popular among Muslims at the moment.

Bush: Okay, you don't have to rub it in. How do you propose to gain influence among Muslims?

Putin: Do you know how many civilians died in Chechnya when we suppressed the rebellion there? No one knows exactly, but the number is around 100,000. We know that half a million Chechens lost their homes. That's half the country. We've been killing Muslims for 300 years. That's why they respect us.

Bush: Vladimir, what you are saying is horrible. The American people will never see the world that way.

Putin: The American people don't have to. They are sitting comfortably in their own continent and think it's a great disaster when a few thousand people are killed in an office building. I'm not suggesting that you go out and explain to your voters that things might be very different in other parts of the world. But I am warning you: we have a tough enough job on our hands. Don't make it harder for us, or you will be sorry.
******************
end of article
*************
I do not agree with everything said above, but
you can judge by yourself

[GakunGak]

Talkin' about KOSOVO? Never wise...:yep: