Now this is deeply disturbing.. the pawns move
 

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev on Friday embarked on a four-nation Latin American tour seen as sending a defiant message to the United States at the close of the George W. Bush presidency.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php...show_article=1

I'm guessing we are looking at the Cuban Missile Crisis 2. He can hang out with Chavez. Play in the oil fields. Make few missile bases. Perhaps as a counter to missiles in Poland? Who knows.

Where's President-elect Obama?!? Not a peep. Not surprised. But I think it would be appropriate for the new President-elect to address this. This is a hostile move by the Russians meant to jab at us for our intervention in Georgia. And is clearly meant as more tests for Mr. Obama. The prospects of the next 4 years are frightening.

Edit to add: AVG's right. Our missile defense proposals are a factor as well. Forgot about that. Even though Mr. Obama has shown a disdain for such a system. Like I said before in another thread, if Mr. Obama removes the missile defenses (and it's a real possibility), I have my doubts that it will affect Russian missile deployments in any way. That is, the Russians are going to put their missiles up Eastern Europe's rear-end regardless. Missile defense or no missile defense.

Probably US interference in Georgia on his mind.

Just an added bonus for other thoughts on his mind. Also, there are attempts to make a another type OPEC but in the area of natural gas. Could be a possibility. Both countries are fat with oil.

He can't. He has no power to do anything at this point. It's best that he maintain a low profile until he takes office.

It looks like AVG has made a good analysis :yep:

Cold wars are better at sobering you up than a cold shower...:yep:

We'll see what happenes. But the way I see it, US and Russia are much more allies then they are enemies and have been so for some time. Even during the cold war their efforts weren't really aimed against each other but the various little proxy wars around the world.

Has there ever been such a long 'quiet' war between two world powers in the history of the world? Isn't it about time that these two either sorted out their problems and were open allies or fought it out. And yea I know, nukes blablabla. We've been hearing about the nukes since ever. I think the rest of the world has earned a rest from these two arrogant nations.

That is an amazing statement from someone whose country, along with every other world civilization, would be totally destroyed if we and the Russians ever fought it out.

"nukes blablabla" indeed... Its that kind of thinking that will be the cause of a nuclear war if it ever happens. :nope:

What are you all blind?

He is there to play kissy face with Hugo Chavez and their oil interests as well as the other things mentioned.

Again with this same ol', same ol.

The present state of affairs in the world means wars, starvation, etc. negative things to a lot of people in the world. This is the world order as it stands now. The interests of USA, some European nations (close allies of US) and maybe some Far-East Asian countries come first. Russia is not an economic powerhouse but it seems to be edging itself there, still very shaky and all over the place economically, militarily very strong.

Imagine a world where USA and Russia were either allies or they just fought it out. And instead of nukes they would fight it out traditionally. You know, they would understand that nukes would be a bad thing for everyone so they would agree not to use them. They would only use traditional weapons, no ABC. They wouldn't rely on their allies (ok I admit, this is a bit of a leap but just imagine) and would fight the war mainly over the Bering strait. It would be mostly a naval conflict so lots of boats and subs but no ballistic nukes. This would mean relatively little damage to the rest of the world at least directly from the battles themselves.

Anyway, at the end one would emerge victories but both would have been dropped down a significant notch. No longer would either of them boss the rest of the world around. The end.

Anyway, pardon me, I'm just rambling here. I shall now resume my daily "duck and cover" - drills. :)

with Brazil set to become - or already being - a regional leading power and the US having lost much sympathy in South America in general and having seen contempt for the US rising, Putin would be dump not trying to make hay while the sun is shining. It is a good opportunity for him, because different to the Russian'S ability to react to American interference in Georgia, there is little the US can do when South America is denying the North even more and makes friendship with the Russians - last but not least not only in defense to the US, but against the growing Chinese influence on the South American economy and market as well. as a german commenator yesterday said on TV: "the Southamericans may feel contempt for the US - but of China they are afraid."

You need money to run any military. They may certainly have a lot of toys, but how long can they keep gas in the tanks, bullets in the rifles and food in the stomachs? All of that costs money.

In short, Russia can certainly fight a war, but not a protracted one.

True but I think Russia's whole system is geared towards war. You know, Russians are not big on flower arrangements so things look shabby but when push comes to shove, they will be ready. A lot of people throughout history have been fooled by Russia's apparent 'weakness' (Napoleon, Hitler) but they kinda learned a harsh lesson.

Having said this Russia hasn't really been tested fighting an equal opponent, at least lately. Neither has the USA so we don't really know how things would go. With nukes they can hold the rest of the world hostage, so to speak. With a traditional, no-ABC war they both stand to lose.

that is true in so far as the military is integrated and accepted in civil society to a bigger degree than it is the case in western european nations. But russia is not different to america! In America, too, after the vietnam protests are forgotten since 1991 at the latest, the military again enjoys extremely high (by european standards) acceptance levels again. And different to Russia, American industrial production depends to much greater degrees on wartime production and the assemby of weapons, vehicles and weapon platforms and military goods, so I think you do not really have an argument there. Also I want to remind you that the Russian defense budget is more than 20 times smaller than the american one. Russia is much bigger than germany, nad has a much longer border to defend and faces the Chinese as neighbours and in somewehat disputed terrain - but there defense budget compares to that of Germany (with Germany falling behind France and Britain.)

What is the big deal?

This is a case of double standards.

Why can't Russia court South American countries and if it wished to arrange basing deals. So what if it is with Chavez.

It does seem to be a case of NATO and the US can park themselves all the way up to the Russian border, contravening a deal whereby NATO agreed not to do suich a thing, but as soon as Russia courts countries close to the USA and sells them weapons it is worrying.

OK so Russia isn't the western style democracy and yes has made a lot of noise about sticking Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad, which there already are older TBMs there anyway so its not like Russia doesn't have missiles there.

Also from a UK point of view I am sceptical about the whole need for a missile defense system in europe anyway, aimed at Iran or anyone else. Also I don't feel NATO has really taken Russian concerns into account.

they never had and still don'T. don't get me wrong, by this i do not say that Russia does not demand to be seen as more than it is. It is a regional leading power, but not that global superpower as which it wants to be greeted.

The russians take their mouth a bit too full. And US-NATO speaks with a split tongue. If I were a third power and wpuld need to deal with them, I would hold my weapon at their direction and tell them both: "Keep away from me, no matter what". But as realist, my advise would be to Russia: demand a little bit less and realise your real status instead of blowing it up, and to NATO: be more honest with the Russians in words and deeds, give them the opera ball they want, and stop provoking them: neither NATO nor America is a model for the world that must be pushed everywhere.

With the oil price going down, it's going to leave alot of countries that relied on the high prices short of foriegn currency. Russia, Iran and so on have got use to large inflow of money to send on domestic issues.

Russia will find it hard to increase funding for the military if the price stays this low or keeps going down (maybe one of the reasons why they are pushing for more money from India for the carrier?).

Iran will have problems domesticly as money starts to run short to keep alot of the programs going that keep people happy and employed. The fact that 2/3 of the population is below 30 means that there is a ticking time bomb waiting to go off if not handled well.