It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
I only see two ways the west and/or the USA could end up openly the at war . The first is that a international force gets caught up in a civil war in Russia . The other possibility is that after the US loses the second scramble for Africa the contest of over natural resources in the Arctic .
I still say that Saakashvili had his own motives for doing this, and he obviously had Bush43's blessing. If he did not have U.S. approval, he must have thought he did. So far, it looks like Saakashvili is getting what he wanted. Scary, but still impressive. THAT is chess.
PARIS: The overwhelming reaction from America and Europe on the Russian riposte to Georgia's attack on Russian "peacekeeping" forces in South Ossetia has been that Russia showed too much of its claws.
This response evades acknowledgment that the real damage President Mikheil Saakashvili of Georgia has done has been to the United States and NATO, and to Georgia itself, which for the foreseeable future will be a nation of limited sovereignty, and an awkward embarrassment to its Western allies.
Georgia will have Russian troops indefinitely stationed on its territory to protect South Ossetia and Abkhazia - henceforth self-declared independent entities under Russian protection or eventually annexed to Russia, at their own petition. The Russians prefer a self-declaration of independence because, as they like to emphasize, it would follow the Kosovo precedent of self-proclamation of independence from Serbia under American sponsorship.
The crisis has been a turning point in international relations because it demonstrates that the United States will not defend Georgia, despite the impression that Washington, after having trained Georgia's troops and displayed the Saakashvili government as its protégée, was in some way implicated in the Georgian attack on South Ossetia and on the Russian soldiers legally there as "peacekeepers."
The Russian soldiers have been there for 16 years under an international agreement following a first Georgian attempt to "recover" the linguistically and historically distinct South Ossetia and Abkhazia, both of which have been autonomous Russian protectorates or regions since 1810.
Vice President Dick Cheney [and Mrs. Christy McCain] is going to visit Georgia next week, after visits to Azerbaijan and Ukraine - which no doubt are in need of some bucking up after this display of Russian fury and of American "diplomatic restraint" (meaning lack of a rational alternative). American naval vessels are in the Black Sea, and one of them, a destroyer, has delivered some humanitarian supplies to a southern Georgian port.
The Russians have darkly declared their suspicion that American vessels have been delivering arms to Georgia. Even though the Russians destroyed all that was left of the new American military equipment and installations recently given to Georgia, Saakashvili is unlikely to want to start up the war again - at least just now, unless Cheney is going to bring the 82nd Airborne Division and the Sixth Fleet with him.
That, of course, is what Saakashvili seemed to expect the night his invasion turned into a debacle. "Where is America?" he said, "Where is the Free World?" He has since received reassurances from the presidential candidate John McCain and Barack Obama's running mate, Joe Biden, both fans of the unsuccessful Georgian liberator. This has been an inane and stupid affair, except for the unfortunates who got killed or maimed, lost their homes, or have been ethnically cleaned by one side during the past days and are now grieving refugees.
The United States left Saakashvili and the Georgians twisting in the wind, after telling them they were going to belong to NATO and help spread freedom in the Caucasus. Ukraine and the Baltic states have been given the lesson that great powers do not go to war against other heavily armed great powers just to settle ancient sectarian quarrels or linguistic rivalries in client countries, even if those are prospective NATO members.
Poland and the Czech Republic had thought it prudent to humor the obsession of Washington and its arms manufacturers with building a missile-defense system against Iran's committing suicide. Now they find that Russia is furious about something they had taken on faith from the U.S., but turns out to have been, to Washington politicians, a voter-pleasing and money-making boondoggle.
Israel now finds Syria talking with Moscow arms suppliers. Russian cooperation with the U.S. on various matters - Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah, counter terrorism, nuclear non-proliferation, and oil and gas supplies to Europe - is now expected to cease.
Why? Because a certain number of policy types in the Clinton and Bush II administrations, and in the Pentagon, decided that it could be a cost-free demonstration of American power to expand NATO right up to Russia's front door. They could even take over some of Russia's historical dependencies and protectorates - just to show who's No. 1. Opinion by William Pfaff www.iht.com...
[Bold by DW]
In an effort to stay on topic, By helping them, we help ourselves."
Originally posted by xpert11
Justin if you are looking for an uprising in a similar vain to 1968 then keep one eye on Iran . If the reports about the CIA supplying arms to dissent groups are true then an up rising could be in the making sometime in the future . Of course the US government would turn its back on any up rising in Iran after having encouraged such an event to take place for years .
. . looking for an uprising similar to 1968 then keep one eye on Iran. If the reports about the CIA supplying arms to dissent groups are true then an up rising could be in the making sometime in the future.
Of course the US government would turn its back on any up rising in Iran after having encouraged such an event to take place for years. Cheers xpert11.
Originally posted by donwhite
Ugh, IMO the Middle East (as is most of the world) is AWASH in guns. AK47s bring a mere $100. (I’ve read than in many magazines). Iran must have 1000s of such arms inside the country.
While I would put no act of bad judgment beyond the CIA, supplying arms to dissidents in that part of the world to encourage a revolt is just not plausible.
Finally to stay on topic I have a question to those who are following this thread. How would you rate a successful or failed up rising in Iran in terms of importance as an event?
Don you seem to be confusing the fact that you and I know that meddling in Iran is a bad idea with the fact that the CIA, members of Congress and future presidents will think the same way. There may well be pro democracy groups but I also think that you could provide an accurate gauge to many of the opponents of the Iranian regime. Some in Iran may want the country to go the direction of China in terms of capitalism with personal freedoms still suppressed. This fits in with your thinking behind the so called pro democracy groups in Iran.
Even thou to my knowledge there isn’t the same opposition to asset sales in the US as there is locally I would expect Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac to remain in Public ownership in the short to medium term.
It remains to be seen what new regulations will be put in place and other measures will be taken in the wake of the Credit Crunch. If Obama is elected the Republicans may do a flip flop or look towards a policy of returning Fanny Mae and Freddy Mac back to private ownership ASAP. The reasoning behind this would to gather ammo that can be used at the newly elected president.
Originally posted by Justin Oldham
How does this compaire to past financial scandals? What's the generational equivalent?
The scale of Japan's 1980s boom and subsequent bust was breathtaking. In the five years before its 1989 peak, the Nikkei stock average rose 275%. Property prices became so inflated that the tiny spit of land surrounding the Imperial Palace in central Tokyo was briefly worth more than the entire state of California. At the time, Japan's seemingly unstoppable rise inflamed fears among Americans that the United States had slipped into permanent economic inferiority.
When the bubble finally popped in late 1989, stock and property prices nose-dived in tandem. In less than three years, the Nikkei stock average fell 63% from its peak of 38,916. It didn't hit bottom until April 2003 and a total decline of 80%. At Monday's close of 13,326, it remains a fraction of its record high.
Originally posted by xpert11
You don't even have to go back a generation Japan stagnate economy is still fresh in people memory's. The article makes for an interesting read .The US economy could well be stagnate for a decade while passing on the torch of the worlds number one economy to China at the same time