I am interested in how exactly Bush plans to "punish" Russia. We have been hearing "punish" alot lately - all talk and no action. We get it - U.S. is pissed off. Nothing new. But where is this talk going to get us? If U.S. really wants to escalate this - than there is nothing that can stop it. And if not - why not calm down already?

Look at Europe - it was barking out alot against Russia innitially. Then the Europeans realized that this will get them nowhere, and that Russia holds the energy card. So they backed off. But U.S. just doesn't let off with venting its anger.



The fact is - U.S. can't really punish Russia all that much. Russia has means at getting back at U.S. and NATO. Russia is by no means a superpower, but if the push comes to shove then Russia wouldn't mind escalating its response either.

It is getting fairly annoying. If anything the more U.S. talks without any actions - the weaker it looks. I see no point in continuing this war of words, if neither side really backs up what they say.




Obviously that's out of question. The worst Bush can possibly do is to petition to get Russia kicked out of G8. And even then - this would only be temporary. Europe already came to terms with Russia, and U.S. is bound to find some new imaginary enemies in the near future to draw its attention away from Russia.




Israel will sit on its hands for a long a time now. It can't do anything against anybody without suffering major political setbacks. The recent war in Lebannon did major damage to Israel internally and politically - far greater than any damage it suffered militarily.





I think that by now it would be in everyone's best interests if U.S. focus more on its internal policies than foreign policy. We get it - U.S. rules the foreign policy global frontier. Great. Now how about sticking to fixing things within its own borders for a change.

My real worry now is what do they have planned before elections.Biden (and others)have said he will look into war crimes against Bush and Cheney if Obama gets elected,now whether he actually will is a different story but if Bush and Cheney have even the slightest fear of going to jail then they may actually do something really bad to stay in power. In fact IMO the only way they wouldn't try something crazy is if they know there won't be any charges against them.IMO

lol, yeah like who? China? Attention away from Russia might be good, in the sense of the lesser of two evils. But somehow I can't see the neocons being that smart. They're going to insist on supporting Georgia, although from what I am reading, NATO has pledged to withdraw from the Black Sea in the 21 day time frame. So maybe this will cool off if we can get through that time without all hell breaking loose there.

But that still won't stop the resulting arms race, as long as NATO continues its thick-headed barbarianism. That friggin $1 billion should have been given to the South Ossetians for their capital that was leveled for rebuilding, not for replacing the few Georgian ships that got sunk.

And while arguments persist over how to slap Putin's hand, the families of hundreds of Ossetians sit uprooted and screaming for their people who were brutally massacred. Where is their retribution, and where is THEIR money? Huh, George W. Friggin Bush? WHERE? How bout a cargo drop of MRE's or something?

reply to post by TrueAmerican

---

Yes, that will be in accordance with the Montreux Convention.

NATO ships entered the Black Sea on August 21; The 21-day time period expires on... yeah, September 11.

Well... this is a conspiracy forum, after all.

Uh... my money is on "Al-Americ-Aeda" lol... yeah I made up the name. But I'm willing to bet if the neo-cons get their way, they'll try to tell you the new threat is a home grown terrorist network... and anyone, even your neighbor, intends you harm.

For that reason, checkpoints will be placed. You will have no freedoms. Anyone caught speaking out against the administration will be suspect members of the terror cell... and oh yeah... papers please?

Just wait. It's one of those steps along the road of fascism... the people of the nation, become the enemies of state.

Interesting coincidence or is it. Iran, watch out. Well, here we go again checking Iranian servers.

They are likely creating a new threat to strip away yet more rights and also justify more spending of hard working middle class tax payers dollars and putting it right into the pockets of the elites.

reply to post by TrueAmerican

---

Interesting, eh?

(Press release: August 28/Updated: September 3)


(nato.int)


NATO doth protest too much?

reply to post by chips

---

Sure it's unrelated

And I got some beach front I can sell you too. I'll even let you pay me in Liberty Dollars.

reply to post by TrueAmerican

---

Well I find it very ironic how much the U.S. and Bush pretended to be in the same boat as Russia during the War on Terror. "Yeah we are on the same team fighting terrorism" and similar crap - I vividly recall Bush announcing to Russia several years ago. Back then Russia wasn't an enemy yet - and Putin was viewed by Bush as and "honest and good guy that can be trusted" or something along those lines.

What has Russia done to become the new enemy of the U.S.? Nothing much. U.S. created an enemy out of Russia - through its arrogant conduct in the War on Terror and its aggressive expansion of NATO into Eastern Europe, and coordination of coups against Russia's allies (or colored revolutions as they are know).



What does this prove? That U.S. recycles enemies and creates new ones virtually out of thin air. Why? I have no idea - Americans should know better. But this is fairly obvious. The people in the U.S. got tired of the terrorists and axis of evil (which wasn't really being all that evil or doing much at all). Come in big bad Russia. Evil Putin and damn commies - what better excuse to waste Pentagon's funds on building up a buffer zone in Eastern Europe.

Soon enough the people in America will become tired of Russia too (presuming there is no Cold War II), and will need a new enemy. I am confindent that U.S. government will use some creativity to make up a new enemy. When will this cycle end? Why does U.S. even need these enemies? Look at Europe - yeah they got pretty worked up about Georgia - and then went back to doing what ever it is they do (make cheese and wine I presume).

The key to solving this lies in overturning the U.S. foreign policy - a policy adhered to by both Democrats and Republicans. The policy that goes hand in hand with the military industrial complex. Virtually all of America's outside problems are of its own making, and someone profits from that. At this point sadly it doesn't look like anyone has the power to reform the U.S. foreign policy - which will eventually lead to something very unpleasant.

[edit on 6-9-2008 by maloy]

While I do fault Russia (how can anyone believe the Russians aren't invading people when they spent months preparing for an attack on Georgia) I think by sending in U.S. military presence, the situation will be provoked further. This cancellation punishment just adds more.

Yep Bush is gonna leave this problem to his successor. He is gonna get his revenge on the two people that screwed him the most. Well I dunno how Obama screwed Bush except all those campaign speeches, but it will be sweet revenge to a Democrat party in full power to deal with such a huge problem in combination with others.

If Obama gets elected, Bush will roll over laughing at how Obama will stutter in the face of Putin.

If McCain gets elected, this will be great payback for all those times McCain has screwed with Bush.

Don't be surprised if on the hours before an Obama or McCain inauguration, if all hell breaks lose around Russia and Israel starts bombing Iran.

I don't like Obama, but if he wins, I hope he is as great as his followers think he is because he will be tested through fire from the start.

I hope McCain is as wise as he wants us to believe also because most men his age will have a heart attack over the stress of his first few years.

reply to post by TrueAmerican

---

Ha? That was unexpected. Why would Israel nuke two neutral to it regions? Especially since as far as Israel foreign policy is concerned - they are part of friendly state?
As for "Great" Israeli wall in south US - trust me, you do not want our guys doing that. After bureaucratic/political/legislative/military inner fights there are people with home on one side of the wall and garden/agricultural field on another! They have to call the army to open the gate to go to work and to return from it! Please, i beg you - reconsider. Chinese did it a lot earlier and a lot better.
Now after i "defended" national pride - on topic!
Maloy:

Just as US needs to solve its issues- Russian needs the same. If US will concentrate on its own problems and withdraw from international politics (which means automatically loss of "only" superpower position) Russia will act just as aggressive to compete with China and EU for leftovers. Do you not see Russian quest for regaining "its" territories? I do not know your position - but i assume that you have no problem with Russian desire not to let Chechnya go. How about Georgians doing the same then? Humiliating small Baltic states, heavily messing with Ukraine, invading Georgia finally - it is not a country that is happy with its current borders. It is not actions of some invisible West that almost all countries on Russian borders fear Russia and want to join its opposition. So blaming US/West for all the problems - was wrong in USSR and is wrong in Russia.
See for yourself - don't you find it weird that when Russia was weaker - it had much more friends around its borders? Ukraine was friendly, even Georgia was friendly. And even relationships with Estonia/Lithuania/Latvia were a lot better. Then Russia with new leadership and a new approach starts to mess with its neighbors - and they naturally seek help at other side. What happened first- orange revolution in Ukraine or Russian involvement in elections over there?
I think that if Russian citizens will stop blaming the West for all their troubles and look at the direction of Russian leadership and what (or more importantly - how) it does things in foreign relations, they will see the reason for current political isolation.
As for EU - to assume that they are back to "wine/cheese" after letting of a steam is very naive/egocentric. Nobody will mess with Russia before the winter on such short notice. But in long term - "wine/cheese" guys made their notes.

Either the UN are being sucked into what the US are doing or they are in on it aswell. Remember power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Georgia has admitted to dropping cluster bombs on civilian targets which are illegal weaponry, so where's the sanctions against them? Russia have been percieved to be the bad guys straight from the beginning and none of the western world has taken what georiga did into account. And why did georgia attack on the same day as the opening ceremony of the olympic games, knowing full well russian peacekeepers would be killed. And what about the US's missile defence systems? they are now on the doorstep of russia in poland just to annoy them even more. Then there was the military exercise a few weeks ago when a US,british and french warships were practising the blocking of iranian ports in the persian gulf right before russia's eyes.

Many Americans do know better. I just wish our government did.



Yeah Americans were tired of the war on terror as soon as it was revealed that Bush sold us this war on lies. "Retribution" for "9/11" was had pretty thoroughly, and erroneously, in Afghanistan against the Taliban- when instead the US military should have been lounging in Abdullah's biggest palace after shoving an oil well up his rear. The need to go into Iraq it seems was more for strategic positioning to widen the beach head for the assault on Iran. They are no doubt already figuring out who's going to share in the contracts for that huge swath of oil fields along the Iran/Iraq border.

Conquer Iraq, install puppets, and get contracts to buddies. Why would Iran be any different? The writing is pretty much on the wall for them.

But not sure I'd agree that the US government is "tired" of the war on terror. Remember that Bush just extended the state of national emergency, with respect to terrorism- and his supposed need to fight it. He's just making sure he and Cheney's buddies in the military industrial complex are well no-bid contracted even after he leaves office. And that's if we make it that far without him pulling an NSPD 51.

reply to post by xmotex

---

Well said!

I agree completely.

It’s no secret that war on terror is a really good source of income for big Gov. and it always generates hefty taxpayer dollars to support the self proclaimed cause! Big Gov. need not ask the opinion of the blue collar family, the homeless, or any other group in these United States that struggles every day to keep their heads above water.

“We had better clean off our own porch before we try to clean others”

German's foreign minister Steinmaier demands a full investigation by the EU to clarify who really started the war in Georgia. Seems Germany do not go along with the Bush gang once again...

And it did and still does. For much of his first term and a good part of his second, Putin concentrated on major internal reforms - particualarly economic onces. Even despite the recent events, Russia still has a very limited and passive foreign politicy. Medvedev also campaigned for internal reforms, and now that he is elected he mostly concentrates on that.

While Russian is now more involved in foreign policy than with Yeltsin, it is still hardly a player on the world stage that U.S. is, and doesn't really aspire to it all that much.





Do you honestly think that a sole-superpower world run by businessmen and the military industrial complex adds stability or safety to the world? U.S. does what is pleases. Who would save people from the U.S.? If U.S. decides to attack Iran, who will save the tens of thousands of innocent civlians who are bound to die? We hardly live in a peaceful world today - and U.S. is much to thank for that.

And it is understandable that U.S. doesn't want to give-up its position on the top of the hill. Fair enough - not many would. But think what will it eventually lead to if U.S. retains this militaristic agenda? U.S. doesn't have to withdraw completely under its own shell - just reform the foreign policy. War (especially on the scale of Iraq or Iran) should not be something that is waged preemptively or that is a viable alternative. War shouldn't be a crutch for the U.S. - something to fall back on if your diplomacy doesn't go the way you like.

Same goes for NATO's actions. Why did NATO expand to Eastern Europe, back when Russia was still weak and unthreatening under Yeltsin?





No. Why would I. Did Russia invade any of "its territories" in the last 15 years? Did Russia even invade Georgia when it had the chance to (and I don't mean occupy 2 towns for a few week)?




I have a problem with the way Russia prevented Chechnya from being let go. And I have a problem with the way Georgia acted. Two wrongs don't make a right.




What is this? How has it humiliated them?




Huh? "Heavily messing" would involved dropping 5,000 lb bombs on Kiev (ala U.S. in Iraq). Raising gas prices is called capitalizm.





More like - it is not a country that is happy with its pupper neighbors and their aggressive rhetoric.




Aye - that's how puppets work. It would be more accurate to say that local government purposely want Russia to be perceived as a threat, so that they can join NATO and reap the benefits of being America's buddy (read b*tch).




Not all problems. Just some foreign policy problems. See - S Ossetia and Abkhazia conflicts aren't the fault of the U.S. But it is the fault of U.S. toa degree that Georgia restarted them through a bloody mess.





Not really. Ukraine was never an ally of Russia. Kravchuk and Kuchma had major differences with Russia. So did Shevarnadze in Georgia. Poland and the Baltics were always throwing feces everywhere like they do now. They weren't Russia's friend, but they were major trading partners, and they wanted to keep up positive relations with Russia. That didn't chance with Russia becoming less weak - it changed with "Colored Revolution" coups orgnazied by the West.





Not true. Differences existed - but both sides choose to be more optimistic in resolving them.




Lol. When was that?




Define "mess". Give some examples. Most of Russia's moves were reactionary to what was happening with NATO and U.S.-backed coups, not the other way around. Look at the timelines.




What involvement was that? Yanukovich won the election. He was ousted with a threat of coup by Yuschenko. Russia didn't like this, but didn't get involved. Then Yuschenko fell in the bathroom for all we know - there is no medical consensus on his cursed face.




Part of a reason. Again - what the Russian leadership is doing is not good, but I see it as reactionary. Once again - look at the timeline of events. U.S./NATO makes a step, then Russia makes a step. I am not saying Russia is outright provoked, but U.S. has been playing its game in Eastern Europe long before Putin came around.




And what - were it not for the winter and the gas/oil - you think Europeans would mess with Russia? Ah yes - the mighty French, and the warmongering Germans, and antagonistic Italians, the hotheaded Spaniards, and the imperialistic Brits, and scavenging Scandinavians. I am sure they are all just itching for a fight. I am sure they all have nothing better to do than have pretend wars with pretend enemies.

What would you want the European to do? Be excited about having a new enemy and pave their own way towards a Cold War.

Europe has a slightly different rhetoric and mentality from the U.S. if you hadn't noticed. Call it weak and passive if you will. But then you don't have thousands of French and Germans dying in Iraq. You don't have politicians far more concerned with boogeymen overseas than with their own economies. You don't have 2/3 of the world despising Europe for making cheese and wine.

Summary of changes in Russia's relations with its neighbors in the last 8 years (Putin's administration and major policy changes):


No change in relations:

Finland, Slovakia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania, Greece, Turkey, Israel, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan.



Improved relations:

Relations with France marginally imrpoved when Chirac was in power. Stayed relatively positive under Sarkozy.

Relations with Italy improved under Berlusconi.

Relations with Germany greatly imrpoved under Schroeder, and many cooperative energy projects and economic partnerships. Not changed since Merkel came to power.

Relations with Belarus improved gradually, as talks are underway for potential unification of the two countries.

Relations with Armenia improved slightly.

Relations with Iran/Venezuela/Syria improved because of their stand-off against the U.S.

Relations with China and India marginally improved, and many economic projects are underway.

Relations with Kazakhstan slightly improved.



Soured Relations:

Relations with Ukraine worsened after Yuschenko's coup against Yanukovich. On the other hand relations with the Ukrainian parliament and Party of Regions improved.

Relations with Czech Republic slightly worsened after it joined NATO.

Relations with Baltics continued to sour because of their NATO membership and harsh criticism of Russia.

Relations with Georgia worsened under Saakashvili - obviously. This is the result of Saakashvili's political coup against Shevarnadze.

Relations with U.S.'s Bush administration gradually declined from good to bad.

Relations with Poland marginally worse as the result of policies of nationalistic Polish leadership.

Relations with UK worsened after UK sheltered criminal oligarchs and Chechen terrorists.






So there you have it - there isn't really a big net change in Russia's foreign relations. While some relations soured, others improved a great deal. Notice how much of the changes are based on Russia's relations with leaders of respective countries. If leaders and nationalistic, then relations likely worsened. If leaders are businessmen and economists, then relations likely improved.

reply to post by maloy

---

Nope. I think that ideal bi-polar world with two mutually respecting superpowers will work better. Now it is not going to be bi-polar for several decades anyway.

NATO did not expanded on former Soviet Union turf until 2004 - former Baltic states. Deep in Putin's rule.

It is a month since Georgia started this war. And Russian troops are in Georgia proper. I do not believe they are there for good - they probably use it to throw Saakashvilli off , but in Abkhazia and South Osetia - there is de-facto Russian rule. And those were internationally recognized part of Georgia. I think that is is the start of reshaping the borders. Ukraine and Crimea will be next.

Now come on! I do not live there and i heard about "cyberwar", semi-blockades and such as a response to statue re-arrangement. I disagree too with Estonian actions - but it is no reason to humiliate them.

I hope it will never be this way! What i meant -

en.wikipedia.org...
If he would not be involved that much - Ukraine leadership would still be pro-Russian.

Belorussia too? The only country i can safely say is nobody's puppet - and look at their recent behavior. They are worried. They talk with EU, and it is going to stop its sanctions. Coincidence that it happens now? Lukashenko also fears Russian passport handouts.


Quoting:
"In February 2002, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Yevgeni Gussarov presented to Estonian ambassador Karin Jaani a non-paper list of seven demands to be fulfilled by Estonia in order to improve the relations of the two countries."
en.wikipedia.org...
And what a coincidence - Estonia refused and since then it is down the hill.

As for mess and examples - Ukraine - elections (Putin actively promotes certain candidate,congratulates even before results are in) and economic games;Baltic states - constant pressure,economic games, ethnic card; Caucasus - pressure, ethnic card, keeping conflict on slow fire; Poland - Katyn handling, economic games,direct threats.

Yes. Not in blunt US way. But Europeans have eyes and ears.

www.boston.com...
It also says that they are going to get closer to US and other stuff.

Now for your list or changes in relationships - it is a lot of work.
But i spoke about neighbors. Russian-Israeli relationships actually improved (i hope that this Georgian affair will not spoil them) but Israel is not worried about Russian invasion. Check neighbors.