Tag: Russia

Why should U.S. not meddle in the Ukraine Situation?

Because of this here, kudos to Lew Rockwell and his friends for bringing it up:

Ukraine is a dangerous situation because the U.S., at least verbally, is threatening Russia and because Putin and Obama, at least in public, analyze, understand and see the situation there in very different ways. We do not know what was said when Obama and Putin recently conversed at length by telephone. The U.S. and E.U. have embraced the revolution, while Russia does not see that riots are part of a democratic process.

A key problem in Ukraine is that there is a strong right-wing, ultra-nationalist and neo-Nazi type party and other similar groups that have played a key role in generating the violence that brought down the government and breaking an agreement reached in late February. Putin’s rationale for a Russian presence in Ukraine includes reference to this destabilizing and violent element. On the other hand, the public statements of Kerry and Obama focus almost solely on Russia’s reactions and on generalities about democracy and the Ukrainian people. Putin has not, however, said anything against that democratic aspiration. He sees the Svoboda party as having undermined it.

via U.S. Should Not Meddle in Ukraine – LewRockwell.com.

Update: Now a major Memeorandum topic.

I still do not trust the Russians

Rod Dreher is quite happy that we have supposedly avoided a war with Syria. I guess he trusts a leader of a Nation that has lied to the United States many times before.

He writes the following:

I’m sure Sen. John McCain is on the verge of spontaneously combusting this morning over the news from Geneva. We are going to hear from the GOP’s superhawk wing that Obama has gone wobbly, has caved, has revealed himself to be a squish. It is up to what I hope is a newly emerging Paulite (Rand) wing of the GOP to stand up to the usual hawkish Republican claque. I do not believe that every Republican, at least at the grassroots, opposed Obama’s proposed war on Syria simply because it was Obama’s idea. Those Republicans who did allow themselves to be driven not by principle, but by uncut partisanship, in opposing the president’s plan must be made to consider the principles at issue in this episode, so that when a future Republican president starts up with the same belligerent nonsense, they will resist it just as strongly.

HA! Laughing Good luck with that one! As long as those who were directly involved with the rigged trial of the Lord Jesus Christ are running the Republican Party, this will never change, ever. Frustrated Last time I checked the Podhoretz and Kristol families were not hurting for cash and still had a good amount of influence within the Republican Party.

Nice thought, but no, that will never change. Everyone that has resisted the hawks on the right has been beaten in an election. Perfect example? Romney. Kristol did everything he could to keep Romney from getting elected. Kristol also recently pronounced Palin is not having a future in politics.  Furthermore, Kristol was one who basically got Glenn Beck taken off Fox News. Because Glenn dared to call Kristol to the carpet on Iraq.

On Putin’s Op Ed in NYT

It’s nothing more than soviet communism:

My working and personal relationship with President Obama is marked by growing trust. I appreciate this. I carefully studied his address to the nation on Tuesday. And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is “what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.” It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too. We are all different, but when we ask for the Lord’s blessings, we must not forget that God created us equal.

via What Putin Has to Say to Americans About Syria – NYTimes.com.

  1. It is classic soviet communism to say that there should be no difference between anyone; everyone should have the same, no rich, no poor — everyone the same. That is one the classic tenets of soviet communism.
  2. It is gross distortion of the Bible as well. The Bible says that “God is no respecter of persons.” What it does not say, is that we should all be of one class. God never promised any sort of wealth in the Bible at all.

Again, Putin is trying and it seems to making a mockery of Obama, and quite honestly, it is quite deserved. You simply do not draw a line in the sand and then try to erase it, because it makes you look weak.

I never thought I would ever see the say, when an American President was made sport of, by a soviet-era crypto-communist. It is a sad thing to behold.

Others: Yahoo! News, protein wisdom, CNN, Firedoglake, The Hill, The Daily Caller, National Review, BBC, Guardian, Telegraph, Washington Monthly, Erik Wemple, Post Politics, Associated Press, Mediaite, Ed Driscoll, AMERICAblog News, Washington Free Beacon, ABC News, Politico,Religion News Service, Questions and Observations, CBS News, Business Insider, RT, First Read,Wonkblog, TheBlaze.com, emptywheel, RIA Novosti, Roll Call, Weekly Standard, Gawker, Reuters,Washington Examiner, Vox Popoli, American Spectator, CFR.org, The Huffington Post, Booman Tribune, Hot Air, Duck of Minerva, Sense of Events, The Dish, World News, msnbc.com, Hullabaloo,Weasel Zippers, Daily Kos, Twitchy, Alan Colmes’ Liberaland, WorldViews, The Week, NO QUARTER USA NET, Roger L. Simon, Connecting.the.Dots, Washington Wire, CBS New York,Capitol Report, No More Mister Nice Blog, Taylor Marsh, The Hinterland Gazette, The Moderate Voice, Power Line, The Raw Story, The Verge, Prairie Weather, Poynter, Althouse, The Gateway Pundit, Fox News Insider, Jihad Watch, The Lonely Conservative, The Reaction, American Power,ABC News and The Other McCain, more at Mediagazer »

White House shrugs off threat of retaliation from Assad

The absolute arrogance of this White House is astounding:

The White House on Monday shrugged off Syrian President Bashar Assad’s thinly veiled threat of retaliation if the United States goes ahead with military strikes against his country.

Assad told CBS news that there will be “repercussions” for any American attack, ominously warning “you should expect everything.”

Asked about those comments, Deputy U.S. National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes told Yahoo News “it’s not in his interest to escalate with the United States, because that only invites greater risk to him.”

But what about the 1988 Lockerbie bombing? Agents of Libyan strongman Moamer Kadhafi were convicted of that attack, which came not quite three years after American warplanes struck Tripoli. And Syria has been a regular on the State Department’s list of state sponsors of terrorism since 1979. Is that a concern?

“We’re prepared for every contingency,” Rhodes replied, before repeating: “It’s not in his interest to escalate. That would only invite greater risk for him.”

via White House dismisses Assad retaliation threat – Yahoo! News.

I seem to remember when President Bush was in the White House, that he too had the same sort of arrogance; as if to say, “we’re going to do what we damned well please and we don’t give a flying flip what anyone thinks about it.” The sick part is, that Obama White House is doing the same very thing. This is not what the Democratic Party voted in, this is not what all those Obama supporters voted for; they voted for change and this President is playing the “Business as usual” game.

I can tell you this; if Obama does go ahead with a strike, and it explodes into an all out war, that it will be the end of the Democratic Party for a very long time. This sort of using the Military as a pawn in a chess game, does not sit well with the American people at all. Especially seeing that we just came out of eight long years of war in Iraq. Especially when you have members of the MIlitary suffering from the after effects of war. It is insane to do what Obama is doing; especially seeing that this rebels have the backing of Al-Qaeda.

I believe that President Obama is making a terrible mistake and that the Al-Qaeda terrorists have laid for him a trap and he is walking right into it. The problem is that he is taking America itself, over half of which do not support this horrific action, right into the trap as well.

 

Max Boot makes a very good point

I must be slipping. Silly

I am actually sitting here and agreeing with something that Max Boot wrote in Commentary Magazine. Surprise

Quote:

Today the U.S. Navy must prepare for two major wars–one against Iran in the Persian Gulf, the other against China in the Western Pacific–while also combating piracy off the coast of Africa, dealing with unexpected wars such as the one in Libya last year, supporting ground operations in Afghanistan and other theaters, combating drug runners in the Caribbean, and showing the flag in the Mediterranean, Indian Ocean, and other seas. The operational tempo dictated by these requirements is terrific, as I have seen for myself in the last few years in visits to the 5th Fleet in the Persian Gulf and the 7th Fleet in Japan.

The ships we have are, when not retrofitting in port, almost constantly at sea and they are struggling to keep up with threats ranging from Chinese “aircraft-killer” ballistic missiles and submarines to Iranian mines and cruise missiles–not to mention the ever-present threat of cyberattack and terrorism (of the kind which crippled the USS Cole). Yes, the capabilities of each naval ship are greater today–but so are its range of potential missions and so are the capabilities of our potential foes. China is expanding its maritime capabilities at a rapid clip; the U.S. Navy is struggling to keep up and the balance of power in the Western Pacific is shifting against us.

That is in large part why the bipartisan Hadley-Perry Commission concluded in 2010 that the Navy should have 346 ships. Yet today it has only 282 ships–and falling. As former Navy Secretary (and Romney adviser) John Lehman noted in April: “The latest budget the administration has advanced proposes buying just 41 ships over five years. It is anything but certain that the administration’s budgets will sustain even that rate of only eight ships per year, but even if they do, the United States is headed for a Navy of 240-250 ships at best.”

That is a looming strategic disaster–and one that no amount of quips about horses and bayonets can wish away. If we don’t build more ships, our global maritime dominance–the basic underpinning of the world’s strategic and economic stability–is in real danger of slipping away.

The only thing that I have a quibble with, is that he actually forgot Russia. If Max thinks that Russia is not a threat to our National Security; he is nuts. As long as Putin has his hands in the Government in Russia, the United States should be very worried. Putin is a holdover from the communist era in Russia and he would just love to take Russia back to the old Communist era. So, they are a threat, as a matter of face they were just testing missiles yesterday.

Reagan always said, when it came to Russia; “Trust, But Verify” and Reagan always did try and independently verify anything that the Russians were saying or doing. All of the Presidents since then have not been so careful, as far as I know. As much as I know that it is going to make me sound like a conspiracy theory kook; I really do not believe that Russia is to be trusted at all. Communism never quite dies, it just takes on new shapes and names. Sort of like what we have here in America, as it is called —- imperfect Marxism.

However, over in Russia, I believe it to be a bit more sinister and complex; those who would want to bring back old soviet-style communism, have plenty of funding, as many in the Russian Business and underworld, would stand to make a good deal of money, if the old Communist Party came back to power. So, that is a threat and I believe our Military should always be on the ready, for when the Russians decided to show muscle.

I hate to be the one to say it; but, anyone who thinks that there are not threats to the security of this Country and others in the region, is at the very least highly uninformed. This is why I always had a quibble with Ron Paul’s foreign policy. As Paul’s foreign policy was just simply not rooted in the realities of the time. Ron Paul seems to be stuck in a utopian era, before World War 2. Truth is, times have changed, and we must be responsible as a Nation to protect this great Republic of ours, from those who wish to cause it harm. This is not a “Neo-Con” foreign policy, that is a reality based, Pro-American foreign policy.

Sadly, Ron Paul refuses to accept that argument and that is why I always had trouble taking him seriously, except maybe on matters of fiscal policy. Even then, some of his ideas are just not rooted in reality. Nice ideas, but a bit out of step for the realities of today.