Recently, the US military has started re-working how we decide what’s right and what’s wrong in terms of how we use our nuclear weapons, and is focusing on seven “Main threats.” Amongst them are Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lybia, and North Korea. Okay, these one’s I can understand because apparently, we’ve had a lot of trouble with them (and we’ll probably have more after Bush’s "Axis of Evil statement, way to go “Dubbya”). But also on the list were China and Russia. Okay, China, a little understandable because during the last trip there, they said they were still going to sell technology and information to any country willing to pay, including our “enemies,” but why Russia? To my understanding, they’re our friends. Is this still just residual bitterness about the whole Cold War, or is there something more that I just haven’t noticed? I understand they’re still in sales, but is that any reason to announce publicly that they’re on our “Seven Countries we Don’t Trust and are willing to Bomb” list? If Russia’s done something to us lately that I’m missing, please let me know, otherwise, it seems to me we’re just getting ready to piss off another nation for no reason.
Russia has a sizable and poorly regulated nuclear arsenal. Russia has a sizable chemical and biological weapon stockpile, also poorly regulated. Russia has a great capacity to produce more of all of the above. Russia has a very poor, very disgruntled population. [By Russia, I mean the all the states/countries of the former Soviet Union]
Additionally, many of the southern countries, near the Middle East and South Asia, are terrorist hideouts. Strictly speaking, these aren’t Russia, but Moscow (the Russian capital) does what little it can (on no budget) to reign in these states.
Russia is a huge threat - not as direct as an Iraq or North Korea, but simply due to its total collapse.
D_Odds states the case very well. Also the recent Robert Hansen and Aldrich Ames spy cases should add to the “not friends” argument. Hansen gave up several of our double agents in Russia, who were later killed by the Russians. He severely compromised our intelligence and military assets with valuable information he sold to Russia until he was caught last year. So while we may have a better relationship than we had during the Cold War, we are far from friends.
Aren’t we friends with Russia?
If GW keeps at it we aren’t going to be “friends” with anybody
Isn’t there a possibility, due to the very collapse of control of the nuclear arsenal, that the West is most threatened by (fanatical) people who are unlikely to be swayed by threats of mutually assured destruction? Thus rendering the “Russia” part of GWB’s rhetoric more harmful - in the “look at that warmongering imperialist” way - than helpful.
From this BBC article : http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1864000/1864173.stm
"As for Russia, the report says that it is only listed in view of its own large nuclear arsenal and it is not viewed as an enemy. "
That seems like a reasonable reason to me.
The statement in 1997–that of approximately 100 “suitcase” tactical nukes, two-thirds were unaccounted for–would be enough reason to consider Russia a threat if it were still true. (Does anyone know if they’ve found all their bombs yet?)
As for the espionage, I honestly don’t think that in and of itself it’s as big an issue as people might think. We spy on the British (and they spy on us) but they’re pretty good friends. It’s just that you’re more willing to forgive your friend for beating you at poker than you would be if a conniving card shark did the same.
jjimm
Would you mind providing a cite for GWB’s Russian rhetoric? Or did you just assume that since you hate hate all things Bush, then he must have threatened Russia?
I’ll be waiting for that quote.
I think what jjim was referring to as ‘rhetoric’ was the inclusion of Russia on the list. Also I have noticed that President Bush has been a bit belligerent in general. I mean to say that he’s said some pretty harsh things like calling Iran, Iraq and North Korea an “Axis of Evil”. There have also been things like not following the Geneva Accords and the ABM treaty, I mean, OK, so he maybe isn’t being really confrontational with Russia and maybe what he’s doing is necessary, but he’s not making friends with other countries either.
How does that make Russia a threat? This seems to be the classic non sequitur.
Seen that brandished around a whole lot, with little evidence to back it up.
So how is the use of nuclear weapons a solution?
Yeah, but the US doesn’t want friends, it wants puppets 
Since Dubya has then denied any changes to the nuclear policy, I see this whole thing as some kind of lamebrained weather balloon designed to test reactions. I doubt such a leak is possible without the government purposefully leaked it.
Hmmm, don’t recall saying they were…nope, I didn’t. I did answer the OP about why Russian can be considered a threat. But, please, keep trying to put words in my mouth.
C-O-N-T-I-N-G-E-N-C-Y
P-L-A-N-S…
It would be irresponsible for our government not to look at many possible scenarios before they happen.
It’s not like you can look at Russia’s past and try to convince us that dramtic political change can’t happen there suddenly.
Having contingency plans for dealing with Russia in a nuclear war doesn’t come close to Bush throwing around rhetoric towards Russia.
Cite please?
I know some of you guys just hate Bush…but I never looked at our President as a social co-ordinator. Accepting for one second that your premise was correct, his first responsibility is to America. Protecting our country against mass murdering terrorist attacks are a big priority. Keeping the rest of the world happy takes a backseat to our safety.
Now that your second is over…
Among other things…
I would have to note that our troops are not alone in Afghanistan. In my opinion relations with Russia seem to be improving. Bush is strenghtening relations with Mexico. England has proved itself once again as our closest ally.
So I don’t see Bush in a negative light.
You’re correct: rhetoric was the wrong word for me to use. I meant inclusion on a list that, with further research, appears to have been leaked anyway, rather than officially released. My bad.