The NY Times reported that President Obama has decided to stop work on the missiles, which were to be placed in Poland, intended to protect Eastern Europe from attack.
The Poles and Czechs are furious-but the Russians are pleased. This is no surprise, as Putin has remarked that the project was intensely disliked by him. Now the question is:will Russia offer anything for this?
Personally, I think this is a wise move on Obama’s part-we have been (needlessly) antagonizing the Russians on this, and removing the issue ought to improve our relations.
Yes, Putin has agreed to export nuclear technology and more weapons to Venezuela. So it’s all good.
I wouldn’t say the Poles and Czechs are necessarily furious. They did expend quite a bit of political capital to move closer to the US and away from Russia, only to have us acquiesce to the Russians, but there are ways they can forge closer ties with us that don’t involve antagonizing Russia.
I have to think that this is a prelude to some sort of assistance with Iran.
Vladimir Putin will not reciprocate with something equally good to the US I’m certain although there’s a good chance he might trade off something rather trivial for this. Seriously why have we betrayed our allies again (like Honduras) and embolden potential rivals. Russia was not going to have a war or even a sanction against teh US for the missile shields.
It’s partly about the US wanting backing from Russia in the forthcoming talks with Iran, so they say over here.
What’s to reciprocate? Were the Russians building a missile shield of their own?
Was Honduras a U.S. ally under Zelaya, before the coup? It was no enemy, certainly, but I think Zelaya was too friendly to Venezuela to be “allied” with the U.S. And I know Honduras has not been a U.S. ally at any time since the coup. So what are you talking about?
They were selling Iran nuclear technology.
See this baseball bat,** Mac**? Its a Louisville Slugger, genuine. Solid wood. Truly a bitch pounding that spike through it.
If I hear one word out of you that sounds even remotely like “We got to stop Putin before he gives WMD to the Iranians!”, I’m going to start clubbing you with it.
Bwahahahaha…
I’m sorry, but I can’t…bwahahahahahah
Putin… reciprocate… bwahahahaha
Sorry. I was overcome by the moment.
More seriously, this is exactly the kind of boneheaded thinking Democrats are famous for. “Oh, let’s show how nice we are by unilaterally giving up a military system our adversaries fear! Then once they see how nice we are, they’ll realize there’s nothing to be afraid of, and they’ll deal with us more fairly, and we’ll all get along and raise puppy dogs and join hands in the spirit of peace and harmony!”
What, Putin’s giving missiles and nuclear technology to Venezuela? He’s refusing to help us disarm Iran? He’s threatening Canada’s sovereignty in the north? He’s assassinating reporters on foreign soil? Well, it must be our fault! Here, let’s give him another gift, to show that we’re REALLY nice!
So far as I can tell, Obama gave up those missiles for nothing. They were a prime bargaining chip, and he threw it away. Not only that, but he’s continuing his pattern of sucking up to the U.S’s enemies and pissing all over the U.S’s allies. This is a critical mistake, because as the Czech ex-president said today, it sends a signal to Moscow that the ex-Soviet Republics are no longer firmly under the U.S’s umbrella, and that support for them by America is at best circumstantial. This could trigger all sorts of aggressive Russian moves. Putin may now decide to push some more boundaries to test just how far the resolve of the U.S. really goes.
This, by the way, was exactly the motivation of the Soviet Union during the Cuban Missile Crisis - to test a young Democratic president who they perceived to be soft on defense. Let’s just hope history doesn’t repeat itself.
In addition, the people of the ex-Soviet Republics were firmly pro-American, and by stabbing them in the back after they stuck their necks out to approve the missile installations in the first place, Obama is going to damage America’s reputation with them. Just as he’s done with the people of Israel and Honduras.
What missiles are those?
The neo-con wet dream missiles that don’t exist - the missiles that, in development, have attianed only a 50% strike rate, the missiles that depended on the right weather conditions for accuracy?
There aren’t any missiles to give up.
As for the realpolitik, it’ll take months and years to weigh the consequences of this geo-political and strategic judgement.
What missiles? You know, the ones the Russians were having conniption fits over. Clearly, they didn’t share your assessment of their usefulness.
The missiles that Putin didn’t want protecting Europe? To be replaced with a"smarter, stronger and swifter" system involving both sea-based and land-based mobile interceptors? The ones using proven technologies to create an effective missile defence system? Is this a neo-soc wet dream?
Link
i.e. the missiles **do not **exist.
Someone better tell Obama.
But the whole point of bargaining chips is to give them away, isn’t it? We don’t know what Putin agreed to in return - I mean, it’s not as if the Kremlin is known for being forthcoming with information. I’m sure that in the coming months we’ll see inklings of the secret agreement that was just made between the U.S. and Russia.
Besides, the Russians weren’t afraid of the missiles; they were nervous about American forces encroaching into their comfort zone. They’re like that.
Tell him what? That’s he’s “giving up” something that doesn’t work, or something that doesn’t exist or something for which success of the technology depends on which way the wind is blowing?
Did you see that base in Poland on the news, weeds and rust surrounding 40-year old tarmac - there is nothing there.
You said the missiles don’t exist.
That’s because . . . they don’t.
You going to tell me otherwise - that the (so far) $100 billion centrepiece of the neo-con defensive strategy is out there defending the homeland as we speak?