# Russia insecure yet again. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 22, 2008, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636 "2008-09-22T04:13:13Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![gravitycrash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@gravitycrash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gravitycrash)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2008, 4:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/1 "2008-09-22T04:13:13Z")
Why does Russia feel the need to bluster about old cold war stuff? This is a serious question. They have the second largest landmass and feel fear from attack, by who? What are they going on about? If anyone believes that Putin is not still in charge really needs a reality check Maybe I could use some remedial history lessons but it doesn’t seem likely that Germany or China will be attacking anytime soon. ---
**Author:** ![Henrichek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/5daacb/32.png) [@Henrichek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Henrichek)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2008, 12:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/2 "2008-09-22T12:19:23Z")
> [@gravitycrash](#): > > Why does Russia feel the need to bluster about old cold war stuff? This is a serious question. They have the second largest landmass and feel fear from attack, by who? > What are they going on about? If anyone believes that Putin is not still in charge really needs a reality check > Maybe I could use some remedial history lessons but it doesn’t seem likely that Germany or China will be attacking anytime soon. Unless there have been some major shift of borders which must have eluded the world media, Russia should be in possession of the largest landmass in the world, about 71% larger than the second largest (Canada). I’m not sure what bluster you are talking about though. To me it seems more like USA is stuck in the cold war mentality, trying to encircle Russia and constantly treating it as an enemy. About Putin being in charge or not, how is that relevant to the issue? ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2008, 12:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/3 "2008-09-22T12:42:03Z")
> [@gravitycrash](#): > > Why does Russia feel the need to bluster about old cold war stuff? This is a serious question. They have the second largest landmass and feel fear from attack, by who? > What are they going on about? If anyone believes that Putin is not still in charge really needs a reality check > Maybe I could use some remedial history lessons but it doesn’t seem likely that Germany or China will be attacking anytime soon. You missed the fact that it is America who is encircling them and making very ugly noises. America has become very aggressive and Russia has good reason to feel threatened. I think it was Don Quixote who said “When you see you neighbor’s beard being shaven you can start soaking your own”. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2008, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/4 "2008-09-22T13:07:20Z")
From _The Nation,_ 09/17/08, [“Ten National Security Myths”:](http://www.thenation.com/doc/20081006/myths/2) > [@](#): > > \*\*Myth 6. Vladimir Putin’s Russia is an authoritarian state pursuing an anti-American agenda aimed at reconstituting the Soviet Union in the form of a new Russian empire. \*\* > > McCain has seized on the crisis in Georgia to advance this alarmist view and to push his policy of ejecting Russia from the G-8 and expanding NATO to include Georgia and Ukraine. Obama initially took a more nuanced position toward the crisis but has recently joined McCain in promising NATO membership to Georgia. McCain’s characterization of Russia is wrong for two reasons. > > First, Russia’s foreign policy has not been anti-American. Moscow has cooperated with Washington on a number of important international issues, from assisting NATO against the Taliban in Afghanistan and supporting Washington’s counterterrorism efforts, to joining the coalition to curb Iran’s nuclear enrichment program. > > Second, what McCain sees as a pattern of intimidation to re-establish the Russian empire more objective analysts see as a great power protecting its legitimate interests in the face of US provocations. These provocations started during the Clinton administration and have increased under Bush, with the expansion of NATO to Russia’s border and abrogation of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. They have continued with the promise of NATO membership to Georgia and Ukraine and the decision to deploy a missile defense system in Central Europe. Yet Moscow has responded for the most part in a measured and defensive way, its most forceful move being the recent military actions in Georgia to protect South Ossetia. When the Georgian president, Mikheil Saakashvili, sent forces into South Ossetia in violation of an earlier agreement, Russia responded much as the United States did when it intervened in 1999 against Serbia over Kosovo. Russian military actions in Georgia may have been disproportionate, but not as disproportionate as Washington’s extensive bombing of Serbia proper. > > Despite the souring of the earlier cooperative relationship with the Bush administration, Russia has made it clear that it would still prefer a strategic partnership that would reduce nuclear weapons, contain Islamist extremism and expand the world’s oil and gas supplies. But it has also made it clear that this partnership must be based on mutual interests and compromise, not simply on Russian acquiescence in American dictates. ---
**Author:** ![Camus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ba8739/32.png) [@Camus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Camus)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2008, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/5 "2008-09-22T13:19:25Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > From _The Nation,_: > Second, what McCain sees as a pattern of intimidation to re-establish the Russian empire more objective analysts see as a great power protecting its legitimate interests in the face of US provocations. How does resuming bomber flights that aim to violate the airspace of Britain, the U.S. and other European countries and only peel off when chased away by on-call fighters protecting legitimate Russian interests? How is buzzing a U.S. aircraft carrier, again with bombers, doing the same? The same question could be asked about their recent and future military exercises with Venezuela. In some instances, they may indeed be doing things in order to protect their legitimate interests (which begs the question which interests are legitimate and which aren’t). But in other instances, they’re clearly just trying to poke the U.S. and others in the eye and try and aspire to the power and fear that the USSR could wield. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2008, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/6 "2008-09-22T13:22:42Z")
> [@Henrichek](#): > > Unless there have been some major shift of borders which must have eluded the world media, Russia should be in possession of the largest landmass in the world, about 71% larger than the second largest (Canada). We’ve been stealing bits of Siberia and gluing them to the Yukon while the Russians aren’t looking. ---
**Author:** ![Henrichek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/5daacb/32.png) [@Henrichek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Henrichek)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2008, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/7 "2008-09-22T13:36:54Z")
> [@Camus](#): > > How does resuming bomber flights that aim to violate the airspace of Britain, the U.S. and other European countries and only peel off when chased away by on-call fighters protecting legitimate Russian interests? How is buzzing a U.S. aircraft carrier, again with bombers, doing the same? The same question could be asked about their recent and future military exercises with Venezuela. > > In some instances, they may indeed be doing things in order to protect their legitimate interests (which begs the question which interests are legitimate and which aren’t). But in other instances, they’re clearly just trying to poke the U.S. and others in the eye and try and aspire to the power and fear that the USSR could wield. How do you explain the US strategic bomber patrols which never ceased after the Cold war? What makes you think they are violating any other country’s airspace? What’s the problem with military exercises with Venezuela? ---
**Author:** ![Orbifold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/779978/32.png) [@Orbifold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Orbifold)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2008, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/8 "2008-09-22T13:42:26Z")
> [@gravitycrash](#): > > Why does Russia feel the need to bluster about old cold war stuff? This is a serious question. They have the second largest landmass and feel fear from attack, by who? Having a large landmass hasn’t prevented Russia from being invaded in the past. But it’s likely nothing to do with being invaded. Rather, it’s likely just about geopolitical influence. [There’s a very interesting article here on the subject.](http://www.nybooks.com/articles/21772) The short version: Russia sees the U.S. merrily ushering their neighbours into NATO (did you know that George H.W. Bush and Clinton had promised that wouldn’t happen?), they see Kosovo getting its independence with the West’s blessing over Russia’s objections (and if Kosovo can be carved out of Serbia, what else might get carved out of a polyglot country like Russia?) and they see themselves being marginalized. They see no one else looking out for Russia, so they’re going to look out for Russia themselves. And now they feel they have the ability to do that. ---
**Author:** ![Camus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ba8739/32.png) [@Camus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Camus)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2008, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/9 "2008-09-22T14:00:40Z")
> [@Henrichek](#): > > How do you explain the US strategic bomber patrols which never ceased after the Cold war? According to [this](http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/russian-bomb-flights-spark-grave-fears/2007/08/18/1186857831963.html) article, they did. At least nuclear ones, following a 1991 agreement with Britain, the U.S. and Russia. U.S. air patrols used to do exactly what the Russians are doing now - aim straight for USSR territory and then peel off at the last second when Soviet fighters came to intercept them. Do you have any information that the U.S. is still engaging in this practice like the Russians are? > [@](#): > > What makes you think they are violating any other country’s airspace? After looking at some articles again, I overstated things, but not by much. None of the articles say the distance which the Russian flights came near Britain, Norway or Guam, but they’ve come extremely close to Alaska several times. [Russian bombers fly near Alaska numerous times and over aircraft carrier](http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/02/11/russian.bomber/index.html) [Russian bombers sortie near Britain, Norway, and Guam](http://edition.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/08/22/bomber.patrol/index.html) [Japan claims Russian bombers violate airspace](http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jbPc204b-rVoFjSvZPlHVg6mKM8A) > [@](#): > > What’s the problem with military exercises with Venezuela? There’s no problem, but I still haven’t heard any answers regarding any of Russia’s “legitimate” interests. Russia has sold Venezuela plenty of military arms in the past, but what other interest does Russia have in undertaking these exercises except to poke the U.S. in the eye? (presumably in retaliation for aid to Georgia, though Russian officials insist this was pre-planned) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2008, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/10 "2008-09-22T15:14:39Z")
> [@Camus](#): > > There’s no problem, but I still haven’t heard any answers regarding any of Russia’s “legitimate” interests. Russia has sold Venezuela plenty of military arms in the past, but what other interest does Russia have in undertaking these exercises except to poke the U.S. in the eye? (presumably in retaliation for aid to Georgia, though Russian officials insist this was pre-planned) Easy. They want to keep us preoccupied on multiple fronts. Also deter any **actual** U.S. action against Venezuela. Good, sound strategy on both counts. But it’s rather the reverse of “poking us in the eye,” i.e., provoking us to action. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2008, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/11 "2008-09-22T15:26:57Z")
Put another way, in response to a perceived U.S./NATO “encirclement” of Russia, the Russians are trying to achieve something close to a balance of power by counter-encircling us with an alliance of countries which might not very powerful individually but which can at least give us something to think about, and which have no obvious common interest save that the U.S. is already on bad terms with all of them. ---
**Author:** ![RyJae](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9d8465/32.png) [@RyJae](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RyJae)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2008, 4:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/12 "2008-09-22T16:02:03Z")
Personally I never understood how a nation could tell another nation who it could have alliances with. Georgia wants to be in NATO not up to Russia. Venezuela wants to be in an alliance with Russia not up to the USA. Then again I am becoming more and more isolationist as I get older and realize most wars are not worth fighting at least unless we’re personally at risk barring major proven atrocities. Force as a means to saving lives not taking them. If Russia, Cuba, Bolivia, and Venezuela want to run around in airplanes and ships playing war games who cares? It’s not like they have any real intention of attacking the USA. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2008, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/13 "2008-09-22T20:22:46Z")
> [@RyJae](#): > > Personally I never understood how a nation could tell another nation who it could have alliances with. Georgia wants to be in NATO not up to Russia. Venezuela wants to be in an alliance with Russia not up to the USA. Then again I am becoming more and more isolationist as I get older and realize most wars are not worth fighting at least unless we’re personally at risk barring major proven atrocities. Force as a means to saving lives not taking them. You may have noticed the usual method uses guns, or the threat of guns. It’s reasonably effective. > [@](#): > > If Russia, Cuba, Bolivia, and Venezuela want to run around in airplanes and ships playing war games who cares? It’s not like they have any real intention of attacking the USA. More or less, the U.S. doesn’t care about Venezuela. It’s basically taken itself out of the running and is now heavily dependant on commodities. Russia doesn’t have much reason to fear Georgia, but it wants to make it into a slave-client state. ---
**Author:** ![Henrichek](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/5daacb/32.png) [@Henrichek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Henrichek)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2008, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/14 "2008-09-22T20:50:23Z")
> [@smiling\_bandit](#): > > Russia doesn’t have much reason to fear Georgia, but it wants to make it into a slave-client state. What evidence do you have for this assertion? The Russians could have deposed Saakashvili quickly if that was their aim. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2008, 11:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/15 "2008-09-22T23:27:15Z")
> [@gravitycrash](#): > > Why does Russia feel the need to bluster about old cold war stuff? This is a serious question. They have the second largest landmass and feel fear from attack, by who? Although the U.S. has been the most recent major opponent to Russian interests, it is unfair to say that Russia defines itself exclusively in terms of the Cold War competition. The nation of Russia, as a cultural nexus, has been around far longer than the United States, extending back to the Grand Principality of Moscow (also known as the Vladimir-Suzdal Principality) in the 12th Century CE. The U.S. is only the latest in a long line of regional and global powers (Germany, Britain, France, Poland, Ottoman Empire, Austria-Hungary, China, the Mongol Empire, et cetera) to challenge the power and even existence of an autonomous ethnic Rus-led state. As such, it is the primary driving goal of the Russians to defend against invasion at all costs. The desire of the Russian-dominated Union of Soviet Socialist Republics to gain control of the nations of Eastern Europe and establish “friendly” (read: puppet) governments was far less due to the expansionist Marxist ideology (particularly in the post-Lenin era) and more about providing a vast buffer zone between itself and potential invaders from the West, a fact that high level analysts and policymakers frequently failed to consider. Ditto the border wars in Mongolia and Sino-Soviet split in the East. The Russians are first and foremost concerned about averting attack upon and invasion into Mother Russia, even when there is no specific threat. You’d be insecure, too, if your population was devastated on a regular basis. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![sailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a587f6/32.png) [@sailor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sailor)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2008, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/16 "2008-09-23T00:16:28Z")
> [@RyJae](#): > > Personally I never understood how a nation could tell another nation who it could have alliances with. Georgia wants to be in NATO not up to Russia. Venezuela wants to be in an alliance with Russia not up to the USA. Except the USA is telling _everybody_ what they can and cannot do. It used to be that the world was divided into spheres of influence and the big powers avoided messing in other powers’ sphere of influence. That is one reason Cuba was such a serious question: it was in America’s sphere of influence. The superpowers felt this gave them a certain security as they were surrounded by buffer countries. Now America has decided to upset the apple cart and start encircling Russia and surrounding it with radars, missiles etc. Not surprisingly Russia is upset and making noises. Would America allow China and/or Russia to start installing similar things in Mexico, Canada, the Caribbean? No way! ---
**Author:** ![UnwrittenNocturne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/6de8d8/32.png) [@UnwrittenNocturne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UnwrittenNocturne)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2008, 3:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/17 "2008-09-23T03:33:44Z")
> [@RyJae](#): > > It’s not like they have any real intention of attacking the USA. Shhh. Stop that. You’ll wreck their game. Eisenhower must be rolling in his grave thinking about how his warnings went unheeded. The military, contractors and a lot of politicians get a lot of mileage out of getting people to believe that someone (anyone) wants to invade the U.S. Whenever anyone talks about reducing the military they get hammered with this attack nonsense. And some people, for some reason, seem to believe it. Here’s a hint. Just because some nations (actually since WWII mostly the U.S.) engage in vicious invasions it doesn’t mean everyone wants to. Also worth noting that the invading nations almost always picks a much smaller target. Like, say, an island in the Caribbean. Nobody has had a crack at (for example) Australia or Ireland. ---
**Author:** ![Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/13edae/32.png) [@Stranger\_On\_A\_Train](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stranger_On_A_Train)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2008, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/18 "2008-09-23T04:11:50Z")
> [@UnwrittenNocturne](#): > > Here’s a hint. Just because some nations (actually since WWII mostly the U.S.) engage in vicious invasions it doesn’t mean everyone wants to. Also worth noting that the invading nations almost always picks a much smaller target. Like, say, an island in the Caribbean. Nobody has had a crack at (for example) Australia or Ireland. It’s kind of obscure I know, but the Soviets did kind of invade and subjugate a few Eastern European nations in the post-war era, and also they had a bit of a tiff with Afghanistan in the 1980s. Post-Cold War, it has been mostly the United States doing its bit to keep the tradition alive, but that’s only to be expected since Spain, Britain, France, the Netherlands, et cetera, just don’t have the wherewithal to support proper imperialism any more. Stranger ---
**Author:** ![gravitycrash](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@gravitycrash](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gravitycrash)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2008, 6:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/19 "2008-09-23T06:33:48Z")
> [@UnwrittenNocturne](#): > > Shhh. Stop that. You’ll wreck their game. > > Eisenhower must be rolling in his grave thinking about how his warnings went unheeded. The military, contractors and a lot of politicians get a lot of mileage out of getting people to believe that someone (anyone) wants to invade the U.S. > > Whenever anyone talks about reducing the military they get hammered with this attack nonsense. And some people, for some reason, seem to believe it. > > Here’s a hint. Just because some nations (actually since WWII mostly the U.S.) engage in vicious invasions it doesn’t mean everyone wants to. Also worth noting that the invading nations almost always picks a much smaller target. Like, say, an island in the Caribbean. Nobody has had a crack at (for example) Australia or Ireland. Good job on quite possibly typing the most stupid post I have ever read. Please stay a guest. ---
**Author:** ![MEBuckner](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mebuckner/32/2896_2.png) [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2008, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636/20 "2008-09-23T06:40:12Z")
> [@gravitycrash](#): > > Good job on quite possibly typing the most stupid post I have ever read. Please stay a guest. **Moderator’s Note:** Please tone it down or take it to the Pit. (I realize you said “most stupid post”, not “most stupid poster”, or this would be a formal warning.) (I would also point out that the poster you replied to can now remain a guest and continue posting for the next 10 years. And there is no difference in status between “Charter Members” and “guests” as far as moderating goes.) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/russia-insecure-yet-again/464636.md?page=2)