Clinton: some in US/Russia stuck in Cold War
After Secretary of State Clinton folded like a Kmart lawn chair to the Russians yesterday on the issue of sanctions against Iran, she went to talk to Russian students, according to the Washington Times, and resurrected the old “stuck in the Cold War” myth the Left loves so much;
“We have people in our government, and you have people in your government, who are still living in the past,” she told a hall packed with hundreds of students at Moscow State University. “They do not believe the United States and Russia can cooperate to this extent. They do not trust each other, and we have to prove them wrong.”
She sounds real brave, doesn’t she? Clinton apologizes that Americans still don’t trust Russia because of the Cold War. But if you want to really point fingers at someone who has no real reason to mistrust the other side, yet loves the fear that mentioning the Cold War gets, it ain’t the US, doll. This from Breitbart/AP by way of Drudge;
A top Russian security official says Moscow reserves the right to conduct pre-emptive nuclear strikes to safeguard the country against aggression on both a large and a local scale, according to a newspaper interview published Wednesday.
Presidential Security Council chief Nikolai Patrushev also singled out the U.S. and NATO, saying Moscow’s Cold War foes still pose potential threats to Russia despite what he called a global trend toward local conflicts.
Yeah, if we were really a threat to the Russians, we probably would have made our move 20 years ago when there was such confusion after the SOviet Union collapsed – certainly not now that they’ve recovered somewhat. Yet, Hillary blames the conservatives in the US. Shock, huh?
“I chose partnership and I chose to put aside being a child of the Cold War. I chose to move beyond the rhetoric and the propaganda that came from my government and yours,” Mrs. Clinton said.
The rest of us did, too, Clinton, until the Russians interceded in Georgia last year. We put the Cold War behind us, until the Russians decided to make an issue of defensive weapons in Poland. Why should they be worried about defensive weapons? Why are they now rehabilitating their first strike policy?
Clinton has fallen into the same trap as her boss- trying to blame the US for everyone else’s mistakes. Jimmy Carter foreign policy.
Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Foreign Policy
A few factual errors: A EU study put the blame for starting the Georgia/Russia war squarely on Georgia, not Russia. Russia over reacted, the report stated, but Georgia started it. These so-called defensive weapons can be very destabilizing, increase the incentive for a first strike by us since some generals might have the misapprehension that we could launch a first strike and then be spared the results of a counter strike by these “defensive” weapons.
I know, the EU report was written by a bunch of “cheese eating surrender monkeys”, blah, blah……
Holy tapdancin Christ, Joe–that’s probably the same “study” that puts the blame of WWII on the Poles and gave Obama the Nobel Peace Prize.
Tell ya what–when they can take care of genocide in their own back yards without out help (Kosovo), then they get to lecture us about military matters.
I can’t say I am seeing eye to eye on this US vs Russia thing.
Let’s see. We were allies with Stalin against the Nazis in WWII. Putin/Medvedev are not even comparable to Stalin and the Wahhabis are about the closest thing to Nazis in the world right about now. So…….
But when it comes to the Russians distrusting US, I can think of at least one reason why:
The Russians have had numerous issues with Wahhabi jihadis since the fall of the USSR. The primary backer of those Wahhabi jihadis is Saudi Arabia. Now given the way things appear on the outside in regards to our relationship with Saudi Arabia, I don’t think it is hard to see why the Russians might, just might distrust the US.
Fred,
That is a stretch. For 8 years now the US has been battling the Jihadists on several fronts. To attempt to blame the Russian distrust on that is ridiculous. The fact is that the Russians are the ones living in a Cold War mindset. It actually goes back further than that. The Russians have always been worried about regional security. The problem is the manner in which they attempt to alleviate those fears. Brutally occupying other nations to alleviate your fears is wrong.
I know what the next sentence is going to be– the US… blah blah blah …Iraq and Afghanistan. Well we are not brutally occupying them (likely one of the nicest/kindest occupations in all of history). And we are have no intention of directly controlling these areas for ever as the Russians did in Eastern Europe (and would like to do again). Russia has always been a little schizo about being invaded (even though no one who ever has came out of it well). Grab some history books and read up the Russians.
As to the arguement about generals being likely to advocate a first strike if there is a defensive shield is Hollywood bullshit. There will never be any kind of guarantee that you can stop all of the missiles or warheads, plus there are sub based missles that can easily evade the missile shield in Europe. No one understands this better than the military leadership. And if I am not mistaken the missile shield was not even intended for MRBM or ICBM’s of the type Russia has, it is more to stop smaller regional missiles that Iran and its buddies can launch.
Russian mistrust of the US dates to 1918 when we sent 500 troops (with comparable contributions from our Brit, Japanese and French allies) to rescue the Czech Legion in Vladivostok.
That and the whole ‘we let them bleed white’ during WWII thinking that was everywhere in the USSR following August 1945.
(we being the western allies, that is)
not that Stalin needed help being paranoid about the west…
Gary,
I think both us and the Russians are living in a Cold War mindset. I would not call it a stretch for the Russians to mistrust us over the Wahhabi jihadis at all. Sure we are fighting the Islamists on several fronts, but we also appear to be in bed with Saudi Arabia(The kings of Sunni jihadism.) How could the Russians not see an issue there? Of course that wouldn’t be the only reason the Russians don’t trust us, but unlike many other reasons, this is certainly a legitimate reason that we actually should consider. If we don’t think our relationship with Saudi Arabia hurts our credibility on the battle vs jihadis front, we best think again.
Of course the Russians have always had a desire to exert influence in what they see as their backyard in one way or another. But the current Russian leadership is not nearly as Imperialist as the Communists were, and I’d be inclined to say that the Wahhabis pose a more real threat to Europe than the Russians do.
As far as the rationale behind the missile shield goes, I present two scenarios.
A. Iran launches a missile into Europe.
B. Wahhabis set up a support network in the US, and then smuggle a large explosive/nuclear device into the US through one of our poorly secured borders.
Which one is more likely?
“The fact is that the Russians are the ones living in a Cold War mindset”. And the Russians have always had a huge inferiority complex, probably because they got into the (modern) nation game so late. They built a bigger army, not a better army. They built bigger tanks, not better tanks, ships, aircraft, artillery, rifles, submarines, destroyers, cruisers, etc, etc.
Now, as to Fred’s scenario, I’d go with B. At least now that the DHS and the administration are satisfied that our borders, especially the Southern one, is secure, and they can withdraw BP agents from said border. But, that wasn’t the point to the missile defense systems, the point was to protect our European ALLIES from the Iranian missiles. In their paranoia, the Russians saw it directed at them. So, we get to the crux of the matter. Earbama gave away the system, and got nothing in return, in fact he didn’t even try to get anything. Russia will study the concept of sanctions, and do bupkus. But Shrillary will feel good about her chance to bust on the VRWC, yet again.
Up North,
What are the odds that Iran launches a missile into Europe?
I’d say very, very low. But on the other hand, what are the odds of Europe being attacked with car bombs, suicide bombers, and/or being culturally subverted by Islamists. I’d say much higher. In fact, I’d venture to say it’s already happening.
Of course thanks to our politicians, we got absolutely nothing in return, but why did we want sanctions? When have sanctions ever accomplished anything, save ensuring our efforts in Iraq were even harder. I was thinking we should have attempted to get something else, something more useful and productive.
Well, Fred, I do agree, the odds are slim that Iran will launch into Europe in the near future. And the odds are that the attacks you outline will happen. But then again, who knows what Achmahandjob will do when he runs out of prozac?
Hey, Earbama said sanctions are the way to go, after the stern lecture. So, what should have we expected? Maybe the cancellation of the missile sales to Iran? Sanctions at least on the sale of gasoline to Iran, which would cause the country to grind to a halt in about 3 weeks?
I’m curious, what do you think we could have gotten that would be “more useful and productive”?
Well UpNorth, I would say that better intelligence cooperation on Wahhabi Islamists and more oil would have been more productive from the Russians. Unlike sanctions on Iran, I think the Russians might have actually allowed us those things. But that said, I think the Russians have their reasons for not sanctioning Iran, reasons that might actually make sense.
And yes, the nutty Iranian president is a certified whackjob. But barring an extreme shakeup of power after Khamenei’s passing, the Mullahs hold the cards and I wouldn’t call them insane. The Mullahs crave power above all else and launching a missile into Europe would be the surest way for them to lose power in the end.
Hey Joe; I have some facts for you that are not in error. Fact: Putin is treating the current administration like his bitch. Fact: The Russians have been doing that to this hopey-changey pussified administration since day fricken 1. Fact: The Russians have never had any intention of allowing sanctions against Iran, but they have had intentions to see how much waffling they could get from this admin. before we said enough. Fact: Obama’s world ass kissing and pole smoking tour did nothing but embolden those that would like nothing more than to see the US brought down. I’m sure you and the rest of the leftists would like to see that, also, because you live in a fantasy land where there is no such thing as American exceptionalism and rainbows spontaneously break out with milk and honey flowing in the streets. All we have to do is hold hands and sing and all will be right with the world. Fact: That’s fantasy, this is reality. Fact: Russia has a new line of nukes they are looking to deploy and they have no qualms with doing so right in front of Obama and Clinton, while those two chuckleheads are busy giving up more to the Russians for nothing in return. Fact: Russia is looking to rebuild their dominance in new Europe and they now have the right lack of leadership and intestinal fortitude in Washington to help facilitate that. Fact: We have gotten nothing in return for 3 rounds of vascillating to the Russians. You leftists call that good faith negotiations. The rest of the world calls that gullible. I can hear Vlad right now on the phone with Medveded “Tell them we need to meet again, because we might think about the possibility of talking about sanctions on Iran, but tell them that we need them to boot Poland out of NATO, first, before we talk”, just before Vlad falls out of his chair from laughing. Those are facts. They are not in error, you can’t spin out of them, it’s not all sunshine and rainbows no matter how… Read more »
Disagree OldTrooper. Unless we want to be in a perpetual state of conflict someone had to be brave enough to make the first move. We didn’t do the Russians any favors after the fall of the Iron Curtain, talked a good line but let them fall into chaos and pretty much blew off their new “democracy”, and they have every reason to be suspicious of us, our generals, and our military/industrial complex.
No risk in stopping the new ABM system and saving a few hundred billion dollars for our bankrupt country – we can still blow each other up 100 times over. I see Putin as a pragmatist, not an expansionist. Fact is, when you look around the world, we should have a lot more in common with Russia than differences. On of the few intelligent statements Reagan ever made; “trust, but verify”.
What’s brave about giving away something in return for nothing??? True to leftist dogma, you want to twist it so something stupid and gullible looks brave? I’m sure that will fly with the wool turtleneck crowd at the coffee house, but in the real world, with real issues, it looks weak. The Russians are in control of every pipeline to Europe, after the “crisis” that caused the invasion of Georgia. They have shut the gas off in Ukraine 2 Winters in a row, when they wouldn’t do as Moscow decreed. Is that real enough for you? They brought along battlefield tactical nuke missiles in their invasion of Georgia in order to send a message to everyone to keep out of the operation. Is that real enough for you?
You don’t have to agree, but I will tell you that whether you agree, or not, the sun still comes up in the East and water is still wet, and the Russians will exert whatever influence they see fit on their old satellites.
OldTrooper,
Like we don’t exert whatever influence we see fit on our “satellites”?
Yeah, you’re right, Joe, I mean, I remember from last Winter when those pesky types that are in our satellite…….wait, which satellites are you talking about? In the last 30 years did we cut off energy to a “satellite” of ours for not putting our people in charge of their government; and do it 2 years in a row? When, in the last 30 years, did we roll out tactical nukes to the battlefield, in our bid to control the energy supply to anyone else?
See, Joe, you have a world in which you wish to live that is in direct conflict with the world in which we all live. You choose to put forth as fact, those things from you “wish world” and ignore what is in the “real world”. As I have said; all the hopey-changey you can muster is not going to change reality.
OldTrooper,
So on your planet no one ever extends an olive branch, we all just build more and better guns until we end up with a global situation like what – the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Dumping the unproven, flawed, hyperexpensive, destabilizing ABM system in Europe cost us nothing (although you might disagree if you own stock in Rockwell, Honeywell, Lockheed Martin, etc.), saved us a bunch of money, and sent an important signal to Russia. I predict that, if the present policy continues, there is a chance at a rapprochement with Russia. Will we ever be bosom buddies – probably not. Will we have to “trust but verify” – definitely. But can we work on common goals – I certainly hope so. But you never know until you try. And ditching the ABM system is a cost-free gesture on our part, call it a confidence building measure.
Oh, it most certainly did cost us something. It cost us the trust of an ally and the respect of the Russians, along with others around the world. How many times do you think we should get thrashed with the olive branch before we realize that the Russians are giving up nothing, have never intended to give up anything, all while we give up something before we even meet with them in the “hope” of getting something in return for our kind gesture? Wouldn’t it be more productive to put it on the table and then stipulate that we will remove our nutsack in return for sanctions against Iran? Well, we are removing ofering to remove our nutsack before we even sit down at the table. That’s hopey-changey, not the real world. With all the goodwill we made during these shag fests with the Russians, I’m really encouraged by Vlad’s statement afterwards, where he threatened anyone that would attempt to pursue a hard line towards Iran. That’s akin to wiping your cannon on the curtain on your way out the door.
Um, where to start Joe? Unproven, flawed and “hyperexpensive”? By whose standards, those who want to do nothing to offend anyone? Seems I read that the tests of the interceptors were successful more often than not. Why would a defensive system be “destabilizing”? In what way, other than in someone’s mind, it renders their first-strike capability moot. “Hyperexpensive”? If you want to do away with something that’s “Hyperexpensive”, do away with the idea of a $1 Trillion overhaul to health care that won’t work. Or, refund most of the $750B Stimulus, that hasn’t worked, and the money hasn’t been spent.
But, yeah, you are right about one thing. It DID send an important message to Russia. That message is, “do what you want, Hillary and I won’t stand in your way. As a matter of fact, I’ll make sure that the next president, if he/she wants to, will have to rebuild multitudes of strategic and tactical weapons systems to even think about standing up to you”.
Yeah, UpNorth, why “waste” billions helping actual American citizens when we could be lining the pockets of big corporations by buying inot a pie-in-the-sky Star Wars program that doesn’t work, and maybe never will. We gave up nothing except a gigantic boondoogle, and I’m sure the Poles will get over it.
So now, haveing bailed on Star Wars, we can only kill each other 100 times over. Man, if we’d have built Star Wars, we would have only been able to destroy each other 99 times over….
That’s it, Joe, stick your head back in the sand, but just remember that the Soviets fell because they couldn’t keep up and the possibilities of “Star Wars” accerlerated the decline. So, it does work. Second, you have no fricken clue what you are talking about involving the missile defense proposed for Poland. Third, I’m glad you are finally saying what you mean in regards to the Poles. Yeah, screw ’em, they’ll get over it! Fourth, why would the Russians care about missile defense to stop a rogue missile from Iran? Everyone knows that the particular shield wouldn’t be effective against Russia, anyway.
And, since Poland is part of NATO, maybe you should look at the treaty a little closer and see what it says about members and the defense thereof?
What can I say, Old Trooper?
The Soviets did fall and the current Russian government is nothing like the Communists were. Authoritarian? yes. Interested in becoming a strong country again? yes. Out to subvert and dominate the world? I don’t think so.
As far as Russia and Iran go, I think the Russians might have a point on that one. Our fear of Iran is pretty irrational when you think about it. Not that the Iranians are not a dictatorship whom finance terrorism and have a rather anti-western attitude. They clearly meet that criteria. But protecting Saudi Arabia and UAE from them? That’s pretty irrational, you have to admit.
Why would I care about Saudi Arabia? I don’t think the defensive missile installation in Poland was to protect Saudi Arabia. However, with Iran’s ambitions, and the help they are receiving from Russia, there is a good possibility that they could have a missile capable of reaching parts of Europe. I never said anything about world domination, as a pretext for Russian moves, but I did mention their desire to re-establish their influence over their former states, which does include Poland. Putin is a former KGB Colonel and those habits are hard to break. Nationalistic ambitions on the part of Russia boils down to 2 things; money and control.
Some people have never met a weapons system they didn’t like….
I didn’t like the TOW mounted on a Mule…or the old TOW vehicle, or the ITV. See, there are some weapons system I don’t like.
I wasn’t crazy about the firing port weapons on the Bradley, either.
Well Old Trooper,
You are correct. The current missile shield was not designed to protect Saudi Arabia. However, a large part of our current policy involves protecting Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states from Iran. I even vaguely remember talk of installing a missile shield in the Middle East. Hopefully that idea is dead in the water. Besides, I highly doubt the Mullahs would launch a missile into Europe and Putin’s arming of Iran likely has very little, if anything to do with Europe.
Of course, I agree that we should have gotten something out of the deal with the Russians. But given the fact that Saudi Arabia poses a greater real danger to us and Europe than either Iranian Missiles or the Russians, I found the whole idea of such a shield rather silly, especially given our continuous protection of the Saudis from the Iranians.
Personally I would rather spend more money going after real threats than hypothetical threats, especially hypothetical threats with a very small likelihood of actually happening.
Uh, Joe? Who’s been helped thus far? Other than the thousands who showed up in Detroit for Obamacash? The health care boondoggle surely doesn’t appear to be designed to help anyone, anyone that is, except Harry Reid, Nancy Pelousy and Earbama. And illegal aliens and abortion doctors. And “shovel-ready projects”? Not so much. But it did save jobs, Biden doesn’t know where they were, whose jobs, or how much it cost, but, take his word for it.
And how do you know the system “doesn’t work”? As I said, most of the tests of the interceptors worked, even Karl Levin said so. He just didn’t like the idea of the system, same for the unlamented Sen. Kennedy. The same senator who tried help out his buds, the Sov’s, when Reagan was President.
And again, it was a defensive system but you seem to think you know better. In diplomacy, like most anything in real life, you don’t give up something you have in exchange for…..nothing. That’s what this administration did.