Russian bombers to use Cuban runways. No, this is not 1962.

[GMantis]

link

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If I remember correctly, you support NATO membership for Georgia and the Ukraine, so you should find nothing wrong with this - if you are honest with yourself.

[GMantis]

Russia *facepalm*

And what about the US, which regards the whole world as a sphere of its interests? Even a facepalm isn't enough in their case.

[GMantis]

Dear President Obama,


Please live up to your self inflicted expectations and imitate Democrat Heros like Kennedy and FDR by keeping the Russians out of the W. Hemisphere.




Really,

Tyler Norris

So, USA should quit the Eastern hemisphere following your logic?

I love how Europeans (including Canadians) always try to find moral equivalency.

You don't think other countries are threatened by the presence of US bases around them? I know we believe that we are somehow special but other countries don't. We like to call ourselves the leader of the free world but the rest of the free world says "WTF". Now if your opposition to this is just for Russia then fair enough. Would you be ok with some random country like Indonesia opening bases in Cuba?

I know there is some truth to what you are saying, but ask yourself, "Why does Russia want to do this?"

It's a power move.  They probably have no intention of going through with this.  Their goal is to threaten the United States and make us trade our support of the Ukraine and Georgia for Russia not moving strategic bombers into our backyard.  This is the most clearly belligerent act by the Russians since the 1970's.

It's also no accident that this is coming in at the same time as President Obama's plan for Afghanistan.  The Soviet's don't want a stabilized state in Central Asia, because that threatens there hold of the region.  A stable, U.S. friendly state their means the potential for a stabilized U.S. friendly region.  That would be the end of Russian power.

Of course, if this were just a game, then it would be fine to say "well, make the trade" but the Russians have been subjugating these peoples for years, and they want out.  The ultimate goal of the Soviet's is the restoration of the Soviet empire, by hook or by crook.  We ought to deny them that privilege, not least of which because the Ukrainians, the Georgians, the Baltic people and Stans don't want it... it's their worst nightmare.

I'm sorry, but this is utter nonsense.
1. Russia has no interests in Islamists operating so close to its southern borders, nor of an unstable situation continuing to provide the excuses for US intervention in the region. Remember that they offered help to the US after 9/11 exactly with those thoughts in mind.
2. What subjugation? You might have forgotten, but the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991. That Russia still has much influence in the region is mainly due to the close economic links with the region and the great Russian influence, which is still remaining in parts of the region. After all, there was a substantial Russian population and Russian was the language of education (it still is, to some extent).
3.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Union_of_Soviet_Sovereign_Republics
Something to read before spouting of about worst nightmares
All in all, why is the US permitted to have interests all over the world, while Russia is not permitted to have any influence even in its close neighbourhood? Because the US is more powerful of course, but instead of admitting that it's simply a situation of a superpower asserting itself, you and people like you have to invent the Russian "threat".

[GMantis]

link

You must be logged in to read this quote.

If I remember correctly, you support NATO membership for Georgia and the Ukraine, so you should find nothing wrong with this - if you are honest with yourself.

Except that Russia is not NATO.

There I said.  I know its a bombshell.

The goal of any U.S. policy should be the further collapse of Russia.  It's a tyrant country.  It has always been a tyrant country.  Let them tyrannize their own people and not someone else.

So you agree that the US should work for the downfall of Saudi Arabia and China, instead of suppporting them as it does now.

[GMantis]

So you agree that the US should work for the downfall of Saudi Arabia and China, instead of

I just love the sound of armchair Cold Warriors pretending it's 1951.

When was the last time you added something of value to a thread?

Here is an example. Frankly, how can you take yourself seriously, when you try to paint Russia as some kind of threat?

[GMantis]

So you agree that the US should work for the downfall of Saudi Arabia and China, instead of suppporting them as it does now.

It wasn't directed at me, but YES, very much so.  As long as they treat their people as horribly as they do we should work towards the downfall of their govts.  The fact that women in the West don't give two sh**ts for the women in some Muslim countries is sick.

That's absolutely ridiculous.  The fall of the Saud family from power would result a chaos that would cut off a massive proportion of the world's oil supply and thus cripple the world's economy.

The descent of China into chaos would be a similarly disasterous scenario.

The Saud family would rather lose all power and possibly their lives instead of freeing their women from virtual bondage and stop treating their foreigners and non-Muslims like 4th class citizens?

Treating their women like that is probably on eof the reasons why the islamists haven't overthrown them yet.
Treating the Shiites like they do, however, will probably be disastrous in the long terms.

[GMantis]

Once again you prefer the devil you know.  Damn the people actually being hurt by that devil, there is no hope for them anyway.

Are you speaking to me? Beacuse I do think that the Saudi regime must be overthrown. It is far more harmful than an open islamist government would be.