News Is Russia's recent warning about a potential Cold War 2.0 a cause for concern?

[russ_watters]

Russ, have you had the opportunity to visit Russia?

Lithuania - after the breakup. Nice country, nice people. They treated us Americans almost like rock-stars. I was with the Navy and the line to tour our ship was twice as long as the ship!

I came away with a clear understanding of a nation that has an enormous amount of wealth, should it decide to use it.

They certainly have a lot of potential mineral wealth. We talked about that already. Potential wealth isn't wealth and it takes a bit more than "decid[ing] to use it" to actually get it done.

It also has a cultural heritage of which many countries would be envious. Contrast this against US(S)A's brief presence as a nation.

Their cultural heritage is nice, but isn't relevant here. The country is only 15 years old in it's current form. Heck, the US was 12 when it had to scrap it's constitution and start over from scratch.

Russia has a long, long way to go before it becomes the stable, prosperous nation it should be. Perhaps in 30-50 years...

Many of the foremost thinkers in Mathematics & Physics originate from, or are
still resident in, Russia & the former USSR. Their engineers can often develop excellent concepts on a budget that would be considered paltry in US(S)A eyes. I have witnessed some pretty remarkable engineering.

Yes, that's true. But it doesn't have anything to do with this thread.

 

[momentum_waves]

It would be interesting to hear a Russian perspective on all of this bluster. As I said before. Arrogance causes blindness.

Give Russia a few years as it moves its economy upwards past the US. Then the shoe will be on the other foot, I imagine. The current US position tries to treat Russia with some level of disrespect. Perhaps this would have been acceptable 20 years ago, but since the Bush regime, the world has lost interest in much of what the US stood for. In general, it is now often seen to be an arrogant, ignorant bully super-power-wannabe.

Russia, on the other hand, has everything to gain. It seems to be re-capturing its past - it would not be wise to try discount its rich heritage & treat it as a immature nation - this is gross arrogance & unfortunately does tend to personify much of what the rest of the world sees in the US at the moment. Better to observe & learn, than bloviate. :-)

 

[drankin]

Give Russia a few years as it moves its economy upwards past the US.

Hey, more power to them. I hope the prosper and become a great nation once again (but more reasonable).

Why are you so anti-American? Are you American?

 

[momentum_waves]

^ I'm not an American. After Bush's recent antics, I would guess a few folks have become a little cynical at the ongoing arrogance of the US. I have a similar stance to most bullies.

I happen to think that the Russian people are treated with a certain amount of undeserved disrespect. They also suffered under the previous Soviet regime. It's a reasonably nice place. St. Petersburg & Yekaterinburg are very interesting places - it helps to put things in perspective.

I currently live in Asia, if that means anything. :-)

 

[Anttech]

When did I say I wanted one?

Regardless, if we did, we're in pretty much the same place as we were when the Cold War ended. Russia, on the other hand, is not. Like I said before, if they want an arms race and we decide to join, we'll have to give them a decade or two of a head start before we join, just to let them catch up.

When did I say you said you wanted one You are not in the same place as when the cold war ended, utter BS! During the cold war America had many friends, right now I am sad to say you are almost isolated.

 

[Anttech]

Their cultural heritage is nice, but isn't relevant here. The country is only 15 years old in it's current form. Heck, the US was 12 when it had to scrap it's constitution and start over from scratch.

Yet more bull ****. Russia has the longest uninterrupted empire in the world right now. Its not 15 years old...

 

[russ_watters]

Give Russia a few years as it moves its economy upwards past the US.

Honestly, I would love to see Russia getting their s--- together and becoming a viable 1st world nation. It should be possible, but unfortunately they are having a lot of trouble overcoming their past right now. I don't see them coming out of this funk for a few decades.

I happen to think that the Russian people are treated with a certain amount of undeserved disrespect. They also suffered under the previous Soviet regime. It's a reasonably nice place. St. Petersburg & Yekaterinburg are very interesting places - it helps to put things in perspective.

I don't think you have an accurate perception of peoples' feelings toward Russia here. One of the primary complaints we had against the USSR was the fact that it was an oppressive society, so we do have sympathy for what the Russian people are going through. But then sympathy can be viewed as arrogance too if people don't believe that it is sincere (and people choose not to). When I went to Lithuania, we also had St. Petersburg on our itinerary and I was very disappointed that that port visit got cancelled.

 

[russ_watters]

When did I say you said you wanted one

I really have no clue what you are talking about. Nothing you are saying here seems at all relevant to the thread. Unexplained one-liners are not very useful in a conversation like this. What is your point?

You are not in the same place as when the cold war ended, utter BS! During the cold war America had many friends, right now I am sad to say you are almost isolated.

What are you claiming here? Are you claiming that the US had active help in the Cold War and that help was an essential component of our performance? And are you claiming that that help no longer exists? If you are claiming these things, you'll need to provide arguments to substantiate them. Otherwise, that's just a useless one-liner. What is your point?

 

[Astronuc]

Yet more bull ****. Russia has the longest uninterrupted empire in the world right now. Its not 15 years old...

Actually, I believe China (currently People's Republic of China) is the oldest uninterrupted empire, if one is referring to interruptions from outside.

The history of China is told in traditional historical records that refer as far back as the Three sovereigns and five emperors about 5,000 years ago, supplemented by archaeological records dating to the 16th century BC. China is one of the world's oldest continuous civilizations. Turtle shells with markings reminiscent of ancient Chinese writing from the Shang Dynasty have been carbon dated to around 1500 BC. Chinese civilization originated with city-states in the Yellow River valley. 221 BC is the commonly accepted year when China became unified under a large kingdom or empire. Successive dynasties in Chinese history developed bureaucratic systems that enabled the Emperor of China to control the large territory.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_China

Empires of Russia and China have been rather fluid with peridically changing borders.

The history of Russia begins with that of the East Slavs, the ethnic group that eventually split into the Russians, Ukrainians, and Belarusians. The first East Slavic state, Kievan Rus', adopted Christianity from the Byzantine Empire in 988, beginning the synthesis of Byzantine and Slavic cultures that defined Russian culture for the next seven centuries. Kievan Rus' ultimately disintegrated as a state, leaving a number of states competing for claims to be the heirs to its civilization and dominant position.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Russia

Honestly, I would love to see Russia getting their s--- together and becoming a viable 1st world nation. It should be possible, but unfortunately they are having a lot of trouble overcoming their past right now. I don't see them coming out of this funk for a few decades.

I agree. They have some significant internal problems to overcome - mainly corruption of the political and economic systems. One of the major impediments in Russia is the lack of willingness of the federal and state/regional governments to enforce contracts. Without that stability, progress is undermined, and so is outside investment. The US and Eruopean economies have been remarkably successful simply because contracts do for the most part hold.

I have always been impressed with the endurance and perseverance displayed by those living in Russia and other former communist states.

 

[momentum_waves]

Honestly, I would love to see Russia getting their s--- together and becoming a viable 1st world nation. It should be possible, but unfortunately they are having a lot of trouble overcoming their past right now. I don't see them coming out of this funk for a few decades.

When did Russia cease being a 1st world nation?

What are the comparative economic growth figures (rates, GDP) for US & Russia?

 

[MeJennifer]

Let me get this right, A wants to place rockets on B near C. C responds that if A does that, it also will place rockets near B.

Now C is supposedly the agressor, A is the good guy and B is supposedly thankful.
What a world!

 

[Astronuc]

Let me get this right, A wants to place rockets on B near C. C responds that if A does that, it also will place rockets near B.

Now C is supposedly the agressor, A is the good guy and B is supposedly thankful.
What a world!

It's a bit more complicated than that. There are D, E, F, . . . . . involved.

It's more like A wants to place anti-missile systems in B near C to ostensibly protect against missiles from D, and perhaps E, F, . . .

Meanwhile C, which is neighboring B is a bit upset about having A's anti-missile systems on its borders. But then C is now planning to deploy anti-missile systems of its own. And perhaps A and C are also planning to deploy offensive missiles as well. Perhaps A and C are or have been aggressors, and perhaps A is one of the major agressors in the world with its military involvement in G and H, and covert activities elsewhere.

Yes - what a world we live in.

And we'll need more than 26 letters.

 

[momentum_waves]

^ Very good...

 

[Astronuc]

Reminds me of The Cat in the Hat Comes Back.

We need a Little Cat Z with his big Voooom to clean up the mess!


Even better is The Butter Battle Book, a satire on the cold war.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Butter_Battle_Book

 

[Anttech]

I really have no clue what you are talking about. Nothing you are saying here seems at all relevant to the thread. Unexplained one-liners are not very useful in a conversation like this. What is your point?

I would say the same to you, but I think claiming that nothing makes sense is more degrading to this thread than my one liners, which are and were answering your one liners.

What are you claiming here? Are you claiming that the US had active help in the Cold War and that help was an essential component of our performance? And are you claiming that that help no longer exists? If you are claiming these things, you'll need to provide arguments to substantiate them. Otherwise, that's just a useless one-liner. What is your point?

I read the what's your point the first time, there is no need to attempt to reinforce it by repeating it. You made a pointless and rediculas statement that you being america are in the same place you are now, as you were at the end of the clod war. You arent. you arent . Global politics has moved on, obviously, and your old *when the chips were down dependable alies in Europe* arent your allies to that extent, making your country more isolated than it has been for a very long time. That was my point, the point you seem to be making is that you single handedly defeated the great threat that was communism. Is that what you are saying, because your posts don't make a whole lot of sense if that isn't what you are claiming.

 

[Anttech]

Actually, I believe China (currently People's Republic of China) is the oldest uninterrupted empire, if one is referring to interruptions from outside.

You could be correct, I am not an expert on Chinese History, however we all know that it isn't 15 years old (in its current form, or not).

 

[Art]

Putin warning over US missile row
Russian President Vladimir Putin has said Moscow is preparing to take retaliatory measures if the US builds missile defence systems in Europe.
He described as non-existent the threat from Iran that Washington says the new system is designed to counter, suggesting it might be aimed at Russia.

Last week, Russia said it had tested a ballistic missile to maintain "strategic balance" in the world.

The US says the system, to be placed in eastern Europe, is not aimed at Russia.

Washington wants to deploy interceptor rockets in Poland and a radar base in the Czech Republic to counter what it describes as a potential threat from "rogue states" such as Iran and North Korea.

'Not our fault'

Mr Putin made his comments in an interview with foreign reporters ahead of the G8 meeting that starts in Germany on Wednesday.

US President George W Bush is due to meet him at the three-day summit in the resort of Heiligendamm.

The BBC's Rupert Wingfield-Hayes in Moscow says if Mr Putin's words are anything to go by the summit is likely to be stormy.


Mr Putin said he hoped US officials would change their minds about the missile defence plan.

"If this doesn't happen, then we disclaim responsibility for our retaliatory steps, because it is not we who are the initiators of the new arms race which is undoubtedly brewing in Europe," he said.


Mr Putin said neither Iran nor North Korea had the weapons that the system was intended to shoot down.

"We are being told the anti-missile defence system is targeted against something that does not exist. Doesn't it seem funny to you?" he asked.
Meanwhile top Iranian security official Ali Larijani described the planned deployment as the "joke of the year", adding that Iranian missiles were not capable of reaching Europe.

'New targets'

Mr Putin said a new arms race would be the fault of the US.

He said Washington had "altered the strategic balance" by unilaterally pulling out of the anti-ballistic missile (ABM) treaty in 2002.

"If the American nuclear potential grows in European territory, we will have to have new targets in Europe," Mr Putin said.

"It is up to our military to define these targets, in addition to defining the choice between ballistic and cruise missiles."

Last Tuesday, Russia tested an RS-24 missile that successfully struck its target 5,500km (3,400 miles) away.

It was designed to evade missile defence systems, Russia's defence ministry said.

Mr Putin went on to accuse the West of hypocrisy in criticising Russia's human rights record.

He said the US was the main violator of freedoms and human rights around the world and that France, Germany and Britain had problems of their own.

Finally he accused Britain of foolishness in trying to extradite former KGB officer Andrei Lugovoi for the murder of Alexander Litvinenko, another former KGB agent and a critic of Mr Putin.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/6717119.stm

Published: 2007/06/04 10:06:20 GMT

© BBC MMVII

It looks like europe may become a potential battleground as it was during the cold war with missile batteries, anti-missile batteries and ground forces poised for attack / defence.

I suspect there are many in the pentagon and indeed other military groupings who would welcome a return to the old cold war days with massive spending on defence and huge armies to command. Personally, if that is the plan, then I would prefer if they chose a new potential battlefield to play out their games such as the US for instance. Apart from possibly the UK (or more correctly the poodle Tony Blair) the rest of western europe has zero interest in promoting tension with Russia and once more living under the constant shadow of potential war.

One can see why France is keen to strengthen ties within 'old' europe to counter American imperialism given the US's stated contempt for 'old' europe and it's reckless endangerment of european citizens.

The US is in the happy position of never having had their cities destroyed and it's citizens massacred during the world's previous major conflicts, one suspects if they had they would tread a lot more carefully but when the worst case scenario from current policy is europe gets flattened yet again the American military and it's current war mongering president are happily willing to take the risk of alienating Russia through overt aggressive acts.

Even moderates such as former Russian president Gorbachev lay the blame for the sharply worsening relations firmly at the US's door.

The former Soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev, has blamed the US for the current state of relations between Russia and the West.
In a BBC interview, Mr Gorbachev said that the Russians were ready to be constructive, but America was trying to squeeze them out of global diplomacy.

He added that the Iraq War had undermined Tony Blair's credibility.

Mr Gorbachev accused America of "empire-building", which he said the UK should have warned it away from.
<snip>
In an interview with Radio Four's The World This Weekend, Mr Gorbachev said relations between Russia and the West were in a bad state.

"Well, it's worse than I expected," he said through a translator.

"We lost 15 years after the end of the Cold War, but the West I think and particularly the United States, our American friends, were dizzy with their success, with the success of their game that they were playing, a new empire.

"I don't understand why you, the British, did not tell them, 'Don't think about empire, we know about empires, we know that all empires break up in the end, so why start again to create a new mess.'"

He added that the war with Iraq had damaged Britain's relationship with Russia after a promising start.

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/europe/6717037.stm

Published: 2007/06/03 15:48:42 GMT

 

[drankin]

I'm going to have to agree with Gorby. Why do we, the US, need to protect other countries with our missile defenses? All it does is piss off folks over there that don't appreciate it. If N. Korea is going to throw nukes over there, let them protect themselves from it.

 

[momentum_waves]

^ Most Europeans, if asked, would most likely prefer US non-interference in their affairs.

A good insight into current Russian thinking is very clearly outlined in this link: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070604.wputintext0604/BNStory/Front/?pageRequested=all"

 

[drankin]

I didn't read the whole interview but it seems to me that it is not necessary for the US to put up missile defense systems over there. Russia or the EU could provide that kind of security. So I wonder what the true agenda is.

 

[MeJennifer]

^ Most Europeans, if asked, would most likely prefer US non-interference in their affairs.

Undoubtedly!
Any sane person would immediately ask the question why the USA still has military bases in Europe.

The EU is not a democracy. A democracy is where the majority gets their way. So these bases will undoubtedly stay. It's the same with for instance adding Turkey to the EU, the majority does not want it, but that does not mean it is not going to happen.

 

[IMP]

The current US administration is polarizing us the whole world against us. Now even Russia. I guess starting a new cold war will make someone lots of money...

 

[marlon]

The EU is not a democracy.

Where did you say you are living ?

It's the same with for instance adding Turkey to the EU, the majority does not want it, but that does not mean it is not going to happen.

If the majority does not want it, it will not happen. Ever heard of "a referendum". In France, The Netherlands the population rejected the "first official version" of the European constitution. Now, the commission is working on a new adapted version to satisfy all nations, which is NOT easy.

marlon

 

[J77]

We should have a euro-wide vote:

Who do you love more: the US or Russia?

The result would be a no-brainer.

I only hope your next president drops this missile shield rubbish and joins the 21st century.

 

[marlon]

We should have a euro-wide vote:

Who do you love more: the US or Russia?

The result would be a no-brainer.

I only hope your next president drops this missile shield rubbish and joins the 21st century.

Putin or Bush ? Hmmm...

Actually, why do we need to chose. The European Union should refuse this ineffective missile shielding bull****. The US, Russia, anybody, should deal with that stuff on their own territory. I completely oppose the presence of ANY non European military base within the borders of the EU.


marlon

 

[Astronuc]

Putin or Bush ? Hmmm...

As opposed to Bush vs Gore?

Or Bush vs Kerry?

So much for democracy, eh?

 

[marlon]

As opposed to Bush vs Gore?

Or Bush vs Kerry?

You are asking me ? Well, i dunno. But, this is not my worry because i ain't no US citizen. This sunday, i will vote for the next federal government of Belgium. Which party to chose for, well, that I DO know .

marlon

 

[Anttech]

Undoubtedly!
Any sane person would immediately ask the question why the USA still has military bases in Europe.

The EU is not a democracy. A democracy is where the majority gets their way. So these bases will undoubtedly stay. It's the same with for instance adding Turkey to the EU, the majority does not want it, but that does not mean it is not going to happen.

It doesn't mean its going to either. And I would put money on it not happening in my lifetime.

 

[MeJennifer]

You are asking me ? Well, i dunno. But, this is not my worry because i ain't no US citizen. This sunday, i will vote for the next federal government of Belgium. Which party to chose for, well, that I DO know .

marlon

The majority of the Belgians want a split Belgium. Do you think that democracy will be served in this case as well? How about a referendum?

 

[russ_watters]

When did Russia cease being a 1st world nation?

I said viable - and it was the day after their communist government fell.

What are the comparative economic growth figures (rates, GDP) for US & Russia?

You ask that question as if you think it is relevant...

When your GDP drops by 90%, you have nowhere left to go but up.

 

[russ_watters]

Yet more bull ****. Russia has the longest uninterrupted empire in the world right now. Its not 15 years old...

[from another post]however we all know that it isn't 15 years old (in its current form, or not).

Again, you say this as if you think it is relevant to the thread... Russia of today bears little resemblance to Russa 20 years ago and no resemblance to Russia 100 years ago. Just because the people use the same name, doesn't make it the same country.

This is an important point. What you arguing is missing this point.

You made a pointless and rediculas statement that you being america are in the same place you are now, as you were at the end of the clod war. You arent.

Oh, ok - I get it now: you misread my post. See, if you'd explain your point, we could avoid these misunderstandings.

When I said the US was in the same place as before the end of the cold war, it should have been reasonably clear that I meant financially and militarily since that's what the discussion was about.

 

[MeJennifer]

Again, you say this as if you think it is relevant to the thread... Russia of today bears little resemblance to Russa 20 years ago and no resemblance to Russia 100 years ago. Just because the people use the same name, doesn't make it the same country.

I agree with that.

It looks like the proverbial neocons want to kick out Putin and replace him with some currupt media mogul or similar personalities who made billions in the last decade. And of course this person has to be pro Israel.

 

[marlon]

The majority of the Belgians want a split Belgium.

That's absolutely untrue. Besides, reforming the state does not mean splitting up the country in t"wo separate parts closed down with borders". It's a matter of what is regulated by the federal government and what is regulated by the communities.

Do you think that democracy will be served in this case as well? How about a referendum?

Ofcourse, the majority is ALWAYS right !

marlon

 

[MeJennifer]

So you would be in favor of a referendum on this?

 

[marlon]

So you would be in favor of a referendum on this?

Me personally, YES.

And i would oppose "splitting up the country".

marlon

 

[Anttech]

Russia of today bears little resemblance to Russa 20 years ago and no resemblance to Russia 100 years ago. Just because the people use the same name, doesn't make it the same country.

hmmm... The fact of the matter is: it is the same country. Have you ever been to Russia? What are you basing your presumptions on?

 

[Anttech]

The majority of the Belgians want a split Belgium. Do you think that democracy will be served in this case as well? How about a referendum?

No a minority want that. The Walloons and Flems may talk dirty behind each others backs, on top of that Flanders maybe subsidising Wallonia, but separatism is frowned apon here to the extent that people don't look at it as a viable option...

 

[Anttech]

I agree with that.

It looks like the proverbial neocons want to kick out Putin and replace him with some currupt media mogul or similar personalities who made billions in the last decade. And of course this person has to be pro Israel.

Would hate to see them try, if they want another War perhaps ask Mexico to host it for them...

 

[Art]

Again, you say this as if you think it is relevant to the thread... Russia of today bears little resemblance to Russa 20 years ago and no resemblance to Russia 100 years ago. Just because the people use the same name, doesn't make it the same country.

What do you mean by this? Are you simply stating a global truism that all countries change with time or are you trying to make a point specific to the Russian Federation?

The Russia of today still has much in common with the Russia of yesteryear not least an arsenal of 16,000 nuclear warheads ~7000 of which are currently operational so they are definitely not somebody you should wish to antagonise for fun.

One should learn from history. The first world war started because Germany felt it was being surrounded by potential hostile governments and that there was a concerted effort being made to ring-fence it's influence on the world stage not too disimilar from what is being done to Russia today.

It would be interesting to see how the US gov't would react if Russia were to build a missile interceptor base in Mexico or Cuba whilst recruiting all of the S American countries into a Russian led military alliance.

 

[Anttech]

When I said the US was in the same place as before the end of the cold war, it should have been reasonably clear that I meant financially and militarily since that's what the discussion was about.

Militarily I would speculate your technology is better, but when MAD comes into the game it becomes almost irrelevant. Financially you are waaaaaay more debt. So as I said; even with your very thin remit, you arent.

Pointless arguments.. well kettle pot black is all I can say to that

 

[Mallignamius]

The U.N. might be inept, but keeping NATO only furthers the tensions. Do we need a missile shield in Europe? We are a hyperpower capable of full spectrum dominance. I fail to see any just rationalization for this shield.

It seems to me that we are responding to terrorism all wrong. We're supposed to have more allies right now, we're supposed to be reaching out to our neighbors, not building higher fences. Even the highest walls won't protect us. Instead, I've never before seen so much anti-American sentiment. The best chance we have against terrorism is embracing our friends.

 

[drankin]

The U.N. might be inept, but keeping NATO only furthers the tensions. Do we need a missile shield in Europe? We are a hyperpower capable of full spectrum dominance. I fail to see any just rationalization for this shield.

It seems to me that we are responding to terrorism all wrong. We're supposed to have more allies right now, we're supposed to be reaching out to our neighbors, not building higher fences. Even the highest walls won't protect us. Instead, I've never before seen so much anti-American sentiment. The best chance we have against terrorism is embracing our friends.

Who are our friends?

 

[devil-fire]

The U.N. might be inept, but keeping NATO only furthers the tensions. Do we need a missile shield in Europe? We are a hyperpower capable of full spectrum dominance. I fail to see any just rationalization for this shield.

It seems to me that we are responding to terrorism all wrong. We're supposed to have more allies right now, we're supposed to be reaching out to our neighbors, not building higher fences. Even the highest walls won't protect us. Instead, I've never before seen so much anti-American sentiment. The best chance we have against terrorism is embracing our friends.

this is vary true.

one way to combat the threat of north korea or any other "rogue state" that intents to use a WMD tipped missile would be to share the anti-missile technology with russia and make a cooperative effort to make a missile shield. that way you have russia covering some of the bill as well as being a regional supporter of the project. this might be taking it a little far, but it sounds like there was no effort made to include russia in the project so of course they are going to feel like there was a reason for excluding russian control or oversight.

there are tons and tons of other things involved with the war on terror where the paranoia of the current admin has alienated potential allies.

ps. "you are either with us or against us" need i say more?

 

[Astronuc]

Who are our friends?

Tony Blair and John Howard?

 

[Mallignamius]

Who are our friends?

That's a question I wish no one would need ask. And that's very much the point I was making. We're losing friends. We're supposed to be gaining new ones and strengthening the ones we have. I'm optimistic that the potential, given proper diplomatic efforts, to rebuild or form new friendships exists.

 

[Anttech]

Well it seem Mr Putin has completely outflanked Mr Bush...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6729751.stm

Now will Bush listen, I hope so...

 

[Art]

Well it seem Mr Putin has completely outflanked Mr Bush...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6729751.stm

Now will Bush listen, I hope so...

On the other hand I believe the US has outflanked Europe. This missile shield presents a major setback for those who wish to see Europe develop as a cohesive entity with the ability to project real power in the world.

By appointing themselves as the 'protectors' of the eastern european countries the US has effectively nullified the attempts of western europe to assume that role and so negated the current drive for greater military cohesion between 'old' europe and the former members of the Soviet bloc.

A weaker Europe is obviously a good thing from a US and (for different reasons) a UK viewpoint but just as obviously this is not so good for the EU. It will be interesting to see what countersteps the EU takes next.

 

[moose]

Militarily I would speculate your technology is better, but when MAD comes into the game it becomes almost irrelevant. Financially you are waaaaaay more debt. So as I said; even with your very thin remit, you arent.

Pointless arguments.. well kettle pot black is all I can say to that

Financially, our GDP is far greater than Russia's GDP.

Also, according to the CIA world factbook, the US made up 40% of the entire world's military spending in 2006. It is believed that so far in 2007, that percent is 50. That means we spend more on our military now than every other country in the world combined.

 

[Art]

Financially, our GDP is far greater than Russia's GDP.

Also, according to the CIA world factbook, the US made up 40% of the entire world's military spending in 2006. It is believed that so far in 2007, that percent is 50. That means we spend more on our military now than every other country in the world combined.

As I've stated previously who spends the most is not what determines the outcome of an arms race. Here is a quote from Putin from the article linked above which exemplifies this

We have taken into account the experience of the Soviet Union and we are not going to get entangled into the arms race.

We're not going to reciprocate actions, we're not going to mirror such actions. We are going to find other ways. This will be an asymmetric answer.

For instance, the US is creating a huge AMD system which will cost billions and billions of dollars. We said, we are not going to go this way, we will build much cheaper but very effective systems of overriding such a missile-defence system. Through this, we will maintain the balance of forces.

So as Anttech rightly says so long as Russia retains the ability to fire off its thousands of nuclear warheads MAD reigns.

 

[moose]

So as Anttech rightly says so long as Russia retains the ability to fire off its thousands of nuclear warheads MAD reigns.

Well of course MAD continues. I was mainly referring to Anttech's financial comment.