COLLECTIVE MADNESS


“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."

Tuesday, February 06, 2007

Putin is Getting Nasty

Vladimir Putin recently held a marathon three hour press conference and this was possibly the most interesting bit of news:
Putin denounced the possible deployment of elements of an American missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic, scoffing at U.S. claims that they would be aimed at intercepting missiles from Iran. He said Russia would take unspecified retaliatory measures.

"We consider such claims unfounded, and, naturally, that directly concerns us and will cause a relevant reaction," Putin said. "That reaction will be asymmetrical, but it will be highly efficient."

As he has before, Putin said Russia's latest Topol-M intercontinental ballistic missiles were capable of penetrating missile defenses and added that Moscow is developing more effective weapons against which anti-missile systems would be "helpless."

33 comments:

  1. He's full of shit, and he knows it.

    ReplyDelete
  2. He knows that if Europe, and the U.S. is protected that leaves Moscow out in the Cold.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Like it or not, Russia is trapped by her culture, as Muslims are with their their culture. They do not fit in with western style liberal democracies. Putin reflects who the Russians are. That may evolve in time, but in the mean time, play it safe. Do not depend on Russia to do anything beyond what it has historically. They will never be a friend or trustworthy ally to the US. They will try and triangulate with Europe and have only two assets , a military threat and excess energy capacity.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Deuce, that second asset you mentioned, "excess energy capacity" is a hell of an asset.

    Russia has gone in a very short period of time from being "on the ropes" to being a "contender."

    ReplyDelete
  5. They will threaten Poland and Czechoslavakia with Nat Gas and oil. It Might Work; but, probably not.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Eastern Europe is the only place on the globe that "is not" getting on board with biofuels, and biomass. Lord only knows why. They have all the potential in the world, and heaven knows they should have the motivation.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Eastern Europe would be well suited for syn-fuels, nuclear and some bio-mass. Poland and Czech have great manufacturing culture. Iceland has huge geo-thermal excess capacity. They all have the incentive to lean away from Russia.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Not to change to topic, but why the Hell are we wasting all this time next week voting on a NON-BINDING resolution to stop the troop surge? NON-BINDING? Who are these people? U.S. Politics invented wasting time!

    ReplyDelete
  9. They don't have much to do, Gag; It's called "Gridlock." The Pubs ain't going to let the Dems raise taxes (takes 60, remember?) and the Dems ain't gonna let the Pubs cut spending.

    Gridlock. Gotta love it. We're safe, temporarily.

    ReplyDelete
  10. "The Government that governs least, governs best."

    Congress is less dangerous when it is wasting time but haven't the resolution votes been derailed for now?

    ReplyDelete
  11. btw, Rufus, how is your sign up going? Been out of pocket..

    ReplyDelete
  12. ruf:
    great minds...

    ReplyDelete
  13. Got over 31,000 on the "Pledge," no telling how many individual emails to members.

    I don't know if they had an effect, but they've pulled up short.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Warner even voted against "Cloture" on his Own Resolution.

    Whit; Similar minds, anyway :-)

    ReplyDelete
  15. Back to Putin...He still leads the "evil empire", or at least one of them. Russian leadership has always thought raw square miles equaled power. I'm with Deuce, they are not to be trusted. Besides, they're a little bit too free with the poison for my taste.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Americans say Operation Baghdad Has Begun.

    Iraqis say, "It hasn't"

    Sheesh, these fucking people will drive you nuts.

    ReplyDelete
  17. HAPPY BIRTHDAY PRESIDENT REAGAN.


    and thanks for all you did.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Thanks Sam, that is a very nice tribute to a Great American. Ronald Reagan. He would have been 96 today.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I'll tip a glass for the Dutch treat.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Assad

    Scroll down and double-click the video.

    ReplyDelete
  21. westhawk let's us know the stakes in the "surge". Either the US wins, by providing the Shia population in Baghdad greater levels of Security, both immediately and long term.

    Over 1,000 Iraqi reported killed, just last week.

    Or else Mr al-Sadr wins, by July.

    ReplyDelete
  22. In Baghdad, we will now be calling the operation a "Rolling Surge".

    As westhawk remarked:
    "What ever that means?"

    ReplyDelete
  23. Operation Volcano

    Scroll down and double-click the video.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Sorry, Rufus. I see you already posted it.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Edward Luttwak in the NYT yesterday:

    [...]

    Fortunately, there is a promising, long-term policy ready and waiting for President Bush whenever he decides to call off the good old college try of his surge: disengagement. By this, I don’t mean a phased withdrawal, let alone the leap in the dark of total abandonment. Rather, it would start with a tactical change: American soldiers would no longer patrol towns and villages, conduct cordon-and-search operations, or man outposts and checkpoints. An end to these tasks would allow the greatest part of the troops in Iraq to head home, starting with overburdened reservists and National Guard units.

    The remaining American forces, including ground units, would hole up within safe and mostly remote bases in Iraq — to support the elected government, deter foreign invasion, dissuade visible foreign intrusions, and strike at any large concentration of jihadis should it emerge. This would mean, contrary to most plans being considered now, that United States military personnel could not remain embedded in large numbers within the Iraqi Army and police forces. At most, the Americans would operate training programs within safe bases.

    [...]

    Ed has apparently been comiserating with allen.

    There are many things wrong with this proposal, not least that you can't do jack while you're "holed up...within safe bases."

    And morally, it's just indefensible.

    But what's startling is that it indicates a phenomenal lack of understanding with regard to what is actually going to happen upon the occasion of our disengagement/withdrawal. That government is not going to survive. Iraq as a national entity is not going to survive. And everyone and their brother across how many borders is going to get their game on. Our "slow failure" simply becomes the quick fucking disaster. At that point, US troops have zilch to do. Paramilitary guys, sure. But not troops.

    And we are, mark my words, about one sudden catastrophe away from begging to be cut completely loose from that morass.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Never utter the words, "It can't get any worse."

    ReplyDelete
  27. Exactly.

    Never Utter the Words, "It Can't Get Any Worse" is, I believe, the full subtitle of the Iraq NIE.

    And I'd just like to say to bob w., who popped in on the previous thread, that the contrarian optimism is valiant and you're a fine human being for suffering this bunch of grumpy bastards.

    ReplyDelete
  28. trish check this out:

    This is OT, but a real treat, well written and light take on our astroturfed scorned inspaced-out chick attack. Bobw over at Wilsonizer advice on Astro-nots.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Iraq as a national entity is not going to survive.


    Who cares?

    And why waste another dollar on this idiotic mission, trying to keep Iraq together?

    ReplyDelete