Pajamas Media

42 Comments

1. John Samford:

Simple solution to the Imperial ambitions of both Russia and China.
The USA needs to withdraw from the NPT. IIRC, there is a 6 month delay between notification that we are withdrawing from the NPT and when we can legally sell Nuclear weapons to any state we want. See if the thought of Poland and Germany having ICBM’s with 100Kt warheads aimed at Russia doesn’t cool off the Russian ardor for Empire.
Want to hear Puttie squeal? It is no accident that the former Soviet Union never allowed any of it’s “allies” nukes in WW3 ( the Cold War).

I think if China was faced with the choice of doing something about the Norks and seeing Taiwan getting 2 dozen ICBM’s with 100Kt warheads, then Kim would need that set of bags he keeps packed.

Besides the NPT has obviously failed. It is past time to ditch it and try a make-over.
Withdraw from the NPT and that will give the diplos 6 months to work on getting some co-operation from Russia on Georgia and other issues. Like Iran.

They still there? 27 days and counting.

Sep 5, 2008 - 4:32 am 2. dave472:

John Samford:
“Besides the NPT has obviously failed.”

I agree. Article VI called for nuclear disarmament “at an early date,” and countries such as the US have violated the treaty by ignoring their obligations to disarm, and have went the oppostie direction and developed new nuclear weapons. If the US is not going to honor the treaties it signs, they should simply withdraw.

Sep 5, 2008 - 6:11 am 3. Alicia Del Fino:

Nanotech weapons combined with advanced biotech weaponry are the more fearsome threat than nuclear.

That’s what’s got puta-putin so worried. He knows that Russia is falling behind the west in biotech, nanotech, and any other scientific and technological field.

Russia is doomed demographically, technologically, and economically–as substitutes for fossil fuels take the stage over the next few decades. Militarily, Russia is losing population so fast that it will not be able to field an army to defend its vast territories soon.

Sep 5, 2008 - 7:14 am 4. David W. Lincoln:

As long as the sphere of the church is subserviant to the sphere of government, the Kremlin will continue to be reactionary.

Now, here is a radical thought: why not have each part of life sized up by the authority invoked by Cicero, Diogenes, or Confucius. Check
the middle section of “The Abolition of Man” by C.S. Lewis to receive a more complete description
of this authority.

Sep 5, 2008 - 9:05 am 5. coisty:

It’s despicable to compare an atrocity like Katyn that was carried out by Soviet communists (few of the leaders being Russians) to non-communist Russia’s response to NATO encirclement and the US mutilation of Serbia.

Perhaps it was the great geopolitical hope of the past two decades that Russia would turn out to be a normal country

It is acting like a normal country. Russia is not motivated by ideology but by the quaint idea that a country should defend its national interests. The US by rejecting national interests in favour of ideology is the abnormal country.

Sep 5, 2008 - 9:29 am 6. schnargley:

Everytime I hear some conservative fascist attacking Putin and Russia it invokes in my mind the Joe McCarthy era of fears of a Communist under every bed. You people never change! It’s like you always want to mask your hatred for progressive peoples and countries with your so-called concern for human rights and these little pipsqueak countries with their so-called pathetic little “democracies.”

Just mind your own business and get out of Russia’s hair before you start WW3 again. America is the worst aggresor as we all know so just leave Putin alone.

Sep 5, 2008 - 9:59 am 7. dan:

Russophilia is an incredible delusion; it ought to be studied – although not, I hasten to add, under the psychiatric provisions of the Soviet criminal code. Russia’s problem is Russia, and has been since Peter the Great first looked out at the West and decided he ought to raise St. Petersburg on a pyramid of corpses so he could have his monument to civilizational parity – and therefore, in the Russian mind, superiority. Communism has always been a red herring; its end as official ideology of Russian political organization and ambition is irrelevant. Anyone who simply reviews the list of participants of the Second International can see what role Russianness played in the minds of the Bolshevik putschists. The current regime – a fitting term – dresses like the West, as Peter the Great intended, but acts like its true, little-acknowledged tutor: the Golden Horde. The USSR was what it was because Russia is what it is and Russians are who they are. Goethe enjoined, “don’t keep trying to look behind phenomena – there’s nothing there.” So it is with national character: that is what is. In the case of Russia, this is nothing less than a global catastrophe, and Putin is its current helmsman. My guess is that he will push it as far as possible, according to the dimensions of possibility as discerned by the Russian mind.

Sep 5, 2008 - 10:03 am 8. cedarford:

More nutty idiocy from Samford – the neocon child saber-waver who was recently advocating we sent the Air Force to kill Russians in Georgia and hit bases in Russia itself.

See if the thought of Poland and Germany having ICBM’s with 100Kt warheads (the US would sell to them) aimed at Russia doesn’t cool off the Russian ardor for Empire.
Want to hear Puttie squeal?

Yeah, moron, because your Podhoretz-Sharansky New World Order fantasies clearly meant you never read about how WWI started and how close we came in the Cuban missile crisis.

Then again, you were also the idiot that said he welcomed nuclear war with Russia because “precious Georgian freedom” was more important and our military HAD to attack!

Alicia Del Fino:
Nanotech weapons combined with advanced biotech weaponry are the more fearsome threat than nuclear.

Obviously you are clueless about what 500 thermonuclear weapons each 20 to 1200 times more powerful than the Nagasaki implosion weapon can do.
We have 5,000 of them. The Russians 7,000. Back in 1971, President Nixon, after great thought, concluded that germ warfare was dangerous, uncontrollable within nation’s borders. But the far greater threat of nuclear destruction in retaliation for any man-made plague meant he could unilaterally disarm. Which we did. One of the great feats of that tragic, flawed, but brilliant man.

Strategists estimate that only 30 hydrogen bombs would destroy Russia as a nation and civilization. 55-60 to permanently eradicate the US civilization, its culture and Constitution. China would take almost 100 warheads to do the same trick. Israel or Egypt? Only 3 nukes.

Sep 5, 2008 - 10:11 am 9. Alicia Del Fino:

No, actually I understand quite clearly the effects of thermonuclear weapons. However, unlike yourself, I understand how precisely tunable weapons of “targeted mass death” can alter the global balance of power. A nuclear force cannot effect retaliatory strikes if a pre-strike of targeted bio-nano weapons has neutralised all personnel.

The idea is to clear the hostiles, not kill all life thousands of miles around. Typical dinosaur thinking. Thanks but no thanks.

Sep 5, 2008 - 10:24 am 10. Patrick Armstrong:

Don’t believe everything you read in the MSM.

List of Ossetians killed in war who have so far been identified.
http://www.russiatoday.com/ossetianwar/news/29983

Fake HRW claims on Russian use of cluster bombs

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2008/09/followup-on-hrw.html

Sep 5, 2008 - 12:07 pm 11. Dude:

Putin needs to sit back and relax with a hot cup of Polonium.

Sep 5, 2008 - 12:36 pm 12. ZEITGEIST:

[...] ARTHUR CHRENKOFF on Georgia and the dangers of Putinism. [...]

Sep 5, 2008 - 12:39 pm 13. Austin:

Why were there no invasion stripes on the Russian Vehicles? How were the Russians able to mount effective cyber and electronic warfare on a moment’s notice?

Because it was all planned and rehearsed months before!

I think we should sell some CANDU reactors to the Nordic, Baltic, and E European states.

Sep 5, 2008 - 12:50 pm 14. Candide:

People seriously proposing to study Russophilia ‘delusion’, might start by studying their own Georgia-philia delusion instead.

Georgia is very small but very complicated country, and some aspects of Georgia history and politics might give anyone a pause. Do you know that Georgia is probably the only one of the old Soviet republics where you still can find Stalin statues and museum? Do you know how many Georgian ‘democrats’ worship memories of Stalin and Beria? Do you know that the borders Georgia insists upon were drawn by, – who else,- Stalin?

Now, I’m all in favor of Georgia joining the West and developing into a true democratic state, but there is an awful lot of baggage it has to get rid of before we can seriously start talking about Georgian democracy. Hopefully, Georgians will learn a good lesson from the Ossetian fiasco and get their act in order. Young democracy sometimes deserve to go to a school of hard knocks; it does them good. For example, it did young American republic good to learn about its limitations in the war of 1812.

Katyn forest massacre happened in the Soviet times. Why do try to pin all the blame on Russians? Stalin and Beria who ordered the massacre were both Georgians. Why don’t we blame Georgia for it? Do you know how many Russians were among the executioners? Or maybe the whole deed was done by some ‘wild division’ from Kalmykia or some other place? Why do you bring this up at all? USSR was an abomination and it no longer exists, end of story.

There were many strange actors that built up the USSR: Georgians, Jews, Poles too (Dzerzhinsky organized the secret police). How about Polish responsibilities for tortures and executions conducted by the ‘Iron Felix’? How about Latvians, for instance? Do you know that a regiment of Latvian riflemen was the only military force Lenin had and those Latvians are directly responsible for establishing and preserving the USSR? Should we hold all the Latvians responsible for that?

Seriously, Chrenkoff, you need a lot to learn about history and then to learn a lot how to keep your mouth shut before you have something seious to say.

Sep 5, 2008 - 1:09 pm 15. David Govett:

The U.S. should issue passports to the dozens of minorities in Russia and support their independence movements. Once they break away, some could even be invited to join the U.S.A. Better do it quick before China grabs Siberia.

Sep 5, 2008 - 1:28 pm 16. Arius:

The question should be: how far will the US push it? The West is stepping all over Russia’s near abroad. Doesn’t anyone remember that the US promised not to extend NATO up to Russia, or does what we say mean nothing?

Russia ‘despoiled Chechnya’? While Russia was fighting the Chechnyan Islamic jihad the US was receiving, protecting, and assisting its leaders.

The Georgians started the war and thank God that Russia stopped it. Russia has an intelligence service that could see what was coming, an attempt by Georgia to try to pull off what Croatia did with operation Storm (with US backing), the ethnic cleansing of the Serbs from the Krajina. Of course Russia was ready, had planned and rehearsed, and took action when Georgia attacked.

Sep 5, 2008 - 1:51 pm 17. ChrisGreen:

When commenters say, “We need to leave Russia alone,” I hope they really mean LEAVE RUSSIA ALONE and that they don’t mean ‘ignore every country on Russia’s borders that wants close ties with the West because they are afraid of Russian abuse’.

While its true that our actions regarding Kosovo are similar to Russian’s actions in South Ossetia, Russia has no right to threaten Poland, Estonia or any country along its borders for forming economic or military alliances with the West.

NATO is a defense pact. Unless Russia plans on invading one of its neighbors, NATO poses no threat to it. Furthermore, these neighbors would not feel inclined to join NATO in the first place if decades of abuse had not led to a pathological distrust of Russia.

Sep 5, 2008 - 2:19 pm 18. chicopanther:

Wow, there sure are a lot of commies here defending Putin! Are y’all still mad that Reagan caused the breakup of the old Soviet empire?

Today’s Russia could be part of the modern world, but folks like Putin keep trying to move them backwards, cutting off normal relations with peaceful surrounding countries. There is a reason countries like Poland, Latvia, et al fear the Russkies–because those other folks know the Russkies have a thing about trying to dominate their neighbors through totalitarian government imposed on them.

You Putin defenders should talk to folks who lived in places like Poland when it was under Soviet rule. If you did, and were still a Putin/Russia defender afterwards, you’d have to be an idiot.

– chicopanther

Sep 5, 2008 - 2:21 pm 19. Frank0234:

The United States cannot give up its nuclear weapons until it is certain that all dictatorships have none.

Dictatorships work in secrecy and without accountability, so the democracies cannot disarm before they are disarmed.

The better solution is to free the world, give everyone his or her right to live in a democracy. Then scrap all atom bombs.

Sep 5, 2008 - 2:29 pm 20. ChrisGreen:

As far as the Katyn forest massacre is concerned, the troubling thing is not that Russians did it. Like Candide said, it was Soviets who perpetuated it, Soviets that came from a number of different plances.

What is disturbing is that the government and media in Russia are now lying about it and saying it was the German’s fault.

Imagine what would happen if the US goverment changed textbooks so that McCarthy was described as a Russian operative, trying to undermine our country, not one of us. It would never happen. The media and education establishment would have a fit. It couldn’t be enforced.

In Russia on the other hand, the media seems to be going along with it. Where are the liberal progressive protest groups in Russia trying to put a stop to the revision of their history by their government. They either don’t exist, or have been cowed into silance. Either way, it is a bad sign.

Sep 5, 2008 - 2:33 pm 21. John Samford:

“Article VI called for nuclear disarmament “at an early date,” and countries such as the US have violated the treaty by ignoring their obligations to disarm”

Not accurate.
IIRC both sides had about 40,000 devices between them at one point. Now after Salt and Start, that combined number is down to about 2500 or so.
I wouldn’t describe a 94% ( approx) reduction as “ignoring”. Yes, we are not there yet, which today looks like a pretty good thing.
Unless, you are the other human alive today that thinks Kim should be the only one with nuclear bombs. Oh wait, there is a bugfuk crazy mullah in Iran that thinks he should be the only one with nukes. My bad.

Sep 5, 2008 - 3:57 pm 22. John Samford:

“More nutty idiocy from Samford – the neocon child saber-waver who was recently advocating we sent the Air Force to kill Russians in Georgia and hit bases in Russia itself.”

Perchance, would this be an ad hominem attack?
Or do liberals get a pass when they attack conservatives? I have found out that Conservatives get deleted if they say anything that can be twisted into an attack on a Liberal.

Sep 5, 2008 - 4:03 pm 23. krontekag:

Did someone call just Russia “progressive”?

At last, I now understand what lefties mean when they say that word.

Welcome back Arthur, I’ve really missed your musings. More please!

Sep 5, 2008 - 6:01 pm 24. dave742:

Samford:
With nuclear weapons, the difference between 40,000 and 2,500 in zero. The US, Russia, China, etc. have been in noncompliance with Article VI for decades. I am sure the sanctions will be coming any day now. I wonder who gets the honor to invade, destroy and occupy our country for being noncompliant with the NPT. Developing new nuclear weapons is in direct violation of the NPT. Read the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, then read this:

Wisconsin Law Review, March, 1993/April, 1993, 1993 Wis. L. Rev. 301
ARTICLE: PARSING GOOD FAITH: HAS THE UNITED STATES VIOLATED ARTICLE VI OF THE NUCLEAR NON-PROLIFERATION TREATY?
NAME: DAVID A. KOPLOW

Did you realize that before the NPT was signed that all nations in the world have every legal right to manufacture nuclear weapons? Did you realize that over 100 nations did not give up this right merely to be nice? They gave up this right as part of the “Grand Bargain,” and the NWS part of the bargain was to dismantle their nuclear weapons at “an early date.” This did not mean that NWS states could retain thousands of nuclear weapons more than 30 years after the treaty was signed. Do you think that all the NNWS of the world gave up their right to develop nuclear weapons in exchange for countries like the US to reduce their stock of nuclear weapons to “only” 2,500 over 30 years later? Please try to be rational.
Only India realized in the 1960’s that the NWS like the US had no intention of honoring their part of the “Grand Bargain.” That is why they didn’t sign the treaty, and that is why they have nuclear weapons today. If every country in the world realized that the US had no intention of honoring the treaties it signs, nobody would have signed the NPT, and dozens of countries would have nuclear weapons by now. Other countries have now learned their lessons. Other countries will no longer trust rogue nations like the US, and the world will become a much more dangerous place.

Sep 5, 2008 - 7:10 pm 25. dave742:

Samford:
That should read: “over 40 years later.”

Sep 5, 2008 - 7:13 pm 26. cedarford:

Alicia Del Fino:
No, actually I understand quite clearly the effects of thermonuclear weapons. However, unlike yourself, I understand how precisely tunable weapons of “targeted mass death” can alter the global balance of power. A nuclear force cannot effect retaliatory strikes if a pre-strike of targeted bio-nano weapons has neutralised all personnel.

Except your magic “bio-nano” weapons have not been invented and there is no way you could infiltrate operatives or launch magic, unseen missiles to strike enough nuke deterrent platforms that precluded a massive retaliatory prestrike. Not to mention find the Russian mobile missiles or that the US, China, Russia can all lock down, go on positive pressure and virus-size blocking HEPA filters.
Or the fact you don’t know where the missile subs are.
Nice fantasy though.
Nixons logic and his chem/bio NPTs stand.

==========================
Austin:
Why were there no invasion stripes on the Russian Vehicles? How were the Russians able to mount effective cyber and electronic warfare on a moment’s notice?
Because it was all planned and rehearsed months before!

Well, no shit, Sherlock! They are called war plans. Constantly revised and updated for any threat. We do it, the Russians do it, even the Belgians do it.

======================
On me calling Samford a lunatic for 1st advocating we start a war with Russia over their border conflict with Georgia – then him saying he hoped it escalated to a nuclear war because Russian ICBMs don’t work – now his saying we should threaten to envelop Russia & CHina with nuclear bomb and ICBM proliferation to adjacent countries…Ignoring the idea that would start an immediate thermonuclear war, or a delayed one once Russia and China followed our breach of nuclear proliferation and set up thermonuclear missile centers in Cuba, Venezuela, Syria, Egypt, Iran, N Korea.

At 1st I thought he was so obviously stupid and clueless that Samford had to be a Lefty plant, but later realized the idiot is a young man who is a bit conservative, but also a bit deranged:

Samford – Perchance, would this be an ad hominem attack?
Or do liberals get a pass when they attack conservatives? I have found out that Conservatives get deleted if they say anything that can be twisted into an attack on a Liberal.

I am a conservative and former military officer with more than a passing acquaintance with Russian weaponry.
I can tell you that if you were a subordinate spouting your neocon saber-rattling drivel you would be soon out of the military on bad fitness reports – or Section-8′d if folks thought your Dr Stranglove views were a sign of a more general irrationality.
If calling you a twisted nutcase is ad hominem, so be it.

Sep 5, 2008 - 10:25 pm 27. David:

A few points on Russia:

Quite a few posters seem to have the idea that former Soviet or Eastern Bloc countries should not be welcomed into the western democratic family of nations because Russia might be offended. This notion seems to completely disregard the fact that these nations are now independent sovereign states that have the right to do as they please. Nobody would dream of consulting Spain before signing a treaty with Mexico, because everyone recognises that Mexico is now independent. The “let’s not offend Russia” crew basically do not think that former Russian satellites have a right to their own independence.

On the nuclear weapons front, Russia actually has a much bigger nuclear arsenal than the US. In fact it has more nukes than the rest of the world combined. It has a particularly large number of short range low yield nuclear weapons, of the sort that would be very effective during a land war against non-nuclear armed states.

My own feeling is that western countries, not just the US but Britain and France too, should be upgrading their nuclear capacities to ensure that they remain an effective deterrent.

In addition European countries need to spend more money on defence. Britain, France and Germany have significant military forces, most of eastern Europe doesn’t. Eastern European states are poor and military spending has not been a priority. Without NATO they would be sitting ducks.

The third thing that needs to be done about Russia is for NATO to enter into a temporary alliance with Ukraine. It looks like Ukraine will be the next target for Russian adventurism. It is about the only eastern European country other than Russia itself with a large military. Unfortunately Russia will probably try to create problems in the Ukraine by stirring up ethnic Russians and bribing members of Ukraine’s pretty corrupt political class.

I would note that from what I have heard (those of you in the US may know more) US foreign policy in recent years has been largely focused on the Islamic world and as a result diplomats and resources have been shifted away from Eastern Europe to Islamic countries, so that US interests are not really promoted in strategic areas of eastern Europe any more.

It is of further interest that there seems to be growing co-operation between Russia and Iran, seemingly on the principle that my enemy’s enemy is my friend. Ironically I think that Iran is less inherently anti-American than Russia. In Iran the government is generally looked on by the population as a corrupt and hypocritical elite that preaches religious virtues but never practices them. In Russia the populace generally look on Putin as a national saviour. I wonder whether it is possible to get Iranian regime change without a disastrous war. This might burst Putin’s bubble too.

Sep 6, 2008 - 12:24 am 28. Sergey:

Neither Georgia nor Russia are democracies: both are plebiscitary dictatorships, semi-democratic, semi-authoritarian. Both are imperialistic and chauvinistic, and Georgia has almost Nazi-style propaganda apparatus. Its ruler is insane murderer, who ordered middle-night surprise attack on sleeping city using indiscriminate weapons: ungiuded multiple rocket launchers “Grad”. This is not simply an aggression, it is a war crime. This is the third war Georgia started against its minorities, which Russia stopped.

Sep 6, 2008 - 12:54 am 29. dave742:

Samford:
Bertrand Goldschmidt wrote an article describing the following:

In 1947, Russia put forward a proposal proposing an international organization that would monitor nuclear activities throughout the world, similar to what the IAEA does now. This organization would ensure no new nuclear weapons were built. In exchange, the US would disarm. The proposal was in several ways very similar to the NPT. Of course, the proposal was rejected by the West, and the rejection paper was worked on by Goldscmidt and others. In part, the rejection of 1947 read:

“It is completely unrealistic to expect any nation to renounce atomic weapons without any assurance that all nations will be prevented from producing them.”

This sentence follows your line of argument. In 1986, Goldschmidt wrote the following about the above statement:

“The irony of [the above statement] is that 40 years later 127 non-nuclear weapon countries, in adhering to the NPT, have precisely done what we then deemed completely unrealistic.”

(IAEA Bulletin, Spring 1986, “A Forerunner of the NPT? The Soviet Proposals of 1947,” by Betrand Goldschmidt

If the US would have done in 1947 what the rest of the world found able to do, there would be no nuclear weapons today. As long as the US remains a rogue nation and refuses to do what they expect of the rest of the world, the world will remain as dangerous as it is today.

You brag that the US reduced its arsenal by 94% in 40 years, even though we still have 2,500 weapons. Another 94% reduction over the next 40 years would leave us with 150. Another 40 years, we still have 9 nuclear weapons. Each of these 9 weapons might have a couple dozen warheads. These 9 weapons could still wipe out a major portion of the earth. When the NNWS agreed to the “Grand Bargain” and nuclear weapons states agreed to disarm “at an early date,” do you think that meant that over 120 years later nuclear states would still have enough weapons to obliterate large sections of the earth? Was that really the deal?

Sep 6, 2008 - 6:03 am 30. David W. Lincoln:

The Kremlin has basically two cards to play: one
is by stirring up Russian nationals in territories where they are a majority (but within the country where those territories are found, Russian nationals are in the minority).

The other one is oil.

I say that Russia can be grabbed by the short hairs by the Western Canadian province of Alberta exporting oil to Europe. This involves
more money to flow into the Alberta Oil Sands, but so be it.

That way, the Kremlin will be put in its place.

As for Siberia, the question that can be asked is: what has the Kremlin done for it?

Sep 6, 2008 - 10:47 am 31. wGraves:

Russia and the OPEC have about ten years left before current initiatives make their oil and gas monopoly irrelevant. Novel power systems, electric and hybrid vehicles, and the current price of petrochemicals are going to decouple the western democracies from the old dependence on petroleum. In other words, they have overplayed their hand pretty badly. In the new world, you compete with better ideas, better engineering, and new ways of doing things. So you should be investing in the new capital, human capital. Assuming that Russia understands this, then their motivation in the current conflict is evident, they want their slaves back. They enslaved them fair and square and we should give them back. I suspect that won’t happen. Poland, at least, is a member of NATO, along with Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Hungary, The Chech Republic, and Bulgaria. Note that the argument that you own another country if your national live there goes back to the Anschluss and annexation of the Sudatenland by Hitler, formerly parts of Poland and the Chech Republic. If the NATO agreement is to mean anything, then the moment Russian tanks roll into any of these countries they are going to be up against Warthogs and Hellfires. We saw what happens then in the First Gulf War, 6000 tanks destroyed in two weeks. So we’ll see if Putin wants to try it, and whether he’ll be up against Obama or McCain. Short term tactics, and the positions of France, Germany, and England, will determine the outcome for Georgia and Ukraine. Cheney has stated the US position. Cedarford is right about the nuclear vulnerability, but nobody who will talk about it know what changes there have been to the nuclear arsenal in the 70 years since we invented the things. Putin doesn’t know either (I hope).

Sep 6, 2008 - 12:18 pm 32. cedarford:

Dave742 – If the US would have done in 1947 what the rest of the world found able to do, there would be no nuclear weapons today.

You neglect the obvious fact that in 1947, the Soviets had a 6 to one superiority over the West in most categories of conventional land warfare power. It strongly behooved the Soviets to “de-nuke” the US. Because they were aggressively expanding Communism and Soviet control of other countries at the time – and the only thing effectively stopping the Communists was the threat of nuke weapons.

If the US would have done in 1947 what the rest of the world found able to do, there would be no nuclear weapons today. As long as the US remains a rogue nation and refuses to do what they expect of the rest of the world, the world will remain as dangerous as it is today.

Riiight! America is the rogue nation and the only reason why the world is dangerous today – ignoring that nations do not sign NPTs if they believe their national security rests on ability to develop and deploy unconventional weapons to prevent their people from being slaughtered and conquered by superior conventional forces.
And the main reason that other nations did not develop their own nukes (countries in Europe, Asia, Latin America) is that they were protected from more powerful conventional forces butchering them with “less dangerous” nerve gas, viruses, bullets, bombs, shells, and starvation – by Treaties (OAS, NATO, SEATO, Warsaw Pact) putting them under the nuclear umbrellas of great powers.

Another 40 years, we still have 9 nuclear weapons. Each of these 9 weapons might have a couple dozen warheads. These 9 weapons could still wipe out a major portion of the earth.

Both your math and understanding of nuclear weapons is way off.
Nuke bombs are a “single thing”. They do not sprout off nuclear “sub-bombs”.
Nor do any missiles or bombers carry “a couple dozen warheads”. MIRVs have 10. Bombers can carry more than 8, but the Russians and US never carried more than 8 because that was about all you had time to drop on different targets – reasonably – on Armageddeon Day.

Finally your understanding of nuclear weapons effects and casualties is way off..9 nuke weapons detonating would not wipe off “a major portion of the Earth”, not even “a major portion” of a reasonably large and powerful nation like China.

Sep 6, 2008 - 5:33 pm 33. AL:

Arthur, you are pathological liar and genuine warmonger.

No people died on streets of Gori: it was not bombed or invaded by Russian forces. Invading sovereign nation being genuinely criminal – you better STF up, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq could offer some clues. Only clinical idiot could interpret comments of Russian general as nuclear treat to Poland. There were no cyber attack on Georgia; it was Georgia who terminated transmission of Russian television and assess to international news web sites for Georgian residents. American friend Georgia is the same “democracy” as another American friend – Saudi Arabia. Rise of aggressive nationalism in Russia is mainly fueled by scumbags like you own who can not live comfortably without external image of enemy. Official Russia never ever questioned crime committed in Katyn under direct order of Stalin. GWB was not mistaken about Putin: Putin is not a monster like Stalin and DOES NOT SEEK RESTORATION OF THE LAST EMPIRE.

As I said, you are pathological liar, and it is very sad that droves of ill-informed American Conservatives are being fooled into new Cold War by intellectual prostitutes like you, my dear friend.

Sep 7, 2008 - 3:36 am 34. chuck,:

I”m a Reaganite Conservative and find myself in the odd position of defending Putin and Russia.

Going back 20 years, I was delighted at the liberation of Eastern Europe; Russia did not belong there. When the USSR imploded, I was less delighted. It reminded me of the disappearance of the Austro-Hungarian Empire in ‘18, and the Pandora’s Box that opened. If that’s what Putin was thinking when he said the collapse of the Soviet Union was the great geopolitical tragedy, then he’s right.

It wasn’t to be the first time I was to side with Russia. Chechnya, for example. By what right did the USA and the European nations tut-tut Russia for crushing secession within its own territory? I don’t recall that the Czars carped at Lincoln for the actions of General Sherman in Georgia. As for the lost lands of the former USSR, the day may come when we will have to walk in Russia’s shoes. Someday a majority of the inhabitants of our own Southwest may choose not to be part of the United States and that our country may have fallen on such misfortune as to be unable to prevent them. I would not rest until the Southwest had returned to the Union, by blood and iron if necessary. And, no, I would give a damn what the people living there wanted. Do you think Russians might feel that way too? Like us, they’re a proud nation and don’t take well to the humiliation and dismemberment of their country.

It’s also worth remembering that the West got along quite well the the Russian Empire until 1917. She was a responsible member of the community of European powers. A bad landlord, perhaps, but generally as good a neighbor as the rest. Are we sure that preventing the return of this is worth a war? Putin’s Russia is not the Communist cancer. It’s explicitly Christian, nationalistic, and patriotic, which are not hateful things to most Americans. Me, I save my rancor for Islam.

One last thing. The USA and Russia need one another right now. We need their oil and resources, and frankly their boot down on a very troublesome part of the world. They need our might to give them time while they restock their maternity wards. Otherwise they’ll be a district of China. This partnership won’t be a love affair but rather a practical arrangement based on mutual interest and mutual respect could be very advantageous for both parties. The northern hemisphere could be a zone of mutual prosperity and mutual security, with the EU as a sort of themepark between Washington and Moscow–I think our European “allies” would like nothing better. Too bad the US is sleepwalking back in the days of the Cold War and Russia is thinking with the chip on its shoulder to see it. Maybe Vladimir the Great gets it, in which case he would deserve the title you ironically gave him.

Anyway, to any Russkies reading my longwinded piece, welcome back, Russia! But don’t push it too far.

Sep 7, 2008 - 8:49 am 35. narciso:

You forgot that little thing called the Crimean War. The essential insight was one that long time Russian observer George Kennan (and in a different way) so did Whittaker Chambers figure out. Russian expansionism is manifest in Soviet
foreign policy as well as the Putin neo-Czarist
model; where President Medveyev serves the role of PM like Tolstoy, Witte, Stolypin, and Putin
is the power behind the throne. Considering that
Shamanov of Chechnya is the ground forces commander there (think Custer/Dade et al)I doubt any humanitarian moves on his part.

Sep 7, 2008 - 1:00 pm 36. kabud:

John Samford:, Alicia Del Fino:, others

Guys it is always very beneficial to check the sources on russian, chinese and USA military

so far we have a huge disbalance with communist advantage:

1.kremlin had 40 000 nuclear warheads in 1989
we never had any prove that any of those were dismantled

this huge quantity makes them also protected from USA strike because their tactics involves firing nukes at our incoming nukes

Also kremlin has up to 1000 or more launching bases fortified to the level that they can withstand a nuclear hit on them

we may be have just several like that

We also dont have any ABM system, and they do have it, including the nuclear warheads that may bi fired to destroy our missiles in space

2.they are preparing for surprise attack on us: that is a fundamental thing to their strategy and it means that they will destroy most of our launchers and may even get our submarines – they may have technology to find them underwater and will hit that area with a nuke

3.they accumulated hundreds of thousands of biological agents of many different kinds, well anthrax story and very suspicious reports from could be a false defector Alibek are very concerning material.

Also there are other indirect signals that they may be developing more bioweapons: rumors are circulating that kremlin military is hiring biologists and pay trhem a fortune

4.kremlin is arming beijing for decades: they transfered nuclear technology there in the 50s, they constantly supply China with conventional weapons on the scale of up to 10 billion a year

5.russians have an enourmous fleet both military and merchant; China and its neighbors like taiwan and South Korea have together the largest manufacturing base for vessels of different kinds:

all of them may be used to transport millions of Chinese soldiers to USA shores after WMDs like biological and nuclear may be used on us

And we have those Mexican borders that can be penetrated by enemy from Venezuela and alike
———

So it does not look pretty if we take into account REAL THINGS

Sep 7, 2008 - 7:32 pm 37. narciso:

Russia need not be directly confronted, unless necessary, much like the previous Cold War. Although there will some inevitable contact; Berlin ‘48, ‘61, some say had we decided to hold our own in Cuba; the Missile Crisis wouldn’t have occurred in the same way. Truman’s move against Russian forces in ‘46, the real point of the Schwarzkopf mission is another example. Korea was a direct Chinese operation; Vietnam was a logistical proxy for the Soviets; hence the aces like Cunningham. Signals may already be already be the works, Cheney’s trip to Russia, and the sudden prospects of a McCain/Palin administration has delayed a recently planned military maneuvers in the Southern Caribbean. Logistical support and even supplies to likely threatened targets
on the periphery, Azerbaijan, Ukraine, et al
are likely targets. One recalls that the Russians staged the coup against Abkhasia back in 1993; similar to the failed operation in Chechnya, that lead to their intractible quagmire.

Sep 8, 2008 - 6:53 am 38. Steve J. Nelson:

Thank you Chuck for speaking some sanity into this discussion…I have started a blog to expose one of the most rabid people out there, “La Russophobe”, who basically runs a smear blog that cannot be dismissed as someone’s hobby…but rather seems to be the product of a professional PR machine like Randy Scheunemann’s Orion Strategies.

“The USA and Russia need one another right now. We need their oil and resources, and frankly their boot down on a very troublesome part of the world. They need our might to give them time while they restock their maternity wards. Otherwise they’ll be a district of China. This partnership won’t be a love affair but rather a practical arrangement based on mutual interest and mutual respect could be very advantageous for both parties. The northern hemisphere could be a zone of mutual prosperity and mutual security, with the EU as a sort of themepark between Washington and Moscow–I think our European “allies” would like nothing better. Too bad the US is sleepwalking back in the days of the Cold War and Russia is thinking with the chip on its shoulder to see it. Maybe Vladimir the Great gets it, in which case he would deserve the title you ironically gave him.”

My thoughts EXACTLY. “kabud” and other fans of La Russophobe are either using her to make their own kneejerk anti-Russian position appear moderate in comparison, or they are certifiable John Birchers who really do think that the real world is like that Simpsons episode:

“The Soviet Union would be happy to host your wayward vessel.”
“The Soviet Union? I thought you guys broke up?”
“That’s what we wanted you to think! Bwahhahahahahahahaaha!” (cue Evil Empire music, Berlin Wall going back up, Lenin resurrected)

Sep 8, 2008 - 8:10 am 39. Steve J. Nelson:

http://seansrussiablog.org/2008/09/06/us-private-contractors-in-georgia/

Now more details are coming out about American private contractors (most ex-U.S. military) operating in Georgia, and what they were doing there, as well as the South Ossetian death toll from Georgian operations. The South Ossetian Public Commission on War Crimes has published 372 confirmed dead so far, and 1692 dead or missing.

http://www.osetinfo.ru/

So Kim Zigfeld/La Russophobe, along with the rest of the Western media, were wrong to lap up Human Rights Watch paltry figure of 45 casualties as if it were gospel. Something went seriously wrong in Georgia, and the U.S. involvement there was never adequately explained to the American people. You don’t need to be some crazy leftist (I am getting more paleocon all the time) to see that.

Sep 8, 2008 - 12:02 pm 40. kabud:

Zigfeld/La Russophobe — is not linking to the REAL anti-communist resources on her blog

which makes us think that `she` and `Steve J. Nelson` are working together

Sep 8, 2008 - 3:39 pm 41. Steve J. Nelson:

kabud, have you ever listened to the Bob Dylan song “John Birch Society Blues”? If the Kremlin were plotting a secret attack against us for decades, why didn’t they clobber us in the 1970s before Reagan put them hopelessly behind in conventional forces and obliterated their nuclear advantage? Because the Russians are really more scared of us then they are of 1.7 billion Chinese walking across their border? You know what I’m talking about.

I’m not working with Kim Zigfeld/La Russophobe. I am going to find out who she (or more likely, he) really is and if this group blog is part of someone’s PR operation, ala Randy Scheunemann and Orion Strategies. If it takes some Democrat hack reporter in Washington D.C. to get the truth out, only after the election, so be it. These Beltway bandit bastards have hijacked the conservatism that I and Chuck believed in when we cheered the collapse of the Evil Empire – even if we were a bit naive about the Russians becoming our allies, things never had to get this bad. McCain rails against them in his stump speeches, but he can’t fire the ones on his own staff.

Sep 8, 2008 - 8:10 pm 42. Chrenkoff! Lileks! Lucas! « lumpenscholar:

[...] Chrenkoff! Lileks! Lucas! Posted September 11, 2008 Filed under: politics | Tags: anti-Americanism, Arthur Chrenkoff, election 2008, James Lileks, left-wing bigotry, left-wing cluelessness, Rachel Lucas | Arthur Chrenkoff, that glorious Polish immigrant to Australia who insired so many of us in the dextrosphere, has an article up at Pajamas Media on Russia and Georgia. [...]

Sep 10, 2008 - 6:34 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: