Sudetenland 2.0

[Didymos Thomas]

I think Russia, though, does get the picture that they will not take the oil they are after nor will the get Georgia in the end.

Do they?

First, I do not think Russia is after Georgian oil. Instead, it seems that Russia is after the transportation of oil. Remember, the oil now flowing through Georgia once flowed through Russia to Russian ports.
All Russia has to do is destroy the Georgian pipe line; then, BP and others will have no choice but to reenlist the Russian pipeline.

I don't see what is preventing Russia from occupying Georgia indefinately. The US occupies two foreign nations at the moment. The US doesn't have troops to deploy, and I doubt that the rest of the western world would take any military action against Russia without definitive US involvement.
Bringing in various former Soviet Republics into NATO might be a good idea - but this will do little to help those nations. If anything, should we include them and Russia invade one of them, I think we would see NATO shrivel as a significant military alliance. Either that or World War Three.

Kicking Russia out of the G8 is unlikely. We have to remember just how powerful Russia has become. The days of an economically cripple Russia are long gone. Economics and military concerns considered, Russia is a super power.

If we can figure out how we might flood the market with domestic oil and maximize profit

Which I doubt we can do. Perhaps as a coalition of, say, the US, Mexico and Canada, assuming these nations also make a strong move toward alternative, what you suggest might be possible.

Even if we manage to accomplish such a thing, we're talking about five years at the very least. More than likely, the economic reorganizations your talking about will take ten to twenty years. Even five years will be too distant to help Georgia.

[VideCorSpoon]

Didymos,

Isn’t that something? I don’t have anything particular against Russia, but I mean… come on. This is history repeating itself… and very plainly I might add.

The Russian’s move is old fashion power projection…plain and simple. It sends a variety of messages to the world. One, that they could do it in the first place, two, that the US can’t do anything about it. Not that the US has any obligation to Georgia, but this is a shaky democracy in the ex-soviet bloc. That is a very precarious position.

The international response is the most pathetic thing ever. What sucks even more is that there was a US state department memo that stated quite plainly that nothing can and will be done in regards to US support for Georgia to the issue. Impotency in American power projection is a very bad sign to the rest of the world.

[Zetetic11235]

Dydimos, think you underestimate the U.S. millitary. Occupation is one thing, occupation is not necessary for russia. We won the 'war' in Iraq in the sense that we totally crippled its government and economy pretty damn quickly. A few bombings is all it took.

We have a carrier called the U.S.S. Ronald Reagan that is the 10th largest millitary in the world taken in and of itself. Russian air force is pathetic. We spend so much on military development it is absurd to think another nation might pose a military threat. It owuld take a number of months to launch attack on russia but the country could be crippled very quickly thereafter.

The problem lies in the nukes, we would be looking at einstein's conception of WW III if we actually invaded. We are gearing up for M.A.D. A new cold war. The oil plan is akin to an arms race style strategem.

[Didymos Thomas]

Dydimos, think you underestimate the U.S. millitary. Occupation is one thing, occupation is not necessary for russia.

No offense, but I doubt that. Look, if the US is going to use military action in defense of Georgia (not that we should, necessarily) the US needs combat forces that are not already deployed in combat.

At best, we could rearrange our fleet to pressure Russia. But Russia also boasts a respectable naval force. There is absolutely no way US ground forces could compete with Russian ground forces so long as the US has so many deployed in Iraq, and to a lesser extent, Afghanistan. Without a draft, the US is virtually impotent against such a major power.

Russia is not some backwater. We're talking about an economic and military powerhouse.

We won the 'war' in Iraq in the sense that we totally crippled its government and economy pretty damn quickly. A few bombings is all it took.

So what? Russia could have done the exact same thing to Iraq.

Meanwhile, US forces are engaged in a prolonged occupation of two volatile, foreign nations.

We have a carrier called the U.S.S. Ronald Reagan that is the 10th largest millitary in the world taken in and of itself. Russian air force is pathetic. We spend so much on military development it is absurd to think another nation might pose a military threat. It owuld take a number of months to launch attack on russia but the country could be crippled very quickly thereafter.

I hate to tell you, but there are two nations in the world capable of, on their own, posing a significant military threat to the US: China and Russia.

I do not know why you consider the Russian air force 'pathetic'. Again, this isn't 1991. We're looking at a big, bad Russia.

The problem lies in the nukes, we would be looking at einstein's conception of WW III if we actually invaded. We are gearing up for M.A.D. A new cold war. The oil plan is akin to an arms race style strategem.

Ah, here you show some real perspective. Nukes are a real problem. This is why superpowers have been fighting one another through satellite countries.

The arms race/resource race comparison seems appropriate to me. But that's the history of the world in a nutshell. A battle for resources.

[Aedes]

Originally Posted by Didymos Thomas

Oh, the Administration's response to the Russian invasion is entirely hypocritical.

Well, except insofar as every government on earth has a double standard when it comes to their own ratio of interests to indiscretions. The US looks out for its own interests; one of them happens to be a friendly government in the Caucasus that wants to be part of NATO.

The most interesting part of this whole story to me, and perhaps the most dangerous, is the sudden interest that Poland has in a missile defense system. THIS is what is going to really test how expansionist Putin wants to be.

[Didymos Thomas]

Well, except insofar as every government on earth has a double standard when it comes to their own ratio of interests to indiscretions. The US looks out for its own interests; one of them happens to be a friendly government in the Caucasus that wants to be part of NATO.

Isn't this objection tantamount to 'every nation employs hypocritical foreign policy'?

The most interesting part of this whole story to me, and perhaps the most dangerous, is the sudden interest that Poland has in a missile defense system. THIS is what is going to really test how expansionist Putin wants to be.

Interesting. And the real test might be Poland you say?

[Aedes]

Originally Posted by Didymos Thomas

Isn't this objection tantamount to 'every nation employs hypocritical foreign policy'?

Only If you believe that each nation on Earth should have a foreign policy that makes no distinction between its own interests and those of all other countries. Of course all nations have double standards, because they are fundamentally self-interested. The only hypocrisy is in denial of behavior motivated by self interst, not in the behavior itself.

Interesting. And the real test might be Poland you say?

One Russian official already told Poland that they will make themselves a "target" If they accept a missile defense system from the US. Of course Putin has been using such rhetoric for years.

[Zetetic11235]

Russia and china are not superpowers. The U.S. makes ten times as much money as either of them and they do not trust eachother enough to mount a proper joint offensive. On top of this, the U.S. is gaining EU favor in this. The EU combined with the U.S. are obscenely more powerful than their Russo-Chinese counter part. Our millitary budget is equivalent to half 50 PER CENT of russian GDP. We could increase it easily.

Were it not for the nuclear arms still held by Russia, we could soundly defeat them. Are you even aware of how much more advanced U.S. millitary technology is than russian or chinese weaponry? Have you seen the stuff we have? metal storm? Take a glance at these new/develop g weapons Weapons of the United States Military

Common D.T. do you have a very extensive knowledge of recent russian military history/development that is not readily availible or somthing? Russia's new seven year program for re-armament consits of a budget 2/3s of our yearly one, their defense budgest lingers at under one tenth of ours at a recently quadrupled 31 Billion. It is not going to be able to afford much more and it will loose strength as we shift to alternatives. Glance this over Russian Military Spending.

Top ten economies as of 07 Top Ten Economies of World, Top Ten Economies , Top Ten Economies of World yeah, china and russia fall below denmark. I'm real worried about their military might. What great superpowers. China can't even arm more than 10% of its 'military'.

The only danger Russia can pose presently is nuclear, and then we just get into M.A.D. until we perfect missile defence shielding. In the long run, I think russia will simply collapse as we drift away from oil and towards alternatives. Now even the conservative crowd has reason to jump on the environmental bandwagon, so I doubt it will be too long in coming. China may,may, become a superpower. India probably will first. So many coutries are currently up and coming, that as far as power distribution is concerned, China and Russia don't hold up a candle. Maybe China, certainly not Russia.

I might further add, that when it comes down to it, a nation, just as a person, will do anything to protect its ideology and way of life, even temporarily abandon some of its ideals. When it gets down and dirty, lofty ideals are thrown to the wind and Machiavelli is the order of the day.

[Aedes]

Originally Posted by Zetetic11235

Russia and china are not superpowers. The U.S. makes ten times as much money as either of them.

Not that it matters when a huge chunk of our national debt is owed to China and when we're so terrified of losing them as a market that we will NEVER stand up to them. Economically the US needs China a lot more than China needs the US, and that is a position of enormous vulnerability to us. Military activity is not the point, because it only comes at the end of a longer process of diplomacy and leverage, which we patently would lose versus China. We've hadn't the least bit of influence on China, despite great efforts, about such issues as political prisoners, Tibet, Taiwan, or copyright infringement, and our influence over the issue of North Korea has been to get the bare minimum out of them. They aren't intimidated by us, whatever money we happen to pour into nuclear submarines, because they KNOW we wouldn't risk war with them.

And incidentally, China being a nuclear power with ballistic missiles and the capability of raising a standing army that matches the total size of the US population, they are not some military trifle whatever toys we happen to buy from Lockheed et al.

[Didymos Thomas]

I'm not arguing that the US is weaker than Russia or China, Zetetic. I'm only suggesting that they are military powerhouses, and can most certainly compete with the US military so long as the US military is preoccupied in the Middle East.

Sure, the US has a more powerful military. But what good is that more powerful military against Russia or China if that military is almost entirely dedicated to fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan? Almost nil.

Presenting military spending doesn't make your argument, either. We are talking about a hypothetical military conflict in the near future. Obviously Russia is capable of spending a great deal more on their military if necessary. Not to mention the fact that Russia can field a much larger military than the US.

As for our fancy toys, I'm familiar. And I'm not impressed. Nazi Germany had many fancy toys. The issue is whether or not they are in the field in a big way.

Common D.T. do you have a very extensive knowledge of recent russian military history/development that is not readily availible or somthing?

Nope, everything I know is available to the public. History included. The US is not the Mongol Horde.