Comments on: Russia’s dangerous steps to a new Cold War

By: spirasol

spirasol — Sat, 16 Aug 2008 08:21:07 +0000

Wow, Skiba101 your your pomposity and arrogance are diminished only by your ignorance. Energy, oil, pipelines is what it is all about, and the arrogance of the Georgian president who actually believed he could attack separatists (bomb,kill, murder rape a couple thousand) of his own unruly countrymen that are defended by Russia. This one is a real confuser in terms of who are the freedom fighters and who are the terrorists, and who are the protectors of such groups. Get your head out of Bush's bum parts Skiba, and smell the fresh air of freedom, free of fascist, hyper capitalist, energy dreams. I could refer you to several articles but why bother, in all likelihood you would not be interested in any position but the one you have disingenuously crafted.

By: DLS

DLS — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 04:32:51 +0000

Russia is the source and the cause of its anti-Western problem but the fools and troublemakers find it easier and more convenient to blame Bush and his evil administration.

By: Silhouette

Silhouette — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 21:47:01 +0000

BigOil innocence-rhetoric courtesy of the GOP.

By: Skiba101

Skiba101 — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:27:33 +0000

Silhouette your an idiot…..what oil???…. if your talking about Iraq than your sadly mistaken. Their has not been any increase in oil shipments to the US from Iraq since the overthrow of Saddam. If your talking about oil contracts, I'll be happy to inform you that so far Chinease companies have recieved the most contracts in Iraq for oil. Inform yourself a little more before you comment on things you do not know. You listen to some anti-war propaganda and label it as a fact.

Now if your talking about the oil pipeline in Georgia and Bush's support for it to bypass Russia. I say kudos to Bush. Once again you need to inform yourself a little more on these issuies. Russia has been holding Europe hostage since it is owns most of the piplelines supplying oil to Europe. On several occasions it shut off oil to Belarus and Ukraine to punish these countries for not doing as Russia pleases. If Bush or the US wants to build a pipleline to Europe that bypasses Russia and relevies the EU from being pressured by Russia by all means we should support it.

By: Skiba101

Skiba101 — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:18:26 +0000

“Modern Russia is nothing like the Soviet Union but the Russian people, who suffered greatly in 20th century European wars, are still prickly about national pride and paranoid about security. The US must recognize these emotional blockages even if they seem needless or irrational.”

The same arguement could be used to explain why the ex soviet repulics and satallites wanted to join Nato and the EU. The differances are that there arguements are not irrational but make perfect sense, The EU and Nato would never attack Russia first, the same thing can't be said about Russia. It is these countries that wanted to join Nato and EU and it's not like the west forced them. Since these countries joined they have experianced high gdp growth and are finally catching up to the standard of living in the west. Each country has that right regardless of Russia's irrational fear. Must we let these countries suffer and live in poverty just to keep Russia satisfied.

By: Silhouette

Silhouette — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 19:55:43 +0000

I would like to correct a glaring mistake in the title of this article.

It should read: "BigOil's dangerous steps to a new cold war"

After all, Russia is being truthful when it complains about US aggression in that region threatening it's traditional area of influence.

Like I said, what would our response against the russians be if they decided on a whim to invade Mexico for its petrolium reserves...all under the guise of humanitarian issues?

At least the russians are honest about their intentions and make no bones about it.

If Russians were smart they'd speak about Bush's aggressions and ties to the BigOil monopoly that got the Georgian ball rolling. How would we feel if Russia started putting missile silos in Canada and Cuba and allying those region's troops with its mexican takeover in our hemisphere.

We would be SO VERY PISSED OFF.

And yet we criticize them and are sending troops in on BigOil's behalf to start WWIII.

How nice.

Congress?

By: pacatrue

pacatrue — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 19:34:06 +0000

It's an interesting and provoking analysis. The main disagreement I have is with the expression that the West or Europe annexed former Soviet Bloc nations. Technically, of course, it isn't true with Poland, Ukraine, etc., being as independent as they've been for a century. But even metaphorically, in the sense of annexing into one's sphere of influence, I think the word “annex” is misleading as well. I am sure various pressures were used but by and large places like Poland and Latvia chose, once free, to align themselves more with Western nations for both economic and security reasons. I think there is a difference between supporting an ally who chooses to work with you and annexing something.

Anyway, good post.