The week the dam broke in Russia and ended Putin's dreams

The Telegraph ^ | 20 Dec 14 | Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

[ansel12]

So Russia has some problems, and you think that makes them want to commit suicide by going out with a nuclear bang? What sense is that supposed to make?

[Gritty]

That is smaller than Mexico

True.

But also consider it has more nuclear weapons than the rest of the word combined, has a falling birth rate, is rich in natural resources but bordered by a Chinese super power, lusts to get it's former republics back, and is paranoid - and the overall outlook is pretty grim for "peace in our time".

[elhombrelibre]

Yes, he is. He reported a lot on Clinton back in the 90’s.

[elhombrelibre]

Being fearful is not a manly way to live life nor is it necessary when dealing with Putin.

[Bon mots]

Being fearful is not a manly way to live life nor is it necessary when dealing with Putin.

I am not fearful, I just think that our elation at seeing Putin get smacked down should be tempered - he is unstable and cornered.

The only thing that really concerns me is not the man in the Kremlin, but rather, the 'man' in the White House.

Obama has publicly said that he would not respond to a nuclear attack on America's cities with a nuclear response. In effect, he has already strategically surrendered. There is no longer a guarantee of mutually assured destruction.

Even Thomas Sowell said that he fears that even lowly Iran might nuke Washington and New York and Obama would immediately surrender.

There is nothing pusillanimous in the fact that you may fear the fact that your Commander in Chief is completely without not only intelligence and courage, but a spine as well.

[Bon mots]

Bears repeating:
There is nothing pusillanimous in the fact that you may fear the fact that your Commander in Chief is completely without not only intelligence and courage, but a spine as well.

I mean, just look at him:

Pathetic.
If you were betting on a fair fight between leaders (not nations), which man would you place your money on?

[Bon mots]

So Russia has some problems, and you think that makes them want to commit suicide by going out with a nuclear bang? What sense is that supposed to make?

I don't think it makes any sense at all.
Just like all of the World Wars to date. Remind me which one made sense...
They all start with a few miscalculations, some bluster, a strong leader, a failing economy...

The ingredients are all there. Sparks are flying across the globe. Just a few years ago Francis Fukuyama was predicting 'The End of History' and just as if on cue, the world began simmering again.

[ansel12]

When Russia invaded Poland, it led to them becoming a massive empire, and they never wanted to go nuclear.

Why would they now suddenly want to disappear in a senseless gesture of national suicide, by just deciding to end it all and attack us with nuclear weapons?

Where is the sense in what you are saying?

[Bon mots]

When Russia invaded Poland, it led to them becoming a massive empire, and they never wanted to go nuclear.

Why would they now suddenly want to disappear in a senseless gesture of national suicide, by just deciding to end it all and attack us with nuclear weapons?

Where is the sense in what you are saying?

I never said they wanted to launch a first strike.
(Although Vladimir Zhirinovsky has publicly said that the Russians should nuke Warsaw and the Baltics to put NATO in its place.)

I only said, that the bear is unpredictable. It would not likely start as a first strike, but even if it did, THEY WOULD NOT DISAPPEAR! Obama has publicly stated that he would not respond in kind.

A more likely scenario would be in the baltic states - there are some towns on the Russian border inside Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia where there are only Russian speakers and ethnic Russians. Some of them do not speak the language of the country they live in.

What if they did the same thing that the nutcases in the Eastern Ukraine did? This time it would be in NATO territory.

It could be done in a more fabian style, an incremental little nudge, then another, then...

My admonition was be careful what you snicker at, as it might not end up being so funny. I like seeing Putin get smacked down hard, but it might not end well.

History has proven that betting on people stumbling into war is a safer bet than predicting a long lasting global peace.

[ansel12]

If they aren’t going to do a first strike then who cares that they have nuclear weapons facing the nuclear powers of NATO?

Russia doesn’t have the military might to take on NATO, and when did Obama announce that he would not fight during a nuclear war and would abandon NATO if it happened?

[Bon mots]

It began with this...

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/06arms.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2011/09/would_obama_retaliate_against_a_nuclear_attack.html

[ansel12]

Your links don’t even come close to what you claimed and his statement was about not using nuclear weapons against non-nuclear powers that use bio or chemical weapons.

So tell me again why you think Putin wants to commit suicide by just suddenly deciding to end it all by attacking the nuclear NATO powers of the U.S. France and Great Britain, and face the conventional forces of all 28 of our nations?

[Bon mots]

So tell me again why you think Putin wants to commit suicide by just suddenly deciding to end it all by attacking the nuclear NATO powers of the U.S. France and Great Britain, and face the conventional forces of all 28 of our nations?

I don't know where you read that.
I only said that he is cornered, and a cornered animal is not predictable.

I don't think he would do a first strike as Russia would be destroyed, most of the US's urban centers are already destroyed - Detroit, Oakland, Newark, Philadelphia... our own fifth column took care of many of their potential targets.

The problem is, humanity has a habit for sliding into war... remember FDR - "NO FOREIGN WARS" and a few years later American boys were dying on foreign battlefields.

We don't need a first strike, just a single miscalculation.
An Archduke Ferdinand Moment, a Gulf of Tonkin... a spark and the rest goes on autopilot.

Some people do think Putin is mad enough to try it - some credible people: If Putin goes nuclear
Putin's nuclear option

I cannot find the original article where I read the quote of Obama stating that he would not respond to a nuclear attack in kind. I redact it.

[ansel12]

Make up your mind, is he or isn’t he going nuke, say no/yes/no/yes, and how would he get cornered since he is the one doing the invading, and what “spark” can force NATO to defend itself, except a Russian invasion?

Just tell your man to quit invading people and no one will have to defend themselves from him.

[Bon mots]

Just tell your man to quit invading people and no one will have to defend themselves from him.

My Man?

Are you on drugs? Putin is not my man.
I hate the S.O.B.
I am pro-Ukraine.
Bast@ard has no business in there.

I am; however, realistic. I only said he was DANGEROUS!

By the same token, ALL politicians are potentially dangerous and not a one of them has your or my best interest at heart. When they argue with one another, your kids and my kids get sent to war - but not them or their kids.

I am not a Putin fan at all.
I am also not an Obama fan.
In a perfect world, they would both fight each other to the death and leave us out of it.
No matter how it turned out, I would not be attending any funerals or sending any flowers.

[ansel12]

Well don’t be so terrified of the man then, and don’t try to convince everyone to let him do what he wants.