How is it that everyone in this thread went ahead with the assumption that Russia objected to the shield because it threatened their security? As was pointed out very early on, this system is easily overwhelmed by a nation like Russia. It's effectiveness, and indeed its intended goal, was to be a countermeasure to rogue launches....something that many suspect Russia has been promoting in this region (Russia has historically profited greatly from destablization in the region). If that is the case then their interest in stopping it is in helping to facilitate Rogue missile launches and in stopping that we have furthered that goal. I think it is reasonable in light of those possibilities to ask why we stopped and to not simply ignore common sense in favor of a pacifistic greedy algorithm type approach to foreign policy.
Furthermore, this concept that we should capitulate to Russia simply because we want good relations with them is devoid of basic forethought, this issue, and indeed relationships in general, are never that simple. A relationship is a two-way street, if you want a relationship with Russia you have to have both a common ground to stand on as well as common respect for one another. One without the other is not a relationship, and pursuing one of those non-relationship at all will be deeply damaging to all of our actual international relationships, not just potential relationships with Russia.
So yes, you folks on the left who want to just give Russia whatever they want to keep the peace, you are insane. To believe the most simplistic policies of an already simplistic philosophy of pacifism could be a legitimate foreign policy solution to one of the most complex foreign policy situations in the world...is quite simple insane. Pacifism doesn't work...in fact pacifism produces world-threatening leaders like Hitler. Capitulating over and over again creates the kind of nightmare you want to avoid, and since the definition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly and expecting different results...yes this "give'em what they want" foreign policy is completely and utterly batshit insane.
Russia is deliberately and strategically forcing the tensions for the express purpose of using them as a political lever to get exactly this kind of response. There are only 2 ways this can go down, either we give in and they keep asking for more or we force them to meet on common ground with common respect (in which case they have the choice between war and peace).
What Obama got for this will determine how this issue plays out from here. That anyone could think these things are isolated or that this most crucial of details could be considered unimportant reveals a deep ignorance and/or misunderstanding of foreign policy.
 |
| To Each Man, Responsibility |
