Posted on 08/26/2008 7:49:24 PM PDT by F-117A
Russia played a trump card in its strategic poker game with the West yesterday by threatening to suspend an agreement allowing Nato (sic) to take supplies and equipment to Afghanistan through Russia and Central Asia.
The agreement was struck at a Nato (sic) summit in April to provide an alternative supply route to the road between the Afghan capital and the Pakistani border, which has come under attack from militants on both sides of the frontier this year.
...
Mr Kabulov also suggested that the stand-off over Georgia could lead Russia to review agreements allowing Nato (sic) members to use Russian airspace and to maintain bases in the former Soviet Central Asian states of Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan.
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
Excellent, but chilling analysis!
http://nycright.blogspot.com/2005/10/eurasian-geo-political-earthquake.html
And your solution would be ....
Collective Security Treaty Organization
The charter reaffirmed the desire of all participating states to abstain from the use or threat of force. Signatories would not be able to join other military alliances or other groups of states, while aggression against one signatory would be perceived as an aggression against all.
“In October 2007, the CSTO signed an agreement with the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), in the Tajik capital Dushanbe, to broaden cooperation on issues such as security, crime, and drug trafficking.”
I like your list. But I’d put your item number six up higher on the list, right after your item number 1.
Are you going to lead the attack there Old Boy??
Or, rather, are thinking about getting us in a condition where we are a "Bridge Too Far"??
I doubt it.
Then why can we assume that Russia attacked Georgia because of Kosovo? Another comment above has it correct. It's simply being used as an excuse for Russian behavior.
You are free to assume whatever you want. Russia responded to the Georgian attack on their peacekeepers and citizens.
Kosovo set a precedent that has provided encouragement to independence movements around the world. It also has provided encouragement for governments that want to be their benefactors.
When I asked you whether Russia would have done what it did in the absence of Kosovo (and historical evidence clearly allows that assumption), you dug in your heels and started blathering something about "something you will never know."
Incidentally, that, and toeing the Kremlin line about who attacked whom makes it pretty clear that you don't give a damn about what happened in Kosovo, either. You are just trying to excuse the Russians' behavior.
Pakistan is going to go hard Islamic, cutting off our guys behind three hostile states.
, rather, are thinking about getting us in a condition where we are a "Bridge Too Far"??
Did I call for an airborne assault across a river onto an non-reconnoitered territory occupied by a an enemy armored division?
An attack on Iran would be air force and Navy, designed to take out C4I, the Iranian navy, Iran's land based anti-ship missiles, its air defense system, and the nuclear and ICBM development and manufacturing facilities.
If you wish to argue that this leaves us over deployed and vulnerable to increased unconventional (or if the Iranians army is suicidal) conventional attacks on our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, I agree. But the alternative is worse. Best case scenario is the US is pushed out of the region and Iran takes over. Other fun scenarios include the current Arab nuclear programs, leading to a general nuclear arms race in an unstable region, full of terrorists who want to kill us. As an American and Manhattanite, that is just unacceptable.
I was just listening to a russian immigrant explain that the russian people threw their support behind putin precisely because of clinton’s little foray into yugoslavia. Apparently, clinton cut a deal with the russians to make the yugoslavia police action a joint USA-russia thing. Then we got our boots their first and when the russians showed up, clinton blocked their entry and sent them back home in disgrace.
The russian people were so upset over it, they threw their support behind putin.
Then when the kososvo separation thing was approved by the USA, putin felt obligated to do something drastic. He felt is was his duty to his countrymen to do something to regain russian pride. The people put so much trust in him that they allowed him to remain in government in some capacity other than president.
This is the opinion of a russian-american citizen. So according to a russian, the georgia invasion is EXACTLY a retaliation against america for the disgrace they suffered in yugoslavia.
I don’t think he was agreeing with it or trying to justify it. I think he was just trying to make an american understand how the situation in georgia came to be. This was my interpretation of his dialog anyway.
That’s fine. Some people get their rocks off when they think the US is getting poked in the eye. I get it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.