Posted on 10/12/2016 1:33:53 AM PDT by Brad from Tennessee
Moscow — Leaders of Turkey and Russia signed a long-delayed deal Monday to build the TurkStream gas pipeline under the Black Sea to deliver Russian gas to Europe's doorstep within three years.
The rapid warming trend in Russo-Turkish relations holds deep implications for Syria's immediate crisis, which dominated the talks and the subsequent headlines, but the fallout from that pipeline deal is a potentially crushing blow to struggling pro-Western Ukraine and may be rearranging strategic realities around the region for many years to come.
Analysts say that if TurkStream goes ahead it will enable Moscow to cut its former main gas transit partner, Ukraine, completely out of the loop when current contracts expire in 2019. For Ukraine, it spells the loss of about $2 billion in annual transit fees paid by Russian gas monopoly Gazprom, which will make a huge hole in the struggling country's state revenues. More importantly, it will also upend Ukraine's strategic dream of integrating with the European Union (EU) as the key energy hub that mediates Russian energy to the continent's thirsty markets. . .
(Excerpt) Read more at csmonitor.com ...
NATO is also so yesteryear.
>He estimates that the plunging energy prices from about US$100 per barrel to today’s level has forced Vladimir Putin to inflate the ruble by at least 30%.
But Ruble has already inflated by ~100% from the previous stable level (from ~30 per dollar to 60). Did he mean 30% more on top of that?
“Russia and Turkey were allies long before the dust up earlier this year. While the ignoratti were saying Russia and Turkey would go to war, I waa saying they would remain allies. It wasn’t hard to predict, and it had nothing to do with U.S. policy.”
Its name is Armenia. The Turks were able to slaughter the Armenians because Russia had its back.
That’s kind of an odd way for the US to be weak, if it is. It seems to defy logic, that the US has not long ago gone Venezuela... but there it is. Still. The flag is still there in the middle of a profligacy which is only to gasp about.
Will Russia be able to transcend that kind of financial quicksand without some kind of constructive engagement of America? I’m not so solidly positive that it can.
I perhaps wrote it in confusing way. What I meant is that the value of ruble against the dollar collapsed. One dollar used to buy ~30 rubles 3 years ago and now it buys ~60.
And I was pointing out that the ruble slid against a dollar which itself is skating on thin ice.
If Trump gets in, which appears quite likely to me at this point, I could easily foresee some kind of deal between the USA and Russia that would help both the dollar and the ruble, and diminish the influence of the Islamic world upon world energy markets.
This was stated in the context of Putin being able to maintain government largess to his apparatchiks which comes in primarily from the sale of minerals, especially oil. He said that the inflation in Russia was done to keep the government going as long as possible.
Then he mentioned Russia's aims in Syria to be connected to the building of a pipeline.
“When Donald Trump and I observe that, as I’ve said, in Syria, in Iran, in Ukraine, that the small and bullying leader of Russia has been stronger on the world stage than this administration, that’s stating painful facts. That’s not an endorsement of Vladimir Putin — that’s an indictment of the weak and feckless leadership of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.”
______________________________________________________________
Donald Trump slammed President Obama Thursday on TODAY for failing to take a stronger line against President Vladimir Putin in dealing with Ukraine, saying he feared Obama would now make up for lost time with imprudent moves to "show his manhood."
The real estate mogul and reality-TV star, who has criticized Putin for sending military troops into Crimea, said Obama must now take fierce steps to prevent the situation from escalating further.
"We should definitely do sanctions and we have to show some strengths. I mean, Putin has eaten Obama's lunch, therefore our lunch, for a long period of time," Trump said. ..."
http://www.today.com/news/donald-trump-putin-has-eaten-obamas-lunch-ukraine-2D79372098
Many Ukrainians believe you need look no further than the face of Viktor Yushchenko to understand Russia's aggression against Ukraine.
Once smooth and ruggedly handsome, it still bears the scars from an assassination attempt when someone slipped dioxin into Yushchenko's food. ..."
Read more here:
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/world/article24765781.html#storylink=cpy
______________________________________________
*******************************************************************
BY: Bill Gertz
October 10, 2014
Russia is moving tactical nuclear weapons systems into recently-annexed Crimea while the Obama administration is backing informal talks aimed at cutting U.S. tactical nuclear deployments in Europe. ..."
http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russia-deploying-tactical-nuclear-arms-in-crimea/
*******************************************************************
Ignore the red and orange lines. They were already on the map when I downloaded it.
I am reminded of Lord Palmerston’s axiom that nations do not have friends or enemies, only interests.
If Hofer is elected and follows through on his desire to join the Visegrad group, all that remains to reconstitute the Old Empire are Galicia, Volhynia, and Croatia. Ukraine as a unitary state never made any sense. Lembergers in their cafes cohabiting with Russian miners in Donetsk?
As before, the only major geopolitical question in Europe remains, where does the border between Germany and Russia lie? The Elbe is too far to the West. The Volga is too far to the East.
And the emnity between the Third Rome and the destroyers of Constantinople will, with certainty, re-emerge. It’s just that, right now, resolving the Ukraine problem (and destroying the international system that created it in the first place) is of more importance to Russia than needless conflict with Turkey.
Everything old is new again.
More Russian oil in the world does not sound to me like the worst fate that could befall it.
When trade is more or less peaceful (and the rise of America with its stubborn Christian undercurrent has a lot to do with that) it tends to put a damper on larger hostilities. That isn’t infallible, but again it is why we don’t get true Chinese missile crises. China knows that their Potemkin village would collapse in a flash without America as its best customer.
But nothing short of war can reverse that now.
I hope you have at least the outline of a plan to come home. I suspect things will start moving faster shortly.
War is needed, but it might not look like the kind of war that mankind commonly knows.
There is spiritual war too. If this got launched successfully, it would look like a most improbable evangelization in the Islamic world.
Yep...all going on in plain sight with an oblivious lazy media missing it all.
U.S. intelligence detects dozens of hardened bunkers for leaders
Russia is building large numbers of underground nuclear command bunkers in the latest sign Moscow is moving ahead with a major strategic forces modernization program.
U.S. intelligence officials said construction has been underway for several years on “dozens” of underground bunkers in Moscow and around the country.
Disclosure of the underground command bunkers comes as Army Gen. Curtis Scaparrotti, commander of U.S. European Command, warned recently that Russia has adopted a nuclear use doctrine he called “alarming.”
“It is clear that Russia is modernizing its strategic forces,” Scaparrotti told a conference sponsored by the U.S. Strategic Command.
“Russian doctrine states that tactical nuclear weapons may be used in a conventional response scenario,” Scaparrotti said on July 27. “This is alarming and it underscores why our country’s nuclear forces and NATO’s continues to be a vital component of our deterrence.”
Mark Schneider, a former Pentagon nuclear policy official, said Russia’s new national security strategy, which was made public in December, discusses increasing civil defenses against nuclear attack, an indication Moscow is preparing for nuclear war.
“Russia is getting ready for a big war which they assume will go nuclear, with them launching the first attacks,” said Schneider, now with the National Institute for Public Policy, a Virginia-based think tank.
“We are not serious about preparing for a big war, much less a nuclear war,” he added.
Additionally, Russian officials have been issuing nuclear threats.
“A lot of things they say they are doing relate to nuclear threats and nuclear warfighting,” he said. “Active and passive defense were a major Soviet priority and [current Russian leaders] are Soviets in everything but name.”
(Excerpt) Read more at freebeacon.com ...
Our current media doesn’t really have any way of understanding it, or trying to understand it. “Wars and rumors of wars.”
From the campaign trail, 2008...
A video has surfaced of Presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama talking on his plans for strategic issues such as nuclear weapons and missile defense.
The full text from the video, as released, reads as follows:
Thanks so much for the Caucus4Priorities, for the great work you've been doing. As president, I will end misguided defense policies and stand with Caucus4Priorities in fighting special interests in Washington.
First, I'll stop spending $9 billion a month in Iraq. I'm the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning. And as president I will end it.[i.e. not win it]
Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending.
I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems.
I will not weaponize space.
I will slow our development of future combat systems.
And I will institute an independent "Defense Priorities Board" to ensure that the Quadrennial Defense Review is not used to justify unnecessary spending.
Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material; and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals.
You know where I stand. I've fought for open, ethical and accountable government my entire public life. I don't switch positions or make promises that can't be kept. I don't posture on defense policy and I don't take money from federal lobbyists for powerful defense contractors. As president, my sole priority for defense spending will be protecting the American people. Thanks so much.
Article: Obama Pledges Cuts in Missile Defense, Space, and Nuclear Weapons Programs:
http://web.archive.org/web/20090412030633/http://missilethreat.com/archives/id.7086/detail.asp
"MissileThreat.com is a project of The Claremont Institute devoted to understanding and promoting the requirements for the strategic defense of the United States."
__________________________________________________________
From Investor's Business Daily, Jan 2012:
Appeasement: From ObamaCare to recess appointments, honoring the Constitution has not been an administration hallmark. But when it comes to betraying secrets to mollify the Russians, it becomes a document the president hides behind.
It was bad enough that the 2012 defense authorization bill signed by President Obama set America on a downward spiral of military mediocrity.
He also issued a signing statement, something he once opposed, saying that language in the bill aimed at protecting top-secret technical data on the U.S. Standard Missile-3 - linchpin of our missile defense - might impinge on his constitutional foreign-policy authority.
Section 1227 of the defense law prohibits spending any funds that would be used to give Russian officials access to sensitive missile-defense technology as part of a cooperation agreement without first sending Congress a report identifying the specific secrets, how they'd be used and steps to protect the data from compromise.
The president is required to certify that any technology shared will not be passed on to third parties such as China, North Korea or Iran, that the Russians will not use transferred secrets to develop countermeasures and that the Russians are reciprocating in sharing missile-defense technology. ..."
"In his signing statement, Obama said he would treat these legal restrictions as 'non-binding' and that 'my administration will also interpret and implement section 1244 (sic) in a manner that does not interfere with the president's constitutional authority to conduct foreign affairs and avoids the undue disclosure of sensitive diplomatic communications.'
Betraying our secrets is easy for a president who betrayed allies Poland and the Czech Republic to placate Moscow.
Poland was to host ground-based interceptors such as those we've deployed in California and Alaska, with missile-tracking radar deployed in the Czech Republic.
Obama pulled the plug when Moscow objected. Never mind, he said, we have a better approach: a four-phase plan that calls for using three versions of the Navy's Standard SM-3 interceptor missile that forms the backbone of its Aegis missile-defense system.
The fourth phase consists of a missile still on the drawing board scheduled for deployment by 2020, a version of the SM-3 called the Block IIB. It would intercept hostile missiles in the "early intercept" phase before an enemy missile could release its warheads and decoys. The Russians want the SM-3's secrets, and Obama appears to be willing to turn them over.
The president wants to save the New Start Treaty, which the Russians have threatened to abandon if we try to fully implement President Reagan's dream of defeating a nuclear missile attack.
Russia has unilaterally asserted that any qualitative or quantitative improvement in U.S. missile defenses would be grounds for withdrawal from the treaty.
Read More At Investor's Business Daily:
http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/010912-597158-obama-gives-russia-missile-defense-secrets.htm#ixzz3jXmMbVwY
___________________________________________________
March 2012...
"Obama was talking with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev when neither of them realized that their conversation was being picked up by microphones. Here is what they said:
Obama: "On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved, but it's important for him to give me space."
Medvedev: "Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you ..."
Obama: "This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility."
Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir."
"This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility." That statement tells us much about the president's mindset.
The specific mention of missile defense is worrisome enough. Mr. Obama has retreated from the missile defense plan that was negotiated with European allies during the George W. Bush administration.
Apparently, he is signaling Moscow that he intends to retreat further. The clear implication from the president's comments is that he cannot tell the American people before the election what he plans to do after the election.
In addition, there is the phrase "on all these issues," implying more is at stake than just missile defense."
Article: Obama plans double cross on missile defense
When it comes to keeping America safe, we shouldn't be too flexible:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/29/obama-plans-double-cross-on-missile-defense/print/
__________________________________________________________
That can’t easily happen because Russian economy is tiny, so they have almost no power to influence the dollar. It is only slightly larger than Florida’s ($1.1T and $0.9T). For Russia to play with oil prices at significant levels means also having to deal with the resulting starving masses. Putin’s legitimacy comes from the relatively better economic well being under his reign compared to the 90s. He of course achieved this due to the oil boom of the ‘00s - same as Chavez and likewise his praisers don’t care about that.
From Real Clear Politics, Sept 10, 2015...
"In a 2014 New Yorker interview, Obama said his goal was to create a 'new equilibrium' in the Middle East.
In the short run, at least, his signature diplomatic undertaking can be counted on to bring more violence to this volatile region.
The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, as the [Obama-Putin Iran deal] agreement is formally known, provides the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism an infusion of somewhere in the neighborhood of $100 billion of unfrozen assets and a great deal more of continuing revenues as businesses and governments around the world rush to profit from oil-and-gas-rich Iran's reintegration into the world economy.
The agreement relaxes the international isolation of the Islamic Republic and ratifies Tehran's status as a nuclear threshold state. And it relieves restrictions on Iran's acquisition of weapons, including ballistic missiles. ..."
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/09/10/iran_deal_throws_sparks_on_mideast_tinderbox_128034.html
___________________________________________________
Aug 2015
An old fashioned nukemageddon probably isn’t as serious a consideration now as it used to be.
If our greenies have done nothing else, it would be to point out how what goes around, nuke wise, comes around, and this isn’t talking about retaliation. The world is big, but not THAT big.
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.