So on the one hand NATO is too weak to matter. On the other hand, a handful of anti-ballistic missiles designed to knockdown incoming missiles (from Putin’s allies in Iran, by the way) are reasonably seen as a grave threat to Mother Russia who, mind you, has tens of thousands of missiles capable of destroying the USA and all of Europe. And, then, you conclude a Russian first strike might be necessary to restore the balance of power. Is there any limit to the contradictions of Putin apologists? Obama, thankfully, will be gone in days. Putin’s threats to peace and security will not end then. I look forward when patriotism and conservatism mean defending freedom-loving countries and the USA over the real globalist threat, Putin.
I have watched several news conferences - Putin appeared to be pretty upset about the US/NATO deployments.
I happen to feel that what he did in the Crimea was war - though undeclared, and I don’t like that we apparently just let him do it with no real objection.
I will be so glad when Mattis and the other Generals are confirmed, so that we can go back to an intelligent foreign policy.
I am not an apologist for Russia. I merely stated what the dialogue has been.
With the implosion of the Soviet Union and the fall of the Berlin wall, there was a big attitude that we won, and a “peace dividend”. My thought was are you kidding??
All those communists didn’t suddenly become free market capitalists overnight, and I actually felt that the threat level was still quite high, and we shouldn’t let down our guard.