Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Rockingham

“Russian domination of Europe would result in a loss to the US of the immense benefit of Europe’s economic, technological, and scientific talent and a skilled population larger than the US.”


Why is this necessarily the case ?

Before 2014, Russia benefitted from Europe’s economic, technological, and scientific talent while Europe was dominated by the USA.


67 posted on 08/12/2023 2:29:46 AM PDT by Reverend Wright ( Everything touched by progressives, dies !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies ]


To: Reverend Wright
Just as the US has benefited from China's rise and growing strength? Under your scenario, by abandoning Europe, Russia would have the benefit of Europe's great strength in the event of conflict. And Russia is one of those countries (like Germany and China) that are peaceful only when they have to be.

Beginning in the late 1940s, American strategists had to deal with two realities: (1) since Russia had nuclear weapons, a general conflict using such weapons would have catastrophic consequences and had to be deterred; and (2), economic, technological, and political developments and non-nuclear military conflict could still result in catastrophic defeat if it resulted in the US becoming isolated with most of the world's strength against her.

During the ensuing Cold War, three key tenets of American national security policy were carved in stone: (1) isolationism was no longer possible in a world poised and ready for war on a global basis; (2) the US should have enough nuclear and conventional strength to deter a general war; and (3), the US should use its economic and political strength and its WW II alliance system to prevent or break up any hostile combination of powers and to assure full and preferential access to the world's resources.

Many conservatives have a problem with (1) and (3). They have a temperamental attachment to isolationism without realizing that to make it work under contemporary conditions, we would have to be a national security state with a military draft, armed to the teeth, a lower standard of living, and facing an often hostile world. That is why during the Cold War, most isolationists became interventionists. Now, after a long era of relative peace, there is a renewed desire for isolationism without a sense of the consequences.

Here is my Reagan style policy toward enemies of the United States: we win, they lose, and we get to run the world as the victor. Most countries and people around the world prefer that because the US is generally a good ally and friend. By history's standards, we are honorable, easy-going, and well-intentioned. And, realistically, NATO, helping Ukraine, and putting a boot on Putin's neck are part of how we keep on top and make the bad guys behave.

In return, the world mostly defers to the US on the big issues, uses the dollar, and finances our massive federal debt. Yup. The world -- including people who do not entirely like us -- use the dollar and pay for granny's Medicare and Social Security because we keep really bad stuff from happening.

141 posted on 08/12/2023 6:30:17 AM PDT by Rockingham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

To: Reverend Wright

Before 2014 Russia could have benefited, but it didn’t.

The Russian ruling class ie Putin and his coterie benefited, not the Russian people


195 posted on 08/15/2023 3:22:12 PM PDT by Cronos (I identify as an ambulance, my pronounces are wee/woo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson