Monday, December 17, 2007

Russians Give Nuclear Fuel To Iran As Putin Heads For The Middle East


The Russian foreign ministry announced the delivery today of the first nuclear fuel shipment to the Russian-built Bushehr nuclear reactor in Iran.

The Russian company building the Bushehr reactor, Atomstroiexport said thta 180 fuel rods would be sent to Bushehr in the next two months.

Atomstroiexport claims that the enriched fuel is below weapons grade and the containers were inspected and sealed by the IAEA, which should make anyone nervous based on their track record. Even if it's true,there's nothing to top Iran from continuing the cycle and making its own weapons grade fuel with the new reactor.

Deliveries had been held up for a while, mainly because of haggling over price and payment, but apparently that's all cleared up, and the deliveries are proceeding.

Russia's President Putin, soon to be prime minister is soon to be headed for the Middle East as a successful cap to his eight year term as president. He is going first to inspect the new Russian combat flotilla of six warships headed by the Admiral Kuznetsov aircraft carrier, which will be docking in the Syrian port of Tartous and will apparently be photographed with Russian sailors. What this is, of course, is a direct challenge to the US Sixth Fleet and the Israeli navy for strategic control of the Eastern Mediterranean...the Russians haven't put this much muscle into the Middle east since the Cold War.Putin will then go on to visit other Middle Eastern leaders.

This is scheduled a week before President Bush's visit to the Middle East on January 9th and 10th, 2008.

The next Israel-Palestinian peace conference is scheduled for next March or April in Moscow. If I'm right, that's when the major pressure will be put on Israel to give up the strategic Golan Heights to Syria.

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

It's time to bomb them back to the stone age

B.Poster said...

Russia is by far and away the most dangeroust threat to the US and the free world. Russia's nuclear arsenal is the largest and most advanced in the world. It's conventional forces have been greatly assisted by Russia's huge oil profits. They are now at least on par with those of the US and possibly superior to any thing the US has to offer.

Without Russian support Iran, Syria, and other Islamic terrorists would be much easier to defeat. If we can possibly get Russia to withdraw support for the Islamic terrorists supporting states of Iran and Syria, the war against Islamic terrorists would be much easier to defeat.

If this is to be done through diplomacy, I would suggest the US agreeing to withdraw support from the former Soviet Republics as well as other Eastern Bloc countries where it has a presence. In exchange for this, the Russians would withdraw support from Iran, Syria, and other Islamic terrorists. Unfortuately such an agreement is problematic on many levels. First of all, if the US withdrew support from the former Eastern Bloc countries and other Soviet Socialist Republics where it snf NATO have a presence, Russia would be free to regain all of the territories that constituted the former Soviet Union. This would represent a base betrayal of these former Russian colonies and Western Europe and the US would lose a valuable buffer agaisnt Russia. The other main problem is ensuring that Russia honors its agreeemnt. The media scrutiny on the US is always intense. The US will have no choice but to honor its agreemnts even if it does not want to. Russia faces no such scrutiny. If we make this agreemnt, and Russia violates it we would likely end up with a situation where Russia de facto reestabllishes the Soviet Union and continues to support Iranian and Syrian military ambitions. In other words, this would be a VERY BAD deal for the US and Western Europe. As such, I would be opposed to such a diplomatic move.

The only real option, as I see it, is to reopen the Cold War. In order to do this, the US will need to work to drastically increase the size and capabilities of its Armed Forces. My choice is to reopen the Cold War, however, there is very little support for this among members of Congress, European allies, other allies, or the Ameircan people. As such, diplomacy, while deeply flawed may be all we can do. What does seem clear is the current policy of largely ignoring Russia will need to be altered.

B.Poster said...

With the major upgrades that the Russian military has undergone in the past few years, the US Sixth Fleet is likely no match for these Russian Warships. The US likely really only has three options here. They are: 1.) withdrawl, 2.)being forced out, or 3.)withdrawl and upgrade the Sixth Fleet and the rest of the US Navy.

Perhaps if we upgrade the Navy and the rest of the military we will be in a better position to confront Russia. Unfortunately, as it stands right now, I don't see the US Government being willing to undertake the kind of expenditures that it is going to take to remain competitive with Russia.

With the massive upgrades to the Russian military and the next "peace conference" being held in Moscow we are probably seeing the official changing of the guard. Russia is now the most powerful country on earth or it will be very soon. The US is a power in decline. Unless something is done to reverse this trend, the US is unlikely to remain a amjor power for very much longer.

Freedom Fighter said...

Poster, I can't imagine why you continually give so much credit to the Russian military! People have been talking this way since the beginning of the 20th Century about the `Russian bear' and it's a m-y-t-h. In reality, the Russians have a pretty poor track record as fighters and their military is technologically backward compared to the US and a number of other countries.The recent penetration by the Israelis of the `invincible'

Russian Pantsyr missile defense system over Syria is the most recent example.

Some history:

1905, Russia vs. Japan..Japan,by a knockout, with the Russians forced to go to the US as a mediator to get a ceasefire.

WWI, Russia vs. Germany - Russia decisively defeated and forced to make a separate peace in 1917.

WWII, Russia vs Germany- the Germans initially kick the crap out of Russia. The Russians are able to come back for a TKO, but only with massive US aid and an allied 2nd front in France, North Africa and Italy. Without those two items, another defeat for sure at the hands of the Wehrmacht.

The Middle East, 1956, 1967, 1970 Russian arms and personnel vs Israel - The Arabs got SOTA Russian arms and planes that the Russian's own military didn't have, and had Russian technicians, `advisers' and pilots fighting with them. In all three cases, the Russians managed to finagle a ceasefire after decisive defeats by scaring the US into pressuring Israel ( a mistake, IMO). The Israelis turned over the Russian personnel they captured to our CIA.

The 1980's, Afghanistan - the Russians were defeated decisively by the same brigands the US military took out in a week or so.

The Cold War - Need I say more?

Are you beginning to see a pattern? All of these instances had the mighty. technologically advanced Russian military as the favorites to win!

I'll give this to you...if the Russians invaded the EU, they could probably get through most of what passes for the EU military if the US and NATO weren't around, but that's about it.

Russia is a dying nation, with a population in decline and they are desperately trying to finesse that by allying with the Islamist bloc, just as Stalin tried to ally with Hitler.

They're capable of mischief, but the Russian bear has always been a lot of bark and not much bite, all that oil money notwithstanding.

ff

B.Poster said...

FF

The Russian nuclear arsenal is the only nuclear arsenal on earth now that could completely destroy the US and it has been upgraded in recent years. I'm not aware that the US has done much or anything to upgrade its nuclear deterrent in recent years.

What I do find interesting about the Russian war against Afghanistan is the Afgahns possessed more power relative to the Americans than they did relative to the Russians. In other words, on paper at least, the US should have been a much easier opponent than the Russians were. Yet the US was able to defeat an opponent the Russians could not defeat in only a few weeks. This suggests to me that the US military commanders did a much better job of planning and executing their strategy than the Russians did.

I suspect the Russians had such trouble because of their arrogance. This is one thing that has always struck me about Russia is their extreme arrogance.

You write, "I'll give this to you ... if the Russians invaded the EU, they could probably get through most of what passes through the EU military if the US and NATO weren't around, but thats about it." That is pretty much spot on. This is why Russia, their media allies, and the useful idiots in the media are so upset about NATO and former Soviet Republics taking up defensive positions in territory that is now freed from Russian control. The Russians wish to retake these territories and they do not want them defended from anything.

Unfortunately either this Ptesident or the next one will likely abandon these defensive positions. When they do, the Russians will have the area wide open to their control. This sould be disaterous for the defense of the Western Europe.

The Russians will eventually make a mistake. They are too arrogant. If the leaders of the free world are alert, they should be able to capitlize on it.