These exchanges are quite fascinating. As Mitt Romney pointed out, Russia is our "number one geo political foe." He did not use the term enemy. This leads me to believe that even he does not truly understand the gravity of the situation. Nevertheless if one does properly recognize that Russia is our number one geo political foe, they would be unlikely to provoke Russia over an issue as insignificant to our interests as the Crimea. Essentially the US had two viable options here. 1.)Completely stay out of this issue entirely. There's no reason for us to be involved in something that really only concerns Ukraine, Russia, and the EU. 2.)Offer tacit support for the "elected" government and Russia's position. (Note elected is in paranathases because you've pretty well documented on other threads why such a designation is problematic.) In any event, such an approach likely avoids an unnecessary, unaffordable for us, and perhaps unwinnable conflict with Russia. Additionally, some reports indicate the US government may have played a prominent role in funding and training the opposition, essentially the "coup." You probably won't like the sources though (wnd and counterpunch). I'm skeptical of these reports for the following reasons. 1.)The EU hangs by a thread itself and is heavily dependent upon Russian oil and gas supplies. They're not about to jeopardize these vital supplies over this. Should the US try to carry on such an endeavor, the EU nations would be expected to oppose it vigorously and help the Russians thwart it. 2.)Russian intelligence closely monitors the Americans. Such an effort would take a long time to plan and the Russians would have been almost certain to have undermined a coup. The fact that they seem to have been caught flat footed by the coup itself would tend to discount US involvement in this. If one does correctly recognize that Russia is our number one geo political foe, then one is going to have as much distance between themselves and something like Ukraine that their would be no way for media types to link them to it. It's unwise to provoke ARGUABLY the world's most powerful nation. It's doubly unwise to do so in support of the EU nations who have no love lost for us anyway and it's triple unwise to do so for something that is not crucial for American economic or security interests. As the Russian leadership correctly points out, any sanctions will boomerang and affect America. In fact, such sanctions would LIKELY hurt us and the EU nations more than they hurt Russia. Note the terms ARGUABLY and LIKELY are in caps to illustrate that I could be wrong. With that said I think it is fair to conclude that Mitt Romney would have been a far better president than who we currently have. At least he does come closer to recognizing the nature of our relationship with Russia than the current POTUS. Such a recognition would have made him less likely to run off at the mouth than the current POTUS and his team have done. Running off at the mouth the way they have with hollow threats is probably the exact worst thing they could have done.
Post a Comment
please donate...it helps me write more gooder!