The Luke Warm War Heating Up - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 08-12-2008, 12:58 AM   #1
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 12:19 PM
The Luke Warm War Heating Up

I believe we are looking at the resurgence of the Cold War.

1) Obvious - The Russian Response to George
2) THe Expansion of Nato
3) The recognition of Georgia by the West
4) The Missile Defense System
5) The sham of an election in Russia this spring
6) The development of nuclear power in Iran

The last time we were in a cold war situation with a young inexperienced president (Kennedy) the Russians kicked our assess all over the place.

1) Bay of Pigs
2) Kennedy Being manhandled by Kruschev in their first meeting
3) Cuban Missile Crisis causing the bargaining of missiles in Turkey
4) Berlin
5) The Start of Vietnam

I am just concerned that this is not the time for a young, inexperienced President.


I was close to voting for him, but these last two weeks have me thinking otherwise.
__________________

__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 08-12-2008, 05:43 AM   #2
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
DrTeeth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Q continuum
Posts: 4,770
Local Time: 06:19 PM

All the experience of the Bush administration (Cheney, Rumsfeld) didn't stop them from going into Iraq and fucking it up royally. Experience doesn't mean anything if it doesn't lead to good judgement. What matters most is who's analysis of the current situation you think is best and go from there.
__________________

__________________
DrTeeth is offline  
Old 08-12-2008, 09:30 AM   #3
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 12:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadsox View Post
I am just concerned that this is not the time for a young, inexperienced President.

I was close to voting for him, but these last two weeks have me thinking otherwise.
And what do you think that McCain will offer to the table that is necessarily better? Being a prisoner of war and a Senator doesn't make you innately equipped to deal with foreign policy. It is all going to come down to the other members of the administration, which is always the case. Jimmy Carter's foreign policy wasn't defined by his own experiences, but by that of his National Security Advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski. Was Ronald Reagan an experienced commander-in-chief? Unless you think making "Bedtime for Bonzo" was experience, again, it came down to the experience of his administration.

I think the decision as to whether McCain is better than Obama on foreign policy is likely going to be determined as to your approval ratings on the current Bush Administration's foreign policy, because, for better or for worse, these are still "the best and the brightest" that the GOP has to offer. Likewise, I think the decision as to whether Obama is better might be centered around your opinion of Brzezinski and his writings over the last 30 years, because I read, in passing, that he's been one of Obama's foreign policy advisors.
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 08-12-2008, 09:38 AM   #4
Rock n' Roll Doggie
VIP PASS
 
Vincent Vega's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Berlin
Posts: 6,615
Local Time: 06:19 PM
That's almost like deep's comparisons of Obama with Bush. And after all I've heard McCain talking in regards to foreign policy I'm not at all convinced he would be the person to handle such a situation any better.
__________________
Vincent Vega is offline  
Old 08-12-2008, 09:39 AM   #5
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 12:19 PM
What vast foreign policy experience as to the complex nature of the former Eastern bloc does McCain bring, exactly? He still thinks there's a Czechoslovakia.

Bush I and Clinton, both far more intelligent and informed men than McCain stood aside and watched over a quarter of a million people get slaughtered in the Balkans before anything was done. The entire time, Russia flexed its muscles, broke the weapons embargo by supplying the Serbs, and used its veto at the UN to prolong the multiple civil wars. The experienced American administrations pretty much sat back and did bubkus (which is only slightly more than what the inept Europeans did).

So I'm not seeing how in the post-Soviet era in the former Eastern bloc, the experience level of the American presidency has played any kind of positive role.
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 08-12-2008, 09:54 AM   #6
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 12:19 PM
Anyway....

Quote:
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has ordered an end to military operations against Georgia, the Kremlin says.

He told officials he had decided to end the campaign after restoring security for Russian citizens and peacekeepers in South Ossetia.
BBC.
__________________
anitram is online now  
Old 08-12-2008, 09:59 AM   #7
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 12:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by anitram View Post
So I'm not seeing how in the post-Soviet era in the former Eastern bloc, the experience level of the American presidency has played any kind of positive role.
I think there's still this level of "terror" in imagining confronting Russia militarily, because of the specters of the Cold War. We're used to having proxy wars, which is certainly what our involvement with Afghanistan was like in the early 1980s. The Soviet Union comes in, the U.S. throws a bunch of cash and weapons to the resistance, and that's that.

Psychologically, directly attacking Russia would be a substantial step to take, and Russia knows this. They know, increasingly, that they can act with impunity, as long as they don't "go too far." Apparently, attacking a former Soviet Republic that is of minimal strategic value to the West is not there yet.
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 08-12-2008, 10:36 AM   #8
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,501
Local Time: 12:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrTeeth View Post
All the experience of the Bush administration (Cheney, Rumsfeld) didn't stop them from going into Iraq and fucking it up royally.

yup.
__________________
Irvine511 is offline  
Old 08-12-2008, 02:38 PM   #9
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 11:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadsox View Post
I believe we are looking at the resurgence of the Cold War.

1) Obvious - The Russian Response to George
2) THe Expansion of Nato
3) The recognition of Georgia by the West
4) The Missile Defense System
5) The sham of an election in Russia this spring
6) The development of nuclear power in Iran
7) Oil
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 08-12-2008, 02:47 PM   #10
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 12:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by melon View Post
I think there's still this level of "terror" in imagining confronting Russia militarily, because of the specters of the Cold War. We're used to having proxy wars, which is certainly what our involvement with Afghanistan was like in the early 1980s. The Soviet Union comes in, the U.S. throws a bunch of cash and weapons to the resistance, and that's that.

Psychologically, directly attacking Russia would be a substantial step to take, and Russia knows this. They know, increasingly, that they can act with impunity, as long as they don't "go too far." Apparently, attacking a former Soviet Republic that is of minimal strategic value to the West is not there yet.
Do you see it as "imagining" or is it a reality that maybe some (the over 40 crowd) who remember the spectre of nuclear holocaust?
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 08-12-2008, 05:50 PM   #11
ONE
love, blood, life
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 10,881
Local Time: 12:19 PM
AS I was thinking about this today would I be saying the same thing if it were Hillary VS McCain.

I would not. I believe that she would lead better than either of them.....

Sweet Jesus - what the hell pill did I just take.
__________________
Dreadsox is offline  
Old 08-12-2008, 06:21 PM   #12
Refugee
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Winnipeg, Canada
Posts: 2,451
Local Time: 11:19 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrTeeth View Post
All the experience of the Bush administration (Cheney, Rumsfeld) didn't stop them from going into Iraq and fucking it up royally. Experience doesn't mean anything if it doesn't lead to good judgement. What matters most is who's analysis of the current situation you think is best and go from there.
EXACTLY!!!

This "experience" question some of you Americans are obsessing on is a farce. Cheney and Rumsfeld had decades of what you call "experience" and look where it got you.
__________________
Harry Vest is offline  
Old 08-13-2008, 08:50 AM   #13
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 12:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadsox View Post
Do you see it as "imagining" or is it a reality that maybe some (the over 40 crowd) who remember the spectre of nuclear holocaust?
I'm sure the 40+ crowd has something to do with it, or there's just the reality that we haven't fought a war against a country close to our own size since World War II. I imagine we never would have gotten involved in Vietnam in the first place had we known that it wouldn't have been a quick war like Korea.
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 08-13-2008, 09:22 AM   #14
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 12:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dreadsox View Post
I believe we are looking at the resurgence of the Cold War.
Personally, I think this is too simplistic. I think we're mainly heading into a climate we experienced in the 1950s and early 1960s, where third world nations are revolting against Western hegemony. This revolt would not occur, except for the fact that many of these nations do not feel respected on the world stage or are still pissed at us from past offenses.

That is not to say that some of these nations should be automatically respected because they demand it. Some nations really are reprehensible on multiple levels, whether it be a lack of social and/or economic freedoms or a so-called "democracy" that has a habit of rigging elections in their favor. The problem is that the West does not have a consistent standard on which we judge other nations, and our relations--or lack thereof--with certain nations seem wholly centered around self-interest. Why, for instance, is China worthy of diplomatic recognition and free trade, while Cuba is not? Why is North Korea deserving of isolation, whereas Turkmenistan, a nation also dominated by an authoritarian Stalinist government, is left alone? If you answer this question with how it fits into our "strategic interests," then you have also come up with the answer that most third-world nations have come to, as well--which is why many of them have long stopped trusting us.

None of this can be achieved by the U.S. alone, as we would need the support of the rest of the free world also. I also recognize that we are impotent to do very much at all here, as long as we are addicted to oil. I'm not tremendously satisfied with either presidential candidate's energy plans. I think Obama is more serious about getting away from oil, which is imperative over the next generation. Nonetheless, his politically convenient pandering to ethanol is a wasteful and time consuming diversion, and I don't support it. Likewise, while I support McCain's affinity for nuclear power, it comes across mostly as a non sequitor in his larger energy policy, which is pretty much centered around our continued dependence on oil. I'm embarrassed over how useless our politicians have become. Neither candidate fully grasps how important this issue is, but if I'm forced to choose one (as we have long become used to choosing between "dumb" and "dumber"), it will be Obama, as I think he is more serious about breaking away from Big Oil and could possibly be persuaded in favor of alternative energy proposals that don't appeal to the "aging neo-Luddite hippie" wing of the Democratic Party (in contrast, of course, to the "aging neo-Luddite yuppie" wing of the Republican Party who is rarely ever told to shut up).

Overall, I don't see how McCain or his party is favorable on any of these issues, as it is doubtful we will do anything more than stay the course of the current Bush Administration's bipolar foreign policy initiatives that will forever be impotent on our addiction to Big Oil.
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 08-13-2008, 09:31 AM   #15
Blue Crack Addict
 
anitram's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: NY
Posts: 16,297
Local Time: 12:19 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by melon View Post
Why, for instance, is China worthy of diplomatic recognition and free trade, while Cuba is not?
You know I recently spoke to a (black) Cuban at work who said to me that he detests Miami Cubans and their political pandering. When I asked why, he said, these are the upper class ruling white Cubans who got exiled and are looking to go home to rule the roost again. He asked, do you ever see black Cubans represented politically in the US? Don't assume that they feel the same way as the crowd down in the south of Florida.

I do think it's interesting that this view is never, ever covered in the media.
__________________

__________________
anitram is online now  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:19 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com