Obama, Medvedev Discuss Cooperation On Missile Defense »
Posted By gamahuche 4 months, 2 weeks ago in NewsMOSCOW, July 6 -- President Obama and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev reached a preliminary agreement Monday to cut the American and Russian nuclear arsenals by as much as a third while exploring options for cooperation on missile defense.
Read Full Story at washingtonpost.com »
872 Views Share Story 36 Comments Report
Submitted By:
gamahuche
"I would rather be a square peg than fit in a pigeon hole" -
an essay which won me the "Lamb Essay Prize" at the Religious ...
Who Also Submitted:
Other Related Articles:
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 36 (view all)
-
100%
gamahuche4 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Most of what was agreed was based on on-going discussions and negotiations and the signatures were a formality. Strategically, as the current game is being played right now the best "gift" to the US was the right to overfly Russian territory, enabling the United States to transport military personnel and equipment to support U.S. and NATO forces in Afghanistan. Most striking for those of us who would be directly affected by the proposed missile-shield was the agreement of further discussion between the US and Russia on a joint missile-defence system. Should this be a fruitful discussion obviously the current proposal, which has been infuriating Russia, will become moot and a HUGE sigh of relief will be heard in the Czech lands.
Reply-
100%
deathray4 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
look at this thing in a larger context -
Reply
the current kremlin leadership is rabidly anti-american; in the past they could hide this by appearing to be anti-george bush...but he's no longer around for them to hide behind.
the kremlin leadership are afraid of barack obama (i have this from an excellent source in the russian foreign ministry) and don't know yet how to deal with him.
after dealing with the bush 43 administration for eight years, it was easy for the kremlin to go their own way, now they have to deal with an outstretched hand, or be viewed as the uncooperative party.
-
-
100%
jimdoze4 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The big fly in this ointment is that it is in Russia's interest for Iran to have a nuclear arsenal. I certainly hope that Mr. Obama and his administration are aware of that little card up the Kremlin's sleeve.
Reply
Saving $100 million a year in logistics for Afghanistan is nice. But, the Kremlin knows that Afghanistan is not particularly important strategically... and anything they can do to facilitate the diversion of American focus away from strategically important situations such as Iraq and Iran is likely to be in their interest.-
75%
rimbaud4 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Afghanistan is strategically important to the Russians, and they have planty to gain by our success there... as does Iran. Once again, as in Iraq, our interests (in both Iraq and Afghanistan) converge with Iran's (and Russia's). Our interests in keeping Iran from developing nuclear weapons converge with Russia's, and we have an interest in getting at least the Russians, if not ourselves, in to Iran's nuclear fuel development programs.
Reply
-
-
17%
Georgia504 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My two cents...
Reply
1. Medvedev. Nothing but Putin's puppet. Obama was handled the minute talks were channeled through this empty suit. And Obama bought it hook, line, and sinker, earning the contempt of the Russian people. Even Sarah Palin is not this naive, but then she's not a Harvard graduate, either.
2. Overflights to Afghanistan. Putin giveth, Putin taketh away. This is not anything to take to the bank, and it damn sure doesn't lend itself to tactical and strategic planning in Afghanistan. Oh yeah...does anyone seriously think Putin wants to help us succeed where the Russian military failed? Who honestly can be this stupid?
3. Math. Obama can agree to all the missile cuts he wants, but as long as Russia insists on counting even the launchers and delivery vehicles left behind as if they were actual warheads, he's being duped and our military is being shafted.
4. Gas deliveries to Europe. A real leader would work with our Allies to facilitate a strategic alternative from the vise grip Russia has on Europe. LNG from the Middle East via freighters might work with added infrastructure. But since we're stuck with Obama, nothing will happen. He has neither the imagination nor the regard for Europe to seek any other way of getting NG to Europe. For that matter, neither do the Europeans themselves.-
100%
Dionys4 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"This is not anything to take to the bank, and it damn sure doesn't lend itself to tactical and strategic planning in Afghanistan."
Reply
Unfortunately the Generals in charge of Afghanistan don't agree with you here.
" A real leader would work with our Allies to facilitate a strategic alternative from the vise grip Russia has on Europe."
A real leader with half a brain would do that while ensuring a continuance of NG delivery until a 'strategic alternative' is available. How'd Bush do on securing alternatives to our oil dependency, btw? Oh. That's right.
More anti-Obama nonsense from the people who support the party of "no" (as in no -- we don't have any solutions and we're not going to let you have yours). -
80%
gamahuche4 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sorry - not worth 2 cents - especially your number 1!
Reply
Medvedev is a front-man for Putin but he'd far from an empty suit.
The rest is nothing but protocol - and its astonishingly obvious that Medvedev is the current public face and voice of Russia.
This is NOT equivalent to meeting Joe the plumber instead of Obama!
It might in fact be a little more like meeting Bush instead of Cheney..
-
-
25%
Georgia504 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Unfortunately the Generals in charge of Afghanistan don't agree with you here."
Reply
Good...I hope I'm wrong anyway, because if I'm right a lot of Americans are going to die over there.
"A real leader with half a brain would do that while ensuring a continuance of NG delivery until a 'strategic alternative' is available. How'd Bush do on securing alternatives to our oil dependency, btw?"
LNG is currently being shipped out of the Persian Gulf by freighter. The infrastructure to convent LNG to pipeline gas, while critical, is not beyond Europe's technical or financial means. Especially in light of the risk of having an entire continent depend on Russia.
Neither Bush or our energy independence is being discussed. If this was the topic you would not find me defending Bush.
Anti-Obama nonsense? Given the drop in his popularity and the growing regret among Democrats that this buffoon is in office, let's just say I believe in beating the rush. The clown told us if we didn't buy into his wild spending spree ("stimulus package"), unemployment would reach 9%.
You liberals bought in. Unemployment is now 9.5%. And your clown now says we need more spending. The dots are connected whether or not you discern them to be.
It is quite safe to say you may now stop bashing Bush. It's your White House, your Congress, and your economic lies that the American people have to live with. Even if Obama can't step up and act like he has a pair, you fellow travelers ought to.-
100%
Dionys4 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
""Unfortunately the Generals in charge of Afghanistan don't agree with you here."
Reply
Good...I hope I'm wrong anyway, because if I'm right a lot of Americans are going to die over there."
Probably. Though probably fewer than in Iraq and it's nice to see them going after the people who may have actually perpetrated 9/11 instead of invading some country because Bush's daddy lost face to Saddam. Perhaps if the military had started in Afghanistan and stayed focused in Afghanistan and focused on rebuilding the country we'd have an ally there instead of a country that sold itself to Russia, harboring the terrorists who offer a real threat to America.
"It is quite safe to say you may now stop bashing Bush. "
Really? You think that a few months after he's out of office his decisions to get us embroiled in a ridiculously expensive war while ignoring the economy and imploding America's image iin the world aren't still having an effect?
At least if there are lies in the air, they're not lies I'm telling myself. -
-
-
100%
rimbaud4 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The is no real reason for the USA and Russia to be competitive: the interests of both are better served by being cooperative. Putin's delusions were fed by our response to the Georgian hostilities, and by the unpredictability of the previous, hang-tough, shoot from the hip, administration. The USA really has no reason to attack Russia?
Reply -
80%
gamahuche4 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"But, the Kremlin knows that Afghanistan is not particularly important strategically"
Reply
Jim - things may have changed but the Russians spent a huge amount of treasure and blood trying to control Afghanistan and the reason that the US is now very interested in Afghanistan is that it is the country that they should have focussed on from the start, instead of looking for treasure in Iraq!-
33%
jimdoze4 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The Russian involvement in Afghanistan was a combination of the age-old desire to reach south toward a warm water port, to solidify its imperial southern flank, and have a greater influence in the Middle East.
Reply
The reason Afghanistan has strategic importance to us is due to the danger (to everyone) of Pakistani nuclear weapons falling into the hands of Islamic militants. A situation which, of course, was exacerbated when the Taliban (and like-minded of varying and fluid nomenclatures) crossed the Afghan-Pakistan border to escape the coalition.
I disagree that Afghanistan should have been the sole focus from the start. It was (and still is) of far less strategic importance than Iraq and Iran. Furthermore, as a sole focus, it could have become for us what it did for the Soviets. Plus, while that was going on, the inevitable collapse of Iraq would have thrown the oil-producing Middle East into a major regional war at some point in time.
Nobody was "looking for treasure in Iraq, Gama. We were preventing WWIII. Perhaps you could call that saving treasure... everybody's... including yours, in fact.
-
-
-
doggammitComment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
-
0%
Icantwait4 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
My Fellow Americans: Selling the U.S.A. down the river again. Russia has already been destroyed. Remember the Wall? Leave it to Obama to make them feel important again. Reagan set them in their place and now Obama is setting them in our place. It's a good thing the rest of America is beginning to get their senses back and seeing Obama as a destructive force to this Country. Presidential Popularity at 43%. How do you feel now Mr Premier? The Real American
Reply-
doggammitComment removed: Retracted by user
-
0%
frctm54 months, 2 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The wall didn't come down until Bush sr. was president. Reagan did nothing to bring down the Soviet Union, they collapsed under their own weight. When Gorbechav became president, he tried to reform communism with Glasnost and Perestroika. When Chernobyl melted down, Gorbechav tried to keep it a secret and failed to evacuate thousands of Russians who were in harms way. This caused mass disillusionment with the new premier and ultimately led to the downfall of communism. Reagan had absolutely nothing do with it. All Reagan did was run up deficits and confuse Hollywood movies with reality. To the right, he is a hero, but to those who think, he's a pathetic joke. He raised taxes on the middle class with an increase in the payroll tax. He got 243 marines killed in Beirut, supplied arms to Saddam and Iran and stopped increasing fuel mileage standards for cars.
Reply
-
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.