Blog powered by Typepad

« 'What goes around comes around' | Main | Before . . . and after! »

Saturday, 20 December 2014

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Trying to "engage", to use that horrible biztalk, newspeak corrupted word, with dysfunctional democracies and tyrannies as though they were Western democracies is naive and useless.

Redwood talks of the long term rapprochement between the West and Putin's Russia as having been the right path from which the West has strayed in Ukraine, ignoring the wars that Putin has fought on his other borders long before we "overstepped the mark" in Ukraine. Putin's Russia was, is, and always will be on a conflict path with the West. It is a clash of systems that can't be avoided, merely deferred.

Redwood describes the cold war as "unpleasant". What is unpleasant about a cold war? It's obviously considerably preferable over a hot war, and when it comes to the clash of systems we will always win, as we did last time.

A cold war with Putin's Russia leading to regime change and the third Russian republic is the only reasonable hope for the Russians, and for our relationship with them.

SoD

Nonsense! Throughout our history we have engaged with regimes far worse than Vlad's - such as his predecessor Stalin! - when it has suited our national interest. As things stand, there is only one potential but very large global threat and that is China. Anything and everything should be done to ensure that China has as few friends as possible, particularly one as huge as Russia.

Yes, it will be immensely difficult to ween Russia off its inherent anti-western stance but we certainly will not do it by the likes of 'B'rack 'n' Dave', the 'Dumb 'n' Dumber' of international diplomacy, boasting about how they are going to screw down on sanctions! Let's begin to cut a deal on Ukraine by admitting that Russia has a genuine interest thus allowing us to lift the sanctions and help Russia through its hard times with the oil price drop, and then let's start to explore other areas where we can work together.

And stop dreaming about a new revolution which will herald a democratic Russian government. It ain't gonna happen! It will just be one of Vlad's ambitious henchmen who takes over and the result will be the 'same old same old'!

If Buttfuck O'Bummer, and the shites of the "E.U" persist on being the "Joey witnesses" at Russias front door, what do they expect?

I tend towards punching the bastards in the nose as well.

Redwood has an interesting article, some of which I buy and some I don't. On this subject I find myself between the Duffs. Regarding China, they have the potential to be an enemy but not the means to be one for long. Just beyond the glittering Potemkin Villages in the more developed areas you find poverty of the third world type. It seems there are many "China's" within China. Their population has managed to grow quite old long before they grew wealthy. I think it likely China may experience numerous internal wars very soon.

FT, I worry about your blood pressure, 'calm down, dear, it's only politics'!

I agree, Whitewall, that China has a way to go before being able to stand up to the USA but in the meantime it can put enormous pressure on small SE Asian countries as it is doing already. I believe it has huge ambitions nurtured on deep resentments from their history. We (by which I mean America) should be thinking and planning ahead. One of the first things to be done is to woo Russia back, not drive it into Chinese arms!

"Throughout our history we have engaged with regimes far worse than Vlad's - such as his predecessor Stalin! - when it has suited our national interest."

Getting tyrannies, aka our enemies, to fight one another, or if they already are, encouraging them to do so more enthusiastically, is a form of engagement with them, I suppose. We engaged with Stalin only in so far as we could get him to fight Hitler to death, arriving ourselves at the end to join the victory parade - only to immediately face him off in the cold war.

But that sort of "engagement" is quite different from "engagement" with rule of law based democracies, aka our friends.

And I don't see any interest we might have in "engaging" with Putin right now, as we did with Stalin. When you are free of any engaging interest in an enemy, and if you have the power to do so, it is best to do him in. In this case that means doing exactly what we're doing that brought about the end of Stalin's regime - a wall of sanctions and forcing down the oil price.

In other words, the Saudis, who are also our enemies, are being "engaged" by us at the moment against Putin's Russia in exactly the way we "engaged" Stalin to bring down Hitler. To stop this wonderful process in mid-flight would be like pulling Stalin off Hitler in 1944 and saying "I say old, chap, enough is enough, you shouldn't hit the guy when he's down".

You know the overall objective is to destroy all these guys, right? And keep destroying them if they reconstitute - pressing the reset button on them - until they get a law based democracy and join us. You even proposed a blunter form of this yourself, your "trash and dash" principal: Go in and scuff up dictators and then leave, making it quite clear to the successor regime that if they behave in the same way, a repeat performance will occur. Even better if you can get an enemy to do it.

SoD

"You know the overall objective is to destroy all these guys, right?"

No, I do not and nor do I support such a notion. And I would remind you, 'SoD', that the 'president' of the EU is a Pole. Do you want to be dragged along behind Polish imperatives into God knows what? I remind you yet again, Britain has no national interests at stake in the Ukraine or Crimea. Until such time as we do, which I cannot imagine, then we might do something. However, we do have considerable interest in getting Mother Russia friendly to us. If that steps on Polish toes, so be it.

The comments to this entry are closed.