In response to Russian President Vladimir Putin accusing the United States of undermining global security, Sec. of Defense Robert Gates said â€We all face many common problems and challenges that must be addressed in partnership with other countries, including Russia. One Cold War was quite enough.â€
Here Here
Russian President Vladimir (Pooty-poot) Putin has been seen by the 43rd Munich Conference Security Policy complaining about the United States. Putin says the US is undermining global security.
President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia accused the United States on Saturday of provoking a new nuclear arms race by developing ballistic missile defenses, undermining international institutions and making the Middle East more unstable through its clumsy handling of the Iraq war.
He had a list of “complaints about American domination of global affairs, including many of the themes that have strained relations between the Kremlin and the United States during his seven-year administration.”
He whines about why Russia is not already part of NATO, when other former satellite countries of the former Soviet Union are? And if Russia can’t be part of NATO, “Against whom is this expansion directed?”
Well, NATO members agree to play by the rules, and do. Don’t have to look far for why a Putin’ized Russia cannot be trusted to play by the rules. Who was it that was accused, by the victim, of assassinating a member of the Russian news media? And, who is it that provides and builds Iran’s nuclear reactors? Who is supporting the Iranian regime in terms of nuclear technology, and defending other nations at odds with the US? Oil-For-Food Saddam bribery scandal participant. Who uses natural gas and oil as diplomatic weapons to Russia’s neighboring countries? For starters.
It seems to me that the “against whom” would be nations that refuse to play by the rules. Like Russia.
He resents monitoring of elections in the former Soviet sphere. He resents free elections period, and called those monitors “a vulgar instrument of ensuring the foreign policy interests of one country.†Free and fair elections should be the policy interests of every country, including Russia, don’t you think? Especially a country who wants to join NATO.
Putin criticised the US for developing a missile defense system. Right. Can you say Kim Jong Il? Defense Putin, the word is defense.
Putin said the US is making the Middle East more unstable through its clumsy handling of the Iraq war. How many years was Russia fighting a war in Afghanistan? Wasn’t it something like 10 years before they gave up and went home? Putin doesn’t know what clumsy is. Putin does know he was Saddam’s nuclear supplier. Putin did supply Saddam with missile jamming electronics and missiles. Only Putin knows for sure, the location of banned weapons and technologies that were spirited out of Iraq months prior to the start of the war in Iraq. I’m surprised he missed the fact that we still have not found Bin Laden. The unstable-ness of the war is caused by war. The objective is to make things stable by winning it. And he knows it.
I’ve seen this before in this country. It is a political tactic. Putin, aside from being a communist in democratic clothing, has followed the democratic’s (sic) playbook to a ‘T’ in this way; when what you are doing is screwing things up, blame the other guy for doing it and screwing things up.
The next election will most certainly be determined by these ‘one-issue’ voters if they don’t wise up and look at the big picture. The main difference between the one-issue voters in both parties is that the democrats won’t chew off their own arm.
One-issue voters on the conservative side of the aisle is the so-called Christian coalition who make abortion their issue. Illegal immigration and border security represents another one-issue block. There are others but I don’t have the time.
The point is that no matter what a candidate may believe on this topic or that topic, the president does not rule like a king or a dictator. It’s the members of congress that make the laws. And for the one-issue voter to vote as though he were electing a king is just plain wrong, politically, and guarantees they remain in minority status.
Or new low, depending on how you look at it. So your 17 yr old comes home boohooing that he got into a fight and lost. What do you do? Do you give him a pistol and tell him to go get revenge? That’s what one mother did in Mayor Nagin’s city, New Orleans.
A woman accused of giving her teenage son a handgun and telling him to take revenge after he lost a fight was arrested Thursday after another boy was killed, police said.
I think congress needs to step in and put an end to the skyrocketing crime rate. Per capita it’s safer in Iraq than in New Orleans. Here’s what they should do. Put Gov. Kathleen Blanco and Mayor Nagin on notice that they have 6 months to get the city under control or the federal government will start removing it’s assets out of New Orleans. This will send them the message that they need to act, positively, now.
There is just too much loss of innocent lives going on and ‘the American people’ are not going to support an inefficient and corrupt regime indefinitely. If they fail to take the necessary actions, then they can expect government funding to be cut off and the National Guard to be repositioned out-of-state. Some in Washington seem to think this method will work in Iraq. Hell, if it will work there, then its sure to work here. Maybe John Kerry will negotiate with France to help train police officers, in the French Quarter of course. But still, they only have 6 months.
MSNBC video
John Kerry on Iraq. . .
“The Congress should tell President Bush to end this open-ended commitment of American troops,” Kerry said. “The United States must get tough with Iraqi politicians – pressure them to meet tough benchmarks. … Congress must push this administration to find not just a new way forward in Iraq, but the right way forward.”
Sean Hannity interviews the country’s mayor, Rudy Giuliani. Giuliani frankly explains his positions that are contrary to the republican ‘base.’
There’s always somebody waiting to be offended, and today it is a college professor who objects to the President using the word ‘articulate’ when describing Sen. Barack Hussein Obama. There was one such example on Fox tonight when O’Reilly had a guest (a black professor at Temple U.) who accused the President of making a racist comment toward Obama when being interviewed by Neil Cavuto the other day.
CAVUTO: How do you think the troops would feel about a President Obama?
BUSH: Oh, I don’t know. He, let’s — he hasn’t gotten elected yet. He hasn’t even gotten the party’s nomination.
(LAUGHTER)
BUSH: He’s an attractive guy. He’s articulate. I have been impressed with him when I have seen him in person. But he’s got a long way to go to be president.
CAVUTO: All right.
To turn Bush’s statement into a racial slur of some sort is bigoted in and of itself and smacks of someone with a big chip on their shoulder.
The liberal racial template is at work. When black conservatives come into public awareness, (Thomas, Powell, Rice, Steele, Swann, and Blackwell) the knee-jerk liberal response is that they are Uncle Toms. You don’t hear the left calling them bright and articulate and fine examples for our youth, especially our black youth. No, none of that. Instead, they say the black conservatives are on the republican plantation. So much for coming together.
Democrats apparently look at themselves as the gold standard on race relations. How else can you explain this double standard? Joe Biden gets a pass with his description of Obama, who added ‘clean’ to his attributes. So when a republican, or the President, would say a black democrat is articulate, when he IS, then he is being racist? Just ridiculous. That professor sounds to me like the Johnny Cochran of politics.
In my mind, it would be bigoted to call Colin Powell an Uncle Tom, just as it would be if one were to say Sec. of State Rice sounds ‘white’. Both have racial meaning and are equally destructive. ‘Articulate’ is race neutral, as is ‘bright’, ‘intelligent,’ and ‘clean.’ The time to remove that chip has past.
Title correction for Susan Cornwell, the Reuters reporterette. Despite the fact that the MSM calls it the opposite, such as “Republicans block Senate debate on Iraq.’ The measure that is being blocked is the one that allows for no debate, no opposing points of view, no coming together.
This seems to be ‘global warming day’ as far as the news is concerned, what with the release of a summary of the doom and gloom as regards to ‘global warming’ and (most importantly) it is caused by us, and from which there is no recovery. Serve us up some fear please.
Neal Boortz was on this subject this morning and had a great observation about reasons to doubt this global warming crap as relates to human beings.
The United Nations is anti-American and anti-Capitalist. In short .. I don’t trust them. Not a bit. The UN would eagerly engage in any enterprise that would weaken capitalist economies around the world.
Because after the fall of the Soviet Union and worldwide Communism many in the anti-capitalist movement moved to the environmental movement to continue pursuing their anti-free enterprise goals. Many of the loudest proponents of man-made global warming today are confirmed anti-capitalists.
Because the sun is warmer .. and all of these scientists don’t seem to be willing to credit a warmer sun with any of the blame for global warming.
The polar ice caps on Mars are melting. How did our CO2 emissions get all the way to Mars?
It was warmer in the 1930s across the globe than it is right now.
It wasn’t all that long ago that these very same scientists were warning us about “global cooling” and another approaching ice age?
How much has the earth warmed up in the last 100 years? One degree. Now that’s frightening.
Because that famous “hockey stick” graph that purports to show a sudden warming of the earth in the last few decades is a fraud. It ignored previous warming periods … left them off the graph altogether.
The infamous Kyoto accords exempt some of the world’s biggest CO2 polluters, including China and India.
The Kyoto accords can easily be seen as nothing less than an attempt to hamstring the world’s dominant capitalist economies.
Because many of these scientists who are sounding the global warming scare depend on grant money for their livelihood, and they know the grant money dries up when they stop preaching the global warming sermon.
Because global warming “activists” and scientists seek to punish those who have different viewpoints. If you are sure of your science you have no need to shout down or seek to punish those who disagree.
What happened to the Medieval Warm Period? In 1996 the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change issued a chart showing climatic change over a period of 1000 years. This graph showed a Medieval warming period in which global temperatures were higher than they are today. In 2001 the IPCC issued another 1000 year graph in which the Medieval warming period was missing. Why?
Why has one scientist promoting the cause of man-made global warming been quoted as saying “we have to get rid of the medieval warming period?”
Why is the ice cap on the Antarctic getting thicker if the earth is getting warmer?
In the United State, the one country with the most accurate temperature measuring and reporting records, temperatures have risen by 0.3 degrees centigrade over the past 100 years. The UN estimate is twice that.
There are about 160,000 glaciers around the world. Most have never been visited or measured by man. The great majority of these glaciers are growing, not melting.
Side-looking radar interferometry shows that the ise mass in the West Antarctic is growing at a rate of over 26 gigatons a year. This reverses a melting trend that had persisted for the previous 6,000 years.
Rising sea levels? The sea levels have been rising since the last ice age ended. That was 12,000 years ago. Estimates are that in that time the sea level has risen by over 300 feet. The rise in our sea levels has been going on long before man started creating anything but natural CO2 emissions.
Like Antarctica, the interior of Greenland is gaining ice mass.
Over the past 3,000 years there have been five different extended periods when the earth was measurably warmer than it is today.
During the last 20 years — a period of the highest carbon dioxide levels — global temperatures have actually decreased. That’s right … decreased.
Why did a reporter from National Public Radio refuse to interview David Deming, an associate professor at the University of Oklahoma studying global warming, after his testimony to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee unless Deming would state that global warming was being caused by man?
Why are global warming proponents insisting that the matter is settled and that no further scientific research is needed? Why are they afraid of additional information?
On July 24, 1974 Time Magazine published an article entitled “Another Ice Age?” Here’s the first paragraph:
“As they review the bizarre and unpredictable weather pattern of the past several years, a growing number of scientists are beginning to suspect that many seemingly contradictory meteorological fluctuations are actually part of a global climatic upheaval. However widely the weather varies from place to place and time to time, when meteorologists take an average of temperatures around the globe they find that the atmosphere has been growing gradually cooler for the past three decades. The trend shows no indication of reversing. Climatological Cassandras are becoming increasingly apprehensive, for the weather aberrations they are studying may be the harbinger of another ice age.”