digg

Join DiggAbout

Call for questions
Submit and vote up questions you'd like to see answered by Kevin & Jay at the next Digg Townhall on 11/18.

Putin: Russia To Revive Military Power.

guardian.co.uk — "Russia has a very important goal which is to retain leadership in the production of military equipment," he said. "As a state that has acquired new economic capabilities, will continue to attach special importance to high technology and development." - Vladimir Putin Tells Prague to hold off missile shield decision till after '08 elections.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • JeremyRobertsen, on 10/10/2007, -16/+2okay...
  • Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -11/+14Fake Cold War, anyone?
    • mogus, on 10/10/2007, -5/+9Canadian Bacon, anyone?
    • seanherman, on 10/10/2007, -2/+21Odd as it seems, Russia is using the relatively weak US global strategic position to make the most aggressive reassertions of Russian might since the end of the cold war. With America bogged down in two massive wars, tied down diplomatically in Iran and other middle eastern nations, and with the lamest of lame duck presidents and an ineffectual American Congress, there's no better time for Russia to flex its muscles. Ever since energy prices started rising, I've read several places, Russia has been able to reorganize, refund and restructure itself. Currently, Western Europe relies on the Russian Federation for 25% of its natural gas energy (according to Stratfor), a significant political and economic lever, before even accounting for all other petroleum needs Russia is uniquely capable of providing.

      Take this newfound success in the context of recent Russian acts of aggression, like the Russian claim of the North Pole (in response to Canadian plans to establish itself in the northern territories militarily), the recent "dud" missle that landed in longtime adversary Georgia ( http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/08/wgeorgia108.xml ). Russians have recently started flying their strategic nuclear bomber fleet again ( http://fe12.news.mud.yahoo.com/s/nm/20070809/wl_nm/russia_military_flights_dc ), for the first time since the cold war, and announced a new air defense system by 2015, and were extremely vocal in their opposition to Bush's revived missile defense program in Europe. Stratfor also mentions Russia's continued attempts to again assert itself over the former Soviet Union territories in eastern Europe, especially the Ukraine. There's a Ukrainian election coming up very shortly, and the pro-Russian candidate could dramatically shift European and global politics away from the 1990, pro-western trends, back towards a more precarious balance.

      Interesting times.
    • gotamd, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3Fake? This is the real thing. If we continue down the path we're on, this will be Cold War II.
      • Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2...*sighs*. antony sutton? zbigniew brezezinski admitted that because of suttons research, the cold war was indeed nothing more than a show. Both countries were manipulated by many different means, governmentally and monetarily. The U.S actually developed russian infrastructure from 1917-30, and from the 1950's up to 1970. That's right. during the vietnam war, the u.s. was givign weapons and training expertise to russians, who in turn gave it to the vietkong.

        histories a bitch aint it. and now fastforward to seeing bush, bush and putin on a boating outting? what did they discuss? well, the fruits lie before you eyes.
      • Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1http://digg.com/world_news/Putin_pushing_to_resume_Cold_War
  • Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -3/+16Let it be known that there's profit in the stratification of nations and the building of war machines. We all know there's money in the preparation and waging of war. There's the glory aspect, the unification of the populations, the fear that further allows you to control them and relinquish more of their rights, there's the increase of gov't controls and ...did I already say money in war? Oh yeah....

    Research Antony sutton and the fruits of his research. You'll see what I'm talking about. This is nothing more than a ruse to create a new false cold war "terror" atmosphere. What better excuse for the gov't to restrict more of your God given rights, whether you believe in a God or not.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antony_Sutton
  • mattfugitive, on 10/10/2007, -11/+7Smells like Wag the Dog!
    • Albionshores, on 10/10/2007, -7/+3It's sillier than that; one tail wagging two dogs.
  • rabidstrike, on 10/10/2007, -4/+38To hell with world peace. Full speed ahead!!!
    • Albionshores, on 10/10/2007, -4/+12Russia simply knows that America can't be everywhere and this is a great excuse to revive the old days that Russians, certainly Putin & the KGB, long for. One on one the US would win a Cold War hands down. But now it has a South American Problem, a Gulf problem, a Taiwanese problem, an economic Chinese problem and a domestic problem. Russia in East Europe and in the Arctic. Russia can use the excuse without threat of reprisal.

      If Russia wants to rearm there is still a profit to be made for a small minority. Those same profiteers profit again from American insecurity contracts. The people who pay the price are the Regular Joes who believe in an imagined enemy and lose an otherwise quite obtainable peace.
      • AirRaven, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Take note that the USA and Russian Federation aren't the only superpowers in the world- Russia has a rather inconvenient border with the EU to consider if it's going to start "going imperial", so to speak.
        • kazamx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Problem with that is they control something like 40% of European power supplies (Gas oil etc.) Russia can criple Europe without much of a problem. If they turn off the supplies into Europe, we would have huge internal problems that would limit our abilities in the longer term.
        • Albionshores, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Putin has been quite keen to extend trade with the European Union. In 2005 trade increased between the two by 20%.
      • disco5896, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5Mostly, I think we have a George Bush problem. A lot of the tensions could well be removed with a competent leader.

        "Russia wants balance. It wants a strategic balance with the US..." Yeah, good luck with that.
        • kazamx, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3What can you really do about it? The US is skint and its military is fully deployed.
        • Auscifer, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1@kazarnx Yea..... sure.. if you say so buddy. *rolls eyes*
        • Albionshores, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2@Auscifer
          No really you are. Really, really skint. They are going to have to extend borrowing again next month just to pay the debt repayments. Forget the debt itself, it can't even afford the interest. China alone controls $1.4 trillion of US debt reserves. I don't know if you've been underground for the last month but European central banks have just bailed out the US economy with a 1/4 trillion dollars.

          Regarding the military, to maintain manning levels in Iraq through next year the US will have to introduce the draft.
    • rabidstrike, on 10/10/2007, -3/+4There is a huge market in all the countries that have some sort of US arms embargo. That is what russia is trying to tap into. I definitely see this as a progress than anything else. Competition can only be good.
      • Albionshores, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3With industry, commerce and agriculture - yeah, such competition is good if you both agree to free market principles. When the competition is found in an arms race there is a need to justify and find a reason for those arms in order to spend more and extend the market. Thats not good.

        World economy should be there to further mankind; not enslave it in fear, siege mentality and fracture. The people that pay for it should benefit themselves and not made Serf's to its globalisation.
      • Gustomucho, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6Competition is good? You mean putting more weapons in the hand of more people ? Are you some kind of ***** retard?
        • wageslaven, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6You *do* know who the largest exporter of weapons in the world is right? Further, you do know that this same country has a arms budget that dwarfs all of the other big spenders combined.

          Are only enemies of the USA disallowed arms in this global-cluster-fcuk the USA is intent on continuing?
        • kazamx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Isn't that the American dream? I thought it says in your constitution that everyone should be able to carry arms? Well if everyone in the US can have their rocket launchers, isn't it fair everyone can have them too?
      • BESTenemy, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Balance of power means everyone having the same means for defending themselves. In an ideal utopian world, having no weapons would be in everyone's benefit, but in reality, the moment armament occurs, it becomes practically impossible to disarm the opponents. Technology is here. People know how to make weapons. They will make them concealed for offense and defense, they'll make the other kind openly. Disarmament deals only take care of "surface weaponry" used for political leverage. Only thing that uses up real weapons is war. Ironically, the thing that keeps existing guns from firing is perpetual production of more guns and a continuous arms buildup.

        We don't live in an ideal world, so let's deal with what we have. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. The only thing keeping us in check is retaliation of those we're trying to enslave.
  • chubbybubba, on 10/10/2007, -14/+29Putin is a dangerous guy. He looks like a weasel.
    • kushed, on 10/10/2007, -7/+19Never the less, He is smarter then Bush
      • evilregis, on 10/10/2007, -1/+7So is the weasel he referenced.
      • Treoinmypocket, on 10/10/2007, -4/+2Based upon his GPA? His Multiple Degrees? His University education and said institution's standing? I'm just curious....
        • Albionshores, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Based on the fact that Bush needs his dad present when a foreign dignitary visits. Based on that not only does he have trouble speaking, he has trouble recognising terms or remembering facts and faces. Like leaders of countries, or that people from Greece are called Greeks not Grecians.
    • Jalh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0bush is worse.........
  • Treason, on 10/10/2007, -11/+3Stupid Russkies
  • mogus, on 10/10/2007, -7/+27I hear they have WMD's.
    • Mac101, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1ah no we cant pull the old "WMDs" trick on Russia. They have been a world superpower alongside the US. Going after Russian is like going against somebody as powerful as the USA. It would be s stalemate. Napoleon and Hitler and his Nazi army learned the hard way.
  • socomoddjob, on 10/10/2007, -8/+3Someone needs to take Putin out....
    • Jugalator, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4Yeah, the only ones who should put any effort in arming the military well is USA and its allies. Death to the rest of 'em.

      I don't like where the tension in the world is going more than you, but I'm also not being naive here, and the problem isn't with Putin alone, or anywhere near it. It's at least as much on the other side. Much like it took two parts to make one cold war.
    • Jalh, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0some1 needs to take bush out .......... and no 1 are doing anything ....
      • Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1no 1 are doing anything? Jesus... Someone needs to take you out to adult learning classes. But I agree. Bush certainly needs to be assassinated. I've only heard of one attempt. Humans are slipping
    • Frnnkdlxx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3to dinner? He's got those cute little bity hands, and that cold little stare. I'd just EAT HIM UP! oooooooo!
  • whosyourtator, on 10/10/2007, -10/+3This time the war won't be cold, it will be hot due to global warming.
    .
    .
    (grins)
  • hiPpymIck, on 10/10/2007, -8/+9i think maybe Bushs foreign policy isnt helping
    ..a shield against rogue missiles from Iran & N Korea..i bet the truth is they couldnt launch an attack even if they wanted to

    seems the Russian hope his replacement will be better ..FTA

    "Yuri Baluyevsky, Russia's military chief of staff, said that Prague should hold off any final decision on the shield until after next year's US presidential elections.

    "I do not exclude that a new administration in the United States will re-evaluate the current administration's decisions on missile defence,"

    they are quite keen on their civilian aircraft

    "Last week officials said they planned to build 4,500 civilian aircraft by 2025, while the Kremlin has pledged $250bn to boost the civilian industry."

    but it seems its mostly about keeping up in high-tech
    ..military AND civilian aircraft sales will finance it i spose

    overall because global military spending isnt stopping anytime soon maybe a good idea for the US defence contractors to have world competition
    itll make corruption more difficult- look how dodgy Halliburton are
    • longbow486, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0iran, mybe if they get a little help from mother russia for a missle, nK cant do *****, hell China was royaly pissed off when nK launched their two little model rockets off last summer
      • kazamx, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Its that the same rockets poweful and acurate enough to carry the Nukes that N.Korea have to Japan and wipe it out?
    • HPCELarry, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Its a missile shield you genius, not the missiles themselves. The launchers can only fire anti missile missiles, which don't really do any damage and can't be used offensively. Nuke launchers are much larger, and aren't whats being installed.
      • Albionshores, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1The Russian argument to the shield is that it could be used to remove retaliatory strikes. Hypothetically America could strike first, destroy much of the Soviet capability and the shield could prevent anything else. Effectively reducing American accountability and the initial trigger/excuse for Russian escalation.

        The shield is unnecessary and is an act of antagonism. You really think a rogue state would bother to develop then launch ICBMs against America that could be tracked back to themselves. Better to acquire and then FedEx. ABC News have done it twice on 9-11 anniversaries with uranium signatured material put into haulage containers in Asia. Both times it got past customs and to the ABC studios.

        The missile shield is as effective as the Maginot line to rogue states, it was put in place to poke at Russia and is worthy of the George Orwell "War is Peace" award.
  • hydroplane, on 10/10/2007, -6/+22Cold War II: Electric Boogaloo
  • Jimgress, on 10/10/2007, -2/+30
    Soviet Union? We thought you guys broke up?

    YES THAT IS WHAT WE WANTED YOU TO THINK!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s-20CtRdmL4

    /simpsons love
    • wageslaven, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5The Soviet Bloc broke up, and Nato -- contrary to its prior assurances -- accepted former Soviet nations into the NATO block.

      If you were Russia, this would look exactly like the USA is trying to strangle Russia. Why? Because it is exactly how Bush is behaving.
      • jamyz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1What assurances? Given to who by who? What contracts, or treaties confirmed this?
  • JonnyTrombone, on 10/10/2007, -6/+27The Russians (Putin, in particular), are playing a dangerous game. Much of the West views Putin as trying to revive dictatorship in his country- and increasing military spending doesn't look real good right now...
    • Jimgress, on 10/10/2007, -7/+15The Americans (Bush, in particular), are playing a dangerous game. Much of the West views Bush as trying to start a dictatorship in his country- and increasing military spending doesn't look real good right now...

      Not disagreeing with you here, but notice that this is how the rest of the world sees this.
      • jcm267, on 10/10/2007, -9/+6Sane people in the west (where we have the choice to get information from credible sources if we wish) don't think Bush is trying to set up a dictatorship.
      • blackhawk919, on 10/10/2007, -6/+4More accurately this is your view of how the rest of the world sees this.
      • Yokwe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I am part of the rest of the world and have never heard of this dictatorship spin. Spend just one day at a NRA meeting and you know this is not possible You can say a lot of things about Bush but building a dictatorship is not one of them.
    • Jugalator, on 10/10/2007, -2/+4"increasing military spending doesn't look real good right now"

      The rest of the world motivate their reduced rights to freedom and increased military budgets with "terrorism", and I'm sure Russia does as well.

      It's just individual how all the countries define that word. ;-)
    • Jalh, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1i would like to see putin wasting the money building a social future for russia , no for a military purpose ....
  • sctwp09, on 10/10/2007, -21/+16So? Why do Americans (I'm an American speaking here), feel that we can have a military, and no one else has a right to? *****. ***** Bush.
    • xeocube, on 10/10/2007, -11/+19Because America, unlike Putin etc actually has at least some morals and regulations / control over their companies. With Russia, you never know who the hell they are going to sell their weapons to. Also Russia just wants to feel strong again so it can scare the surrounding smaller nations into creating a new kind of USSR.
      • skjalff, on 10/10/2007, -13/+5retard
      • LowRentDiggs, on 10/10/2007, -13/+11You are delusional. Regulation and morals are gone in the US now. The US sells weapons to whoever it damn well pleases (usually to later be bitten).
        • MiDri, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Seriously, they do -- the CIA is all about handing out guns and drugs... Look it up.
      • bobcrotch, on 10/10/2007, -11/+4You ***** idiot, why would you think that America isn't evil?
        • blackhawk919, on 10/10/2007, -2/+11Thank God for the apparent few of us even here on Digg who still love America.
          • didiman, on 10/10/2007, -0/+5Yeah I think I have counted 4 so far.
          • LordSlashstab55, on 10/10/2007, -3/+0Bush is definitely going for a dicidership er dictatorship. WTF you think the Patriot act I & II are doing to the freedoms of the Americans?????

            Wake the ***** up
        • BossKey, on 10/10/2007, -3/+2We love America. We hate what's happened to it. We want the our lovable America BACK.
          Sorry you have such low standards.
      • Albionshores, on 10/10/2007, -7/+9Did they just defrost you?
  • jason469, on 10/10/2007, -2/+6What Putin needs to do is help the poor people of Russia, war is only profitable for those who want it, in the first place.
    • LowRentDiggs, on 10/10/2007, -3/+7The irony is, you're probably American...
  • danielsan1701, on 10/10/2007, -3/+22*UN nameplate rolls over to reveal "Soviet Union"*

    *Berlin Wall pops-up from under grass*

    *Zombie Lenin punches through glass case*

    "Must... crush... Capitalism...."
  • mcfly83, on 10/10/2007, -1/+6I see an opportunity for Patrick Swayze to make his triumphant return to the silver screen - Red Dawn 2: (can't think of anything clever)
    • DarthDiabetes, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Don't put "can't think of anything clever" in parentheses. That's the most honest byline that Hollywood has ever come up with. It's refreshing.
  • poppatopz, on 10/10/2007, -3/+5here is the issue, We need a new super power in the world or a old super power that can be revived. The issue with terrorism is there is no large body of government we can lash out at. If there are more then just us as a superpower then we not only have an option to "settle" down but someone else can help police the rest of the world
    • LowRentDiggs, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3What we need are less power hungry men. But they deliver HDTVs so most people will still vote for them. Not many people know history...
    • Mesmorize, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0What are you on? The first principle of US foreign policy since the Cold War is to never allow the rise of another super power.
  • krnldmp, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4Why not try something, you know, constructive?
  • nixfu, on 10/10/2007, -6/+8
    WOW...good idea.


    That worked out sooooo well for you guys last time.


    • Auscifer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Who cares about buying bread when you ICBMs! Cue fallout scrubbers.
  • yikiad, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3welcome back, iron curtain! our economy has missed you!

    ..now, where did we put that bloated defense budget from the 80's.....
    • Albionshores, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1You're already wearing it.
      • LordSlashstab55, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0zing! (you go to war with the army you have) oh snap!
  • Snuff99, on 10/10/2007, -7/+4On your mark... Get set... ARMS RACE!!!! GO USA! GO!!
    Pootin' is no better than Bush. :/
    • jcm267, on 10/10/2007, -2/+3You're either uninformed or insane. Putin is far worse than Bush.
      • Yokwe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Bush is far from a Saint but next to Putin he is. Most folks forget Putin was one of the top men in the KGB in East Berlin.
  • geekee, on 10/10/2007, -5/+5More weapons for Islamic and communist countries to buy (e.g. N. Korea and Iran). And people here wonder why the US arms its allies in the middle east.
    • Albionshores, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2If you it weren't governed by corporate hawks, stayed out of other people's politics and introduced a true free market without subsidy or embargo all the countries in the middle east would be allies.
      • nixfu, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Your right it has nothing to do with the fact that Islam's entire purpose is to conquer the entire world either by conversion to islam, death, or slavery, into one big caliphate...nothing at all.


        • Auscifer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1A thousand nations of the Persian empire descend upon you!
      • nixfu, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2Your right it has nothing to do with the fact that Islam's entire purpose is to conquer the entire world either by conversion to islam, death, or slavery, into one big caliphate...nothing at all.


    • vertinox, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Aren't are allies in the Mideast dictators and Islamics? I really don't see Saudi Arabia has a hotbed for democracy.
  • 1stmushroombrew, on 10/10/2007, -5/+8Well, the US will be damned and criticized by the rest of the world no matter what we do, so i say we just keep it up. I mean, Bush takes a defensive stance and Putin counters with threats of targeting missiles and renewed strategic bomber production and flights and WE'RE the ones to blame??!! Please... If anyone's rattling their saber its Putin, not Bush. We're not to blame for everything people...
    • Albionshores, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Defensive stance?!? How many countries has he invaded and still occupies? How many threats has he issued?

      You're right that the Administration (I can't bring myself to call it American) isn't to blame for everything but pure as the proverbial 'driven' it certainly is not.
      • 1stmushroombrew, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2i was referring to putin's motive. did we invade your country? is that why you're so pissed off?
        • gotamd, on 10/10/2007, -1/+2We've invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, and have military bases all over the world. No other country can say the same. That is not a defensive position. That is an imperialistic position. Sure, Putin's also stretching his wings, but you can't say that it's completely unprovoked.
          • trovoltex, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1US, you are not making allies in the rest of the world. US has approval only from it's puppets, small countries (or their governments only).
          • Mesmorize, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Yeah it is. The Russians have gotten so used to measuring their worth by contradicting the US that they don't know when to stop.
          • 1stmushroombrew, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0thats fine. i'm not trying to win hearts and minds. i just wanted to let the world know how a lot of americans feel. damned if we do, damned if we don't. if we had stayed out of iraq and afghanistan and not built the bases and not helped liberate europe...twice...then we'd be critized for not helping those in need. we cant win, so we don't care.
          • Yokwe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Russia is not threatened by our military might they are more threatened by their own standing on the political stage. They want to be E.F. Hutton again.
          • Auscifer, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1And yet the governments of those countries, not in turmoil, where we have bases actually _want_ us there. I recently read an article about Japan's government asking the US to scale down the Marines base in Okinawa, and we did, along with being responsible about erasing the footprint.
      • Yokwe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1In the grand scheme of things historically speaking how many countries has the US invaded and held onto for any amount of time? The French in the Congo, English colonialism, USSR with Eastern Europe......etc

        Not to say the US is perfect they are far from it but I hate how people point fingers when their own sordid past reeks of the same stench and in many cases put anything going on today to shame.

        so my point is.... Glass Houses
    • 1stmushroombrew, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1again....putins actions were provoked by a missile defense system put in place. thats it. not the middle east...not air bases... bush took a defensive move, putin took an offensive one. thats all i'm trying to say. you're saying that putins mistakes are okay because the us also makes mistakes. a mistake is a mistake. i don't claim that everything we do is perfect, but the world always sees what we do as wrong. when that happens, we stop caring what you think.
  • SteelChicken, on 10/10/2007, -7/+6I think a little more strategic balance to US dominance is actually not a bad thing IMHO, and im an American.
    • warnergt, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5Why would you need to counterbalance a free democracy?
      • Radan, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2You know, the definition of "free democracy" went all to hell the second the first allied soldier entered Iraq.
        • Mesmorize, on 10/10/2007, -2/+1No it didn't. Wars have to be ratified by the congress.
        • Radan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1So you are saying that the governmental system that the U.S forced upon Iraq, even though the actual people has had no experience of any kind of democracy before, and that it has taken over two thousand years for the west to achieve a somewhat democracy like system, all this which has lead to absolutely nothing as it's still the same freaking bastards who has the power now as then, simply because the people has no idea whatsoever what a democracy is, more than they have had it unwillingly forced upon them by an outside government; you still really think about that as a so called "free democracy?"

          You can't force democracy on people! It contradicts the mere basics of the freaking system. Democracy won't get fully implemented just by snapping your fingers. If ever, it might take fifty or maybe a couple of hundred years before you can even think about calling it something that may look like a democracy.

          Just my two bloody cents.
      • kazamx, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2LOL your not free or a democracy. Your a republic that votes. As for being free, your Media is owned by a few big money men, while the government doesn't control all the information given to you, these few big men do.
        • 1stmushroombrew, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1a big money man owns digg? this is news by the people for the people for a more unbiased viewpoint. freedom is relative too. the us, and indeed, most of the world IS free...to a reasonable extent.
        • Yokwe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1What county has popular media that is not controlled either by the Govt' or rich men? People assume all news comes from the NY Times when in fact that is not the case anymore. information has never been as accessible as it is now.
  • Piedramente, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1now if only he could revive my lunch
  • Albionshores, on 10/10/2007, -6/+5The US Administration constructed and sold a terrorist threat to justify bumping up defense budget spending, withholding human rights and ushering in an authoritarian regime based on a corporate congress. At the opposite end of the authoritarian spectrum Russia has used the new beefed up Fascist threat of the Corporate US' warmongering to justify a return to its old authoritarian and equally militant ways.

    Russians and Americans have a lot in common; neither government has their best interests at heart.
  • TomRitchford, on 10/10/2007, -6/+5It's going to take us 50 years to recover from the damage caused by the first few years of this century -- if we ever do.
  • warnergt, on 10/10/2007, -5/+9Putin needs to sit back and relax with a hot, steaming cup of Polonium.
  • strm, on 10/10/2007, -7/+5Putin is doing the correct thing for Russia as a country, he's bringing it back to its feet so that the rest of the world once again listens to what Russia has to say about world issues instead of it being like the Iraq war thing 4 years ago when France and Russia clearly said, "No you're not doing that", and US just went ahead.
    • cygnus2112, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Putin is being a right royal putz. At least he's making a real effort in making the whole world despise him more than they despise America atm.
      • Yokwe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1You do bring up a point. If he successfully brings back the old regime the US would be seen more favorable, as bad as the US might be to some countries many still remember the days of the USSR.
        • kero552, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Like some people in the Czech Republic (small country, US radar could be here).
          During August 21, 1968 there was a "friendly" invasion from out "allies", and back to tough communism. Putin had a nice speechon 21 August , not exactly the most well recieved thing here.
  • xSEED, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1cold war 2 begin
  • BossKey, on 10/10/2007, -2/+0One of the reasons Russia can get away with this is because of the way we let our military get overextended and worn out. Everyone knows we're not in top form right now and the bulk of our army is tied up and burned out, far from home shores.
    • cygnus2112, on 10/10/2007, -0/+21.4 million active personnel, 860,000 reserved... 150,000 in Iraq. 20,000 in Afghanistan. Yeah, overextended. I love that math.
    • Yokwe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Over extension has nothing to do with their build up. A war with Russia even now would not be conventional, there would be very few troops on the ground

      The build up is more Political/World clout than anything. They want more of it and see what they do have going away. Countries are not as afraid of them as they use to be.

      If they build up the break away republics will be in a panic, Russia can step right back in and take over and no one will intercede.
  • gotamd, on 10/10/2007, -4/+4Sounds like Putin longs for the long-lost days of communist statism. Of course, it's not as though the US can say it hasn't been imperialistic recently. We should pull our troops out of other countries and return to defending America, not screwing up other countries.
  • Veretax, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3interesting article....Read somewhere that he (Putin) said that after the claim of the north pole, that they would focus their efforts south. (Mid East is directly south of Moscow, especially Israel) so get out your bomb shelteres WW IV is coming!
    • cygnus2112, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Ahhh man, did I sleep through WW III? I need to stop drinking Jack and Coke.
    • Palmetto, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Did we skip III?
  • annenk38, on 10/10/2007, -1/+1It's all talk. Too much focus on quantity. Superior numbers in manpower and armaments did not prevent Barbarossa blitzkrieg from succeeding. Adequate training and equipment maintenance is just as essential. The Russians have made amazing progress in advanced radar technology which takes away our stealth advantage, but did nothing to implement it on a national level. Building more advanced aircraft (most of which will be sold to India and China anyway), will add nothing to the country's overall military strength.
  • mcfly83, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Finally those capitalist pigs will pay for their crimes, eh comrades?
  • jedikv, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2I missed the cold war first time round - Can't wait to see what all the hub-bub was all about.

    Maybe Rocky VII (Drago Re-match) and David Hasselhoff can stop it again.
    • Yokwe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Ohh good point Rambo errr 6? what ever it was up to when it went away
    • maz2331, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Nah, you don't want to see it again.
  • dima7b, on 10/10/2007, -0/+4From my Eussian views...

    great, putin's a retard and this is like hitlers rise to power where he dupes everyone into believing in him and giving them false hope. oh boy. glad I'm not there.
  • charman2k6, on 10/10/2007, -2/+2I am so tired of Russia's antics. When will they figure out nobody cares about them.
    • LordSlashstab55, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0once they have no oil left. Which will happen a lot longer than expected with new found arctic supply.
    • Yokwe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0That is why they are flexing they have lost much of their clout.
  • leerayIG88, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Cold war 2??? More like WW3. :-P I'm game.
  • cygnus2112, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2Cold War, Part Deux. For the Motherland, Comrade Putin! Don't you give me the evil eye, yankeebluejeans, or I shall assassinate you with radioactive and toxic poisons!
  • lead2thehead, on 10/10/2007, -0/+2WOLVERIIIIIIINES!!!
  • PacketScan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+3Hmm war for NorthPole oil?.. Damn SAD
  • Palmetto, on 10/10/2007, -3/+3Bush was stupid to piss Russia off by saying we would put missiles in their back yard in former easter-bloc nation.

    Idiots.
    • cygnus2112, on 10/10/2007, -1/+3Why not? It's not like Georgia, Yugoslavia, etc doesn't have a basic right to defend themselves. They can use whatever they want to.
    • Yokwe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0The missile defense ring is just an excuse.
  • TetchyTony, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0Putin's giving the Russians back some self-respect, and they sure needed it. They'd be more dangerous as a criminalised failed state than as a civilized but rather tough one. There's lots to learn from Russia if they can get their act together. Good if Ukraine were to make similar progress some day.
  • Jalh, on 10/10/2007, -4/+0talking ***** about russia and the actual president in comparaison with the USA's president or government is be stupid person or too patriotic because we all know that USA is more dangerous than russia...... before talk about putin we should talk about bush and another nations that do worse things.
    • Yokwe, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Pick up a history book on the former Communist Party. The US is not perfect but next to Russia they are downright immaculate.
  • BabyWookie, on 10/10/2007, -2/+5No big story here. Russia is a big country with big natural resources and has been the victim of massive invasions from East and West many times throughout its history. They need to have a decent defense capability. In the 1990's, their economy completely collapsed down to the level of most "Third World" countries. While the NATO Alliance continued to expand its sphere of influence and surround the Federation, undermining its geo-political influence and alliance, the Russian military capabilities had declined to dangerously low levels. They were just barely able to amass a semi-coherent frighting force for a relatively small-scale invasion of Chechnya.

    In 1999, their economy began to recover and continues to do so at an impressive rate. It's one of the Big Three emerging economies, along with China and India, and is currently the 8th largest in the world. They can finally afford to rebuild their military to the necessary levels.

    There is nothing malicious, concerning or unusual here - just a great, culturally-rich, influential nation getting back on its feet after 80 years of being brutally ravaged by an international cabal of Bolsheviks, Fascist Axis invaders and then, gangster oligarchs and their Western partners.

    Contrary to the popular opinion, the Russian people are extremely sick and tired of war and strife. They just want some peace, stability and bread on their tables, but like the old saying goes: "Those who come to Russia with a sword, always die by the sword." It has been a constant throughout millenia and so, all those thinking that it will be a good idea to attack Russia, better remember that.
    • jamyz, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1When Russia is a thousand years old it would have been a constant "throughout millenia", until then its just like the rest of your *****... Why don't you live in Russia, patriot?
  • musntSurfatWork, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0In Soviet Russia, Missiles SHIELD YOU! spaciba, spaciba. Down the hatch, sto lat!
  • ezstan, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0Lol...I wish I could move to another planet.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 52 of 52 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.