digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

Putin Threatens to Target Europe with Missiles

theglobeandmail.com — In an interview with the Globe and Mail, Russian President Vladimir Putin has threatened to target Europe with missiles, including potentially nuclear weapons, in a dramatic escalation of his Cold War-style showdown with the United States.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • gherikill, on 10/11/2007, -378/+46Now all of the whiney Europeans will come running to Bush for protection.
    • onionizer, on 10/11/2007, -256/+104No, we will destroy all US bases in Europe and kick your ass back in your country. If u.s. dosen't stop sending troops , making base, installing missiles in the rest of the world for no reason but to feed its military industry, destabilizing the international political balance, sooner or later they'll surely have to pay the consequences.
    • atdigg, on 10/11/2007, -43/+247you are both idiots
    • smackywentz, on 10/11/2007, -70/+162I'd say onionizer is right. The U.S. has been violating S.O.F.A. agreements throughout Europe and other parts of the world for some time now. Those S.O.F.A. agreements by the way are heavily favorable for the U.S. and really gives the occupied country no power. We have been clearly taking advantage of their hospitality, consent or not, and most Europeans are getting ***** tired of it. You know why we wanted Iraq? Not just oil, a base. Saudi Arabia got tired of us and got us the hell out of their country. Germany is literally waiting for us to ***** up one more time so they can get us the ***** out of their country. We've been there since WWII.
    • nixonrichard, on 10/11/2007, -168/+43"No, we will destroy all US bases in Europe and kick your ass back in your country."

      Would you have preferred to write that comment in German? Admit it, we saved your asses!
    • N4KMM, on 10/11/2007, -34/+83@ Gherikill You sir, are a moron.
    • joeconway, on 10/11/2007, -72/+25@nixonrichard

      fu.
    • cruzlee, on 10/11/2007, -10/+288Could somebody tell me why this world seems to be governed by ***** RETARDS!!??
    • BeefBaron, on 10/11/2007, -14/+161@cruzlee
      Because only rich bastards get on the ballots, and rich bastards dont give a ***** about us non-rich normal people.
    • kingkilr, on 10/11/2007, -14/+70I hardly think they don't care about people because they are rich, they are just bastards.
    • EmileVictor, on 10/11/2007, -18/+10At least they're not inbreeding like they used to...
    • Inferny, on 10/11/2007, -22/+6No need to run to Bush, just carpet bomb them with vodka, it will all be fine. Besides, if he does launch nukes, ummmm...well... everyone's f**ked then.
    • Pixelante, on 10/11/2007, -49/+17@onionizer: "No, we will destroy all US bases in Europe and kick your ass back in your country."

      ROTFL. Please try, we'd like a few good laughs.
    • HBNDonut, on 10/11/2007, -19/+51What a total wuss! A real man wouldn't hide behind missiles! He would walk up to all those millions of people and challenge them to a good ol' fashioned bout of fisty cuffs.
    • DarthMalcontent, on 10/11/2007, -9/+118I don't think anything huge is going to come out of this. Putin sees the U.S. putting anti-missile systems -- that he knows wouldn't even put a dent in the damage Russia's nuclear arsenal would do to U.S. or European targets -- in his back yard. He can't have the U.S. looking like it's trying to protect Europe from anyone, whether it's him or Iran or North Korea -- whose eventual nuclear arsenals this kind of defense system *would* have a chance of stopping (if and when Iran has nuclear missiles, they won't launch a thousand at a time, as Russia can, they'll launch one or two or half a dozen, that an anti-missile system, if it works, can shoot down). So he makes big threats about aiming at European targets. Well in this day and age, a missile can be re-targeted in a matter of minutes. Missile submarines and other mobile missile systems, for example, have to do it immediately before launch because they're constantly on the move. Where a missile is pointed now doesn't mean that's where it's going.

      It's all just a big prick-waving dick fight.
    • KyleGoetz, on 10/11/2007, -9/+89@hbndonut: I don't think Putin is a wuss. I'm not sure if you were baiting the informed on Digg, but Putin is a 6th degree black belt in judo (even famous for his skill) and is ex-KGB. You can't get to be less of a wuss than Putin is.
    • zKman, on 10/11/2007, -9/+65"Putin also suggested that in the absence of a real threat from Iranian and North Korean missiles, the U.S. plan could be an attempt to spoil Russia's relations with Europe."

      And aiming nuclear missiles at Europe doesn't? Or cutting off natural gas supplies? Or killing ex-spies on European soil? Or DDoSing an entire European nation?

      Seriously, any missile defense system won't stop Russian multiple-warhead ICBMs anyway. Who are they kidding?
    • johnwc723, on 10/11/2007, -3/+50pretty much sums it up
      http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/end.php
    • joeroot1, on 10/11/2007, -50/+44this is why the majority of europe hates americans. you go round the world swinging your dicks around and attacking countries unjustifiably, and because of it, you drop your allies in the *****, whilst you lot don't have to worry about any attacks on your own country, because your all the way round the globe from us. its europe whose going to get done over because all of this, while you all sit nice and cosy in your beds.
    • Osjpr, on 10/11/2007, -26/+45Perhaps Russia should set up bases all around the US and see how many of you start bleating in fear. As soon as Putin opens his mouth people on digg start to quake in terror as if Russia is the one building bases all over the world, when in fact it's the US.
    • Osjpr, on 10/11/2007, -12/+68@joeroot1: Europeans are the ones granting permission for these bases to be built and renditions to take place in their countries. You should be questioning your political leaders rather than blaming the US for everything.
    • EmailAddress, on 10/11/2007, -9/+17The US missile base in EU is like putting the foot in the door. If you put your foot in the door, then getting in will be easy. After the anti-missile base(using missiles to hit missiles) is installed(if it is installed), they could 'upgrade' the site to one which uses lasers to hit missiles. So as Russian missiles are going up, they can be shot down by a laser system.

      Cuban missile crisis meets the Poland/Czech missile crisis...
    • roosterjm2k2, on 10/11/2007, -4/+30FTA: "He also lashes out at NATO and insists he's world's only true democrat."

      I read a nice little quote one day, and it applies here more than ever... A true democracy is a very BAD thing, indeed.

      "A true democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to have for dinner."
    • donveto, on 10/11/2007, -18/+39ALL YOUR BASES ARE BELONG TO US
    • ganjadude4391, on 10/11/2007, -13/+4Real simple solution that would make us look like the good guys AND get our missles. We like to police the world, we should at least try and make it look good for once. Tell the world that these anti missle devices are not just to protect the U.S from a nuke, but rather it will be designed to stop any nuke sent off in that area of the world.

      In theory we could probably get away with putting one up in many more places.

      We could probably even charge the countries we put them in for the services and try and get out of debt.

      but what do I know
    • joeroot1, on 10/11/2007, -11/+26@Osjpr - if you look at the countries in which you are setting up the missiles, they are all ex soviet-bloc countries, who are still in comparions to the rest of europe incredibly poor. Their leaders have been pretty much forced into a corner over this, as turning money down is implausible for them, hence in effect America are just manipulating the poor with your excessive wealth.
    • Pseudorious, on 10/11/2007, -8/+25Kids, kids kids. Calm down. This is standard Russian rhetoric. Being perceived as powerful is the goal abroad, hence the interview with the Globe and Mail. If you are truly interested in the subject, two recent graduates of Harvard's Davis Institute for Russian Studies run a blog translating and analyzing Russian political speeches in the press. They have some material directly dealing with this controversy, and I'd read them now before they get their job offers from the CIA and have to close shop.

      http://notesfromrussia.wordpress.com

      Also, Poland and the Czech Republic are democracies who can make their own choices. They are not the poor, stupid nations being portrayed here, can make free agreements with America, Russia, or other EU nations as they see fit, and they do not need any outside management.
    • EatingPie, on 10/11/2007, -4/+29"Missile submarines and other mobile missile systems, for example, have to do it immediately before launch because they're constantly on the move. Where a missile is pointed now doesn't mean that's where it's going."

      Just an FYI. The Russian Nuclear aresenal is currently aimed into the ocean (which, I don't know). To me, this was the true end to the cold war -- they re-targeted AWAY from American cities, and into the sea -- but very few people know about it because it was the day after Nancy Kerigan was attacked and had her knees beaten. Kerrigan got front page, lead coverage, and overshadowed the re-targeting of Russia's missiles.

      Just in case you're wondering which newspaper to buy, the Chicago Tribune and New York Times were the only ones that lead with the Nuclear Missiles, and not Kerrigan (I did a survey of about 20, incuding the Los Angeles Times and Miami Herald). Sadly, the New York Times has become so anti-Bush, it's effected their ability to report accurately and truthfully. They can be biased all they want -- every news source is -- but when they it effects accuracy of what they report, they've crossed an ethical line. (I subscribed for 12 years.)

      -Pie
    • EatingPie, on 10/11/2007, -19/+36"this is why the majority of europe hates americans. you go round the world swinging your dicks around and attacking countries unjustifiably,"

      Wait a sec. Last I checked, Putin was a RUSSIAN, not an American. He's the one doing the swinging, and yet you blame... America? It's our fault? Not the fault that he's a megalomaniacal dictator (or "near-dictator" as the article states). And you get positive diggs -- reflecting that we base decisions on emotion rather than logic and truth.

      -Pie
    • EatingPie, on 10/11/2007, -14/+20Last one, sorry.

      "We have been clearly taking advantage of their hospitality, consent or not, and most Europeans are getting ***** tired of it. You know why we wanted Iraq? Not just oil, a base. Saudi Arabia got tired of us and got us the hell out of their country. Germany is literally waiting for us to ***** up one more time so they can get us the ***** out of their country. We've been there since WWII."

      You want to cite some sources for this? For example, what news source or speech EVER stated -- or accused -- that Iraq was about having a base? And the base in Germany? It's hugely important to the US. Have their been protestest to get it out of Germany? If you were citing a base in Japan --- one where a soldier raped a local woman --- THAT caused "get out" protests. But in Germany? No.

      Think, people. THINK! QUESTION! Don't just take comments at face value because you agree with them at an emotional level.

      -Pie
    • kuzotz, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8@joeroot1

      yes lets forget how close Russia is to Alaska..
    • thomH, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8@Gherikill, Europeans will be whining for that farce of a president?! Haha!

      You my friend are a complete fool.
    • yournightmare, on 10/11/2007, -12/+19@ EatingPie:

      "And the base in Germany? It's hugely important to the US. Have their been protestest to get it out of Germany? If you were citing a base in Japan --- one where a soldier raped a local woman --- THAT caused "get out" protests. But in Germany? No."

      --First of all, there are US BASES in Germany, not a base.

      Second of all I used to live in Germany, and I can tell you from firsthand experience that there are a LOT of Germans who don't want the US in their country.

      Lastly, they protest US bases FREQUENTLY.

      "Wait a sec. Last I checked, Putin was a RUSSIAN, not an American. He's the one doing the swinging, and yet you blame... America? It's our fault? Not the fault that he's a megalomaniacal dictator (or "near-dictator" as the article states). And you get positive diggs -- reflecting that we base decisions on emotion rather than logic and truth."

      --Yes, he got dugg up. It's because the US has been occupying parts of Europe for over half a century now. Last I checked, Russia gave up on their occupation of much of Europe. And now the US is moving in to occupy the countries Russia moved out of. But it's all Russia's fault, right? You know nothing of logic or truth.
    • stonewaljacksn, on 10/11/2007, -11/+9How bout you cockbags quit your stereotypical America bashing and realize that Vladimir Putin is a ***** truly evil person. He is way more dangerous than Saddam was, way more dangerous than Bin Laden was, and we let him do whatever the ***** he wants.
      I understand that America does some ***** up *****, and I'm well aware they do, but you people here can be such douches when you see a headline like this and AUTOMATICALLY turn it against America. This is why ***** conservatives can get away with sayin liberals hate america, because you find it hard to not talk bad about, or god forbid complement, your country.
    • joeydoo, on 10/11/2007, -6/+7@nixonrichard

      Would have preferred not to make that comment at all?.... We started your country and thus constitute the majority of your population.
      Ever wonder why you are white??? (I'm gonna take a leap and presume white ;) That's because you are from Europe.
      Xenophobic idiot.
    • AlfaSub, on 10/11/2007, -9/+10I'm getting ***** sick of all this talk of occupation. Occupation is what happens when an army TAKES OVER a country. It's what Hitler did in France, what Russia did in Afghanistan, and what the US is doing right now in Iraq. It IS NOT what happens when an army puts a base in a country WITH THE CONSENT of their government FOR PROTECTION AGAINST ANOTHER POWER (like one that threatens them with nukes). Poland and the Czech Republic, who like the idea of ANTI-MISSILE bases in their country, have no objection to the US putting such bases in their territory (after all, what does it cost them, and what do they gain?). If you don't like US bases in your country, fine. Vote for someone who will kick 'em out. But be aware that there are few politicians who will do so because unthinking anti-US sentiment is rare at such a high level of power, and that kind of sentiment is the only kind that does not recognize the value of these bases. For god's sake, it's like a free army to defend you if someone attacks. How the ***** do you have a problem with that? Do you not understand the concept of an alliance?

      Seriously, if you get the time, come up with a pro/con list. I think it will look something like this:
      PROS: improved national security
      CONS: I hate America
    • cjswerve, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3@Pixelante (#7008780)
      "a few good laughs" translates into a few million dead innocent people for the non-moron's reading this... Get your head out of your ass with comments like this.
    • MichaelBradley, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Anyone else notice this story is getting like virtually no coverage. It's being overshadowed by that fool with TB and the Demo debates.

      Apparently the fact that Russia is threatening us with military action is not big news?
    • djAnakin, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8You guys obviously don't realize there is a difference in offensive weapons, and defensive weapons. The US is wanting to deploy defensive weapons to shoot down rogue state's [North Korea, Iran, Syria, etc] [nuclear] missiles. Putin is being a typical dinosaur communist, thinking the world is out to get Russia. This is why the USSR failed. No one cares about Russia. Communism failed because that's what happens to communism. You cannot supress people like that.
    • DildoOreilly, on 10/11/2007, -7/+3WORLD LAUGHS @ USA

      The pending defeat of the U.S. military in Iraq and the embarrassing failures of the g.w. bush administration have set off a chain of events around the world.The world laughs and no longer fears the USA..just look at europe's attitude when bush crawls back and begs for help, they brush him off like nothing.North korea does the same, the say "screw you, we will do as we please" adn are now building nukes.The latest news is that Russia and Iran have signed a deal over nuclear fuel....thats basically both countries simultaneously saying " screw you" to bush and his crooked administration. Sooner or later, all of this will catch up to the USA, no empire lasts forever. Bush sheep, YOU are the laughing stock of the ENTIRE world...it was all so obvious right under your noses, yet your blind ignorance brought down the worlds sole super power....you are not only the laughing stock now but will be the laughing stock in history books for centuries to come. Future historians will ponder how this was so....and every text book will show that chimp face with that evil, snobby grin on it....future pupils will nod their head in disbelief and pity.
    • EatingPie, on 10/11/2007, -1/+14"Yes, he got dugg up. It's because the US has been occupying parts of Europe for over half a century now. Last I checked, Russia gave up on their occupation of much of Europe. And now the US is moving in to occupy the countries Russia moved out of. But it's all Russia's fault, right? You know nothing of logic or truth."

      Heh. I like that last line, very funny. :p

      Reason requires correct use of our language of choice -- English in this case. US is *occupying* European countries? Name one. Please, just one, where we have troops there by *force.*

      You see, I have some knowledge of history. Take Poland for example. It was completely *occupied* prior to WWI, to the point that it didn't techically exist. Russia, Germany and Austria-Hungary divided Poland in three parts, and occupied. On the Russian side, they made Polish folk songs illegal, Polish history illegal and Polish the language illegal (I'd have to double-check that last, but IIRC it was illegal to teach Polish). Illegal in this case meant, you were killed by your Russian occupiers if you were caught. Killed. No trial, no nothing.

      Fortunately, Austria-Hungary was much more lenient. Though it was illegal to teach folk songs and history, it wasn't enforced. But they were still a puppet government, as all three other regions.

      We could also talk about Catherine the Great, who had the whole of the Polish parliament shot dead so she could install her own puppet leader prior to occupation.

      You are twisting the term "occupation" well past the point of breaking. Occupation is not fun stuff at all. And it's a FAR CRY from anything the US is doing in Europe. We are not an occupying force in any European country. And military bases -- allowed by each country's government -- does not an occupation make. Period.

      -Pie
    • smackywentz, on 10/11/2007, -5/+5@eatingpie

      Ask and ye shall receive...
      Ramstein Air Base (the largest military installation outside the U.S.) is located in a rural relatively underdeveloped part of southwestern Germany, adjacent to the small town of Kaiserslautern, known to linguistically challenged GI's as "K-town."
      -Holmes, "Bases of Empire," page 9

      The U.S. still has 480 nuclear warheads in Europe, 130 of them deployed at Ramstein. Three of Germany's center-left parties deeply oppose this.
      -Judy Dempsey, "U.S. Rejects German Calls to Withdraw Nuclear Weapons," New York Times, May 3, 2005

      In 2005, Oskar Lafontaine, former chairman of the Social Democratic Party and one of Germany's most charismatic politicians, said, "We are not a sovereign country; as long as the U.S. can operate from here, we are a participant in the Iraq War." (A war most German's oppose.)
      -Bertrand Benoit, "U.S. Bases Undermine Sovereignty, Says Lafontaine," Financial Times, August 29, 2005

      A few others that I did not feel like typing out...

      -Joshua Hammer, "Digging In: If the U.S. Government Doesn't Plan to Occupy Iraq for Any Longer than Necessary, Why Is It Spending Billions of Dollars to Build 'Enduring' Bases?" Mother Jones, March-April 2005.

      -Karen Kwiatkowski, "Our Inscrutable Iraq Policy: Why We Did It, What to Do Now, and What Happens Next," LewRockwell.com, October 24, 2005, page 3

      -Sam Graham-Felsen, "Operation: Enduring Presence," AlterNEt, July 28, 2005, http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/23755.

      -Eric Schmidt, "Pentagon Construction Boom Beefs Up Mideast Air Bases," New York Times, September 18, 2005

      And here is a reading list....

      -Chalmers Johnson, "The Blowback Trilogy"

      -Holmes, "Bases of Empire"

      - Hammer, "Digging In"

      You are welcome
      -My name is at the top
    • mdhauke, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7@smackywentz

      Are you kidding me, are you really that ignorant? Germany practically had a heart attacked when we tried to close some of the bases here during the last round of base closers. The bases are a big boosts to their local economies. Trust me, the only people who want the U.S. bases to close in Germany, and most of Europe for that matter, are the left winged radicals.
    • tehpwnrate, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Putin is confused. As are most of you.

      Anti-missile system =/= aggressive missile system
    • xsuite, on 10/11/2007, -7/+6I for one welcome our new soviet overlords.
    • smackywentz, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Hey buddy I realize that a U.S. base is great for local economies surrounding it, but the same people that want them to stay, also want them to leave. It is a love/hate relationship, too bad the hate side includes the entire country instead of just the local communities surrounding the bases. They hate that we fly in and out day and night. (violation of SOFA) Our men are above the law over there. (Our extremely one-sided SOFAs) We pollute streams and the local environments. (violation) And the reasons I stated above as well. There are two sides to every story, before you claim my ignorance try looking at both.

      Also Putin is doing this because Bush under the influence of the 2001 Rumsfeld space commission abandoned the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. This is a likely response, whether it has any merit or not.
    • kaelyiesta, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6joeroot1,

      "this is why the majority of europe hates americans. you go round the world swinging your dicks around and attacking countries unjustifiably, and because of it, you drop your allies in the *****, whilst you lot don't have to worry about any attacks on your own country, because your all the way round the globe from us. its europe whose going to get done over because all of this, while you all sit nice and cosy in your beds."

      This is why I hate you: You think I am complicit or somehow endorse those actions you describe. ***** you and your poor grasp of reality. ***** your willingness to forgo thinking about who makes those decisions you describe and simply believe that all americans are evil imperialists. Thankfully I am able to understand that you europeans aren't all the same. Instead of assuming everyone else is like you, I realize that you are (hopefully) a minority. I imagine most europeans are more intelligent and not assumptious hatemongers.
    • sleepykit, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Why are our political leaders completely insane, the lot of them? Hasn't there been enough war? Why the heck do we have to live with the same threat of mutual destruction on account of a handful of morons some of whom were not even elected to govern us...

      *grr*
    • Jagdwulfe, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4You know what is funny is Germany is pissed we are moving our bases further East into Poland and Czech Republic. We pull out it will hurt their economy no matter what the people here on Digg might say. That being said I love how no one is calling Russia on this. Instead they bash the Chimp in Chief. That is like arresting a rape victim and ignoring her attacker.
    • RubyTuesday, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3@nixonrichard
      "Would you have preferred to write that comment in German? Admit it, we saved your asses!"

      Newsflash - The U.S. was the Johny Come Lately of WWII. They would have preferred to have continued to sell arms to both sides.

      You came late to the war.

      You did help.

      If you hadn't participated the war would have been longer but the outcome would have been the same.

      The war would have been shorter had your country not been selling arms to both sides, making a tidy profit.

      Get over yourself. No one believes your rhetoric but you.
    • Kelgann, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1In Soviet Russia, missiles target you!
    • smackywentz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1jagdwulfe

      I have already acknowledged that it will hurt Germanys economy if we leave, but to them the benefits outweigh the cost. I also told why people are blaming Bush, because he decided to abandon the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty so he could put in his drastically over-hyped and under-performing missile defense system. I know you will say but we are putting that in to defend ourselves against missile strikes from Rogue States. But they cannot shoot down a missile of any kind, they cannot differentiate between a fake missile and a real one either. There are three phases in which we could shoot down a missile, we have not been successful in any of them. The best anti-missile defense we had was that treaty, but Bush and his colleagues favor military spending, which why not, it is what our economy thrives upon, so they threw that treaty out. So yes, it is his fault.
    • snapcase, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1I actually agree with some of the points Putin made. Guess we will have to wait and see how this all plays out.
    • waxoff, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@smackywentz
      I remember back in the 80's when Reagan placed Pershing II missiles in Europe. A lot of Europeans didn't like that, but we were facing the Soviet's back then. The Iranian/North Korean threat seems minor in comparison, and the Europeans don't need us to defend them from it. More recently I haven't heard of any violations though. I'm not doubting your call that we are currently violating S.O.F.A. agreements in Europe, but do you have any specific examples? I'd like to know exactly which agreements have been broken and why. I'd also be curious about the host countries reactions to the specific examples.
    • asian1, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3The US missile shield system is a clear provocation against Russia. I'd respond the same way, if I was in Putin's shoes. There's no way that you can build that kind of system in the heart of Europe and innocently claim that it's not intended to be used against Moscow. That's like boarding a plane with your arms full of guns, and claiming your on your way to an NRA convention. Sorry, but no dice.
  • gherikill, on 10/11/2007, -62/+19Are you saying you would rather have a Russia backed Europe than a US backed Europe?
    • onionizer, on 10/11/2007, -10/+74I'd say that I wouldn't have the need to be backed by anyone.
    • nixonrichard, on 10/11/2007, -83/+12"I'd say that I wouldn't have the need to be backed by anyone."

      Are you from Switzerland? I think someone's from Switzerland.

      Or the Netherlands? Admit it you Dutch bastard!
    • airwalkery2k, on 10/11/2007, -3/+37@nixonrichard

      His profile says Italy.
    • nixonrichard, on 10/11/2007, -59/+15Italy? Yeah, probably doesn't need to be backed by anyone. Who would want to invade Italy? Until the world runs out of SmartCars and "Ciao Bella" t-shirts I think Italy is safe.
    • onionizer, on 10/11/2007, -11/+52@nixonrichard: Good, we'll send you a bunch of t-shirts, now get out of my county.
    • fwedwic, on 10/11/2007, -17/+3nixonrichard-

      im from Switzerland and im also from the US, Itialian huh? dont come to either of mine if your country gets annihilated!

      f'ingswissmexican! haha i love it
    • comradeTJH, on 10/11/2007, -2/+45Well I'm Swiss as well, and I don't think anyone (no matter from where) wants to attack its own savings... :)
    • 0crabby0, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Actually the Italians, had NATO IRBM's installed in Italy from 1960 to 1963.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jupiter_%28missile%29


      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Jupiter_Deployment_Italy.jpg

      The NATO deployment of missiles in Poland is merely temporary.


      And just as it was in Italy, the missile deployment is with Poland's full consent.


    • AirRaven, on 10/11/2007, -1/+17How about a pan-European Alliance that stands upon its own two feet?

      The EU has a greater population than the USA and Russia. The EU already has nuclear weapons aplenty. The EU has one of the largest economies in the world.

      Since when have we needed American/Russian backing to survive in the Post-Cold War Era?

      Unless an EU-Russia War escalated to the point of nuclear arsenals being brought into play, the (Western) EU could hold its own reasonably well without American Backing.

      Granted, we'd run screaming to the USA begging them to uphold their obligations as a part of NATO. But we wouldn't be doomed even if they pulled out.
      Of course, that's assuming that nukes *don't* come into play. In that case, Russia'd be able to reduce the overwhelming majority of Western Europe to an uninhabitable wasteland in a matter of days.
    • lesosso, on 10/11/2007, -6/+14If it was not for the Soviets we would have lost second world war!!!!
    • Optimaximal, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6nixonrichard, SmartCars are from Germany :)
    • miles32, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1place holder sorry like to be able to read comments that i reply too
    • miles32, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Damm timer ran out on me
      Lesosso has a point the Russians did most of the work in the european theater

      AirRaven I dont believe a true EU is possible given the differences in cultures and political systems in europe.
      (if your talking about 1 government for europe)
    • AirRaven, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2@miles32:

      I'm not talking about a federal Europe, no- hence why I referred to it as an "Alliance".

      Who's to say a confederation of sovereign states wouldn't work just as well as a federal Europe in a war, provided that there's a central Military Command structure ready to step up to the scenario?
    • thefaithful, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Are you talking about yet another bureaucracy on top of the existing European Union?
    • kuzotz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1smartcars are from Germany.

      I loved Germany.......... Anyway I'm glad I've been there... I'm glad I've been to Amsterdam..
  • ATHEISTinHELL, on 10/11/2007, -5/+33Cold war baby. Looks like we getting our pre 9/11 paranoia back. I wonder if Bert the turtle will make a reappearance?
    • nixonrichard, on 10/11/2007, -6/+28It's good to see the old Russia is back. We missed you tovarisch!
    • Hoov, on 10/11/2007, -1/+39Hoorah for another campaign of fear mongering and manipulation!
    • xtmno3, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7@atheistinhell (#6999480)
      I can't wait to start seeing people do drills of nuclear bomb attacks in schools!
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wiI62AZTQw8

      [Fightclub]Look at them, calm as Hindu cows[/Fightclub]
    • Nightfall, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3Actually, this goes far beyond paranoia. I am convinced that some moron is going to launch a nuclear attack or carry a nuke in a backpack to some country very soon. Not that there is anything we can do to prevent that, and I am sure the media and our government will be happy to milk that for as much as they can. Still, its food for thought.
  • Bigzz, on 10/11/2007, -31/+10There is little chance of a new cold war due to Russia's poor economic state. Putin can yell and threaten all he wants but when its time to put his money where his mouth is he is going to find that the wallet is empty.
    • mwsherman, on 10/11/2007, -1/+55Not exactly. Russia's economy is seriously on track, they are still one of the richer countries in the world, and they control buttloads of oil and natural gas. And unlike the middle east, they are constantly finding new reserves in Russia and huge pieces remain almost entirely unexplored. They are certainly powerful enough that a war is, well, mutually assured destruction. Attempts to slightly alter the balance of this mutually assured destruction is all it takes for another "cold war" to start, albeit a slightly less isolationist one. And probably not as severe or polarizing as the first.

      The best thing the US and Europe can do to, 'stop', Russia is to invest in non-petroleum based energy. This is why America is looking into Ethanol. It's not better for the environment, it's better because we can make it ourselves. If the market for oil and natural gas disappeared, the vast flight of wealth from Russia would probably trigger another Revolution.
    • SonnyW, on 10/11/2007, -1/+17The problem is many people have an outdated view of Russia. They are quickly climbing the ranks of the richest and most aggressive world powers again.
    • atdigg, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3The word that we don't like is the above sentence is "aggressive" otherwise we don't have problems with Russia.
    • jcarrion1976, on 10/11/2007, -8/+16"There is little chance of a new cold war due to The United State's poor economic state. Bush can yell and threaten all he wants but when its time to put his money where his mouth is he is going to find that the wallet is empty."

      There... corrected that statement for you.

      Ironically the roles have been reversed and we (US) are now the socialist bankrupt empire with nothing but brute force for show and they are the democratic and growing economic powerhouse.

      The world will not stand by and continue to prop up the US dollar if we start a huge buildup like the cold war under Reagan. They will dump their US holdings and drive the dollar and our economy to oblivion.
    • lesosso, on 10/11/2007, -7/+5Better a cold war than having to try to make Iranians look as demons.
    • miles32, on 10/11/2007, -7/+5Carrion what the hell are you talking about. America is in debt ill give you that. But according to several major indicators such as the stock market business is booming. In no way is America even close to bankrupt.

      If we could just get a handle on all of these political pet projects like the bridge to nowhere we would be set.
    • Tempest811, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4@jcarrion
      Saying that the US and russia have switched roles economically is possibly the dumbest and most uninformed statement I have read in recent digg time. I spoke with three different people who have been to russia in the past couple years (two of which have actually worked with the russians) and they both said it is one of the most horrible countries they have even been to. It is in such bad disrepair that a lot of the roads are almost unusable. They are broke...and they lie and cheat about almost everything when it comes to foreign policy and contractors. Please spend some time there and come back with some realistic and informed insight on how that country is actually doing.

      The difference between the bullying of the russians and the bullying of the US is that the US tries to mask it under "spreading democracy"
    • r1y23, on 10/11/2007, -0/+0Is a buildup of arms really necessary? Hell we have stockpiled nuclear weapons up the ass and its not like we are gonna need more. Why do people not get the fact that if anyone anywhere launches missiles at US allies or the US this entire world is *****.....M.A.D. is still in effect
    • jcarrion1976, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@ tempest811

      Taking a snapshot in time and using that limited information to back up your reply is ignorant. You need to look at the overall economic trend that is happening in the US as well as in Russia.

      Bad area's in Russia? No *****. But the truth is that they are moving forward at a great pace (albeit not perfectly) and the US is sliding backward into a hell of a mess.

      Try reading to get your information instead of relying on hearsay from some "friend".

      http://sg.biz.yahoo.com/070525/3/48tq9.html
      http://www.russiablog.org/2007/03/russias_good_fortune_the_tax_r.php
      http://www.heritage.org/Press/Commentary/ed032403.cfm
      http://www.europesworld.org/EWSettings/Article/tabid/78/Default.aspx?Id=d19a2d32-518a-4617-b283-9668b604edab


  • BlackStar77, on 10/11/2007, -22/+4In Soviet Russia, cocaine is sugar!
  • cdemi, on 10/11/2007, -24/+17In Soviet Russia, missiles target europe‼
  • wreckosaurus, on 10/11/2007, -2/+80God I'll be happy when bush and putin are both gone.

    Also stop with the nationalistic *****. This isn't youtube.
  • allywilson, on 10/11/2007, -6/+50This whole Russia vs USA thing is pretty old to be honest. If the talk is Europe - then the EU itself is a lot stronger than either if it were to ever federalise. If the Russians want to aim missiles - let them. If the US wants to - let them. Do you really think Europe will let itself become a battleground again? If either launched a strike against each other and it was over Europe, don't you think the combined power of the EU would just neutralise both powers within its borders? Remember, both world wars were caused by issues within Europe - not between 2 super powers outside influencing. They were brought in as allies - to supplement the lack of money and manpower.

    Europe no longer has to ask for it.
    • JohnGalt01, on 10/11/2007, -33/+6@allywilson

      Are you kidding?

      Europe couldn't even get rid of Milošević on their own.
    • crote, on 10/11/2007, -3/+22@allywilson

      Seeing as the term was coined after WWII, there were no super powers involved in either world war. Even if you were to apply the term anachronistically, you would attribute it to Britain, the various central powers, and/or the Nazis, definitely not the US or Czarist/Soviet Russia.

      Plus, the Russians were involved in both wars from the very beginning, and the US was forced into the second war due to a hostile attack. The "brought in as allies - to supplement the lack of money and manpower" model only applies to US involvement in WWI, and even then only kinda sorta.

      Other than that, though, great post.
    • Nitesmoke420, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9yeah, russia vs usa is old, its so '80s
    • caution, on 10/11/2007, -15/+12EU? Neutralize opponents? With what? Sanctions? UN Resolutions?

      Go ahead and give the US and Russia a stern talking-to.
    • Arkavus, on 10/11/2007, -1/+9This isn't the elementary recess grounds. There's no "neutralizing" both powers. If the US and Russia went to war the majority of Europe would probably side with the US. The UK would definitely assist the USA, as we're both really good allies.
    • McHoffa, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2time for Red Dawn 2, and Spies Like Us 2....
    • Zique, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9@caution
      With the largest economy in the world, I'd say yeah, sanctions are a good place for EU to start.
  • funkmachine, on 10/11/2007, -14/+10Putin is just upset because there is no more work for him since they finished filming the Lord of the Rings. He played Gollum if I remember correctly.
    • funkmachine, on 10/11/2007, -5/+18Actually, it was Dobby from Harry Potter. I'm always mixing up my fantasy goblins.
    • Pixelante, on 10/11/2007, -5/+2Please don't mix up LOTR and HP. Gollum was played by Andy Serkis, who is a good actor. Putin is played by, huh, Dobby the House Elf's stunt double.
  • tdskate, on 10/11/2007, -4/+11Damnit, here we go again.
  • whaambulance, on 10/11/2007, -5/+8While I will be extremely happy when both Bush and Putin are gone from their respective offices. I have to say that after actually reading this interview it made me feel a bit better about Putin. Yes he may be a piece of trash for whatever reason, but it seems he at least made a bit of sense in regard to the whole escalation thing. And if you read all that he said this doesn't sound like a doomsday scenario. He just wants to maintain the MAD balance to keep Russia in the game.
  • seraph82, on 10/11/2007, -5/+21"During a lengthy dinner, Russia's President defended his semi-authoritarian style and insisted he is the world's only true democrat."

    Michael Moore and Putin should have a death match. The survivor gets to claim that title.
    • Tarnum, on 10/11/2007, -8/+5"During a lengthy dinner" should be decoded as "He tried to entertain his guests with jokes, but he was pretty drunk already".
  • tizz66, on 10/11/2007, -3/+40I have a proposal. All of us normal people go and live somewhere, and let all these idiots running our countries live somewhere else. They can do what they want to each other, and the rest of us will just get on with our lives on our piece of land. Deal?
    • comradeTJH, on 10/11/2007, -1/+15Deal!
    • AICkieran, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1How about a world wide revolution, then we can line 'em up.

      Mutually assured destruction, indeed, bitches.
    • sirdaz, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10Lets buy sealand!
    • numb, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Time to open the Fletcher Memorial Home for Incurable Tyrants.
    • kuzotz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1Havanna, Cuba has a great chinatown..


      but yea we can live in oceania until things blow over...
    • rendereduseless, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1i think it will have to be on a different planet because if its not you know they would be right on our door step
  • jellygraph, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3I don't see whats so shocking about this. Given the circumstances he pointed out, it seems reasonable for them to be thinking along those lines.

    That still doesn't mean I don't think Putin is a flaming idiot for many other reasons, but I see nothing odd about this news story...

    except, that they forgot that Russia did threaten to point their nuclear missles at targets in europe during the war in yugoslavia... how did they forget that? i remember it quite clearly.
  • cosmikdebris, on 10/11/2007, -1/+13Russia and Central Asian Allies Conduct War Games in Response to US Threats - August 24, 2006

    Barely acknowledged by the Western media, military exercises organized by Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan under the Collective Security Treaty Organisation, (CSTO) were launched on the 24th of August. These war games, officially tagged as part of a counter terrorism program, are in direct response to US military threats in the region including the planned attacks against Iran.

    The Rubezh-2006 exercise, is scheduled to take place from August 24-29 near the Kazak port city of Aktau:

    "It will be the first joint military exercise undertaken by CSTO countries, and will involve 2,500 members drawn from various armed services of member states, with Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan the principal participants. Uzbekistan, which has recently rejoined the CSTO, will send observers, while the two other pact members, Belarus and Armenia, will not be taking part .( IPWR News Briefing Central Asia)

    Press reports from the region describe these war games as a response to US military presence and ambitions in Central Asia:

    "The growing militarisation is connected with mutual mistrust among countries in the region, say analysts. Iranian media have speculated that the United States is using Azerbaijan to create a military counterweight to Iran on the Caspian. It is possible that the exercise conducted by the CSTO – in which Russia is dominant – represents a response to concerns about United States involvement in developing Kazakstan’s navy. Observers say Russia is leaning more and more towards the Iranian view that countries from outside should be banned from having armed forces in the Caspian Sea."

    Experts say the US is trying to step up the pressure on Iran, as well as to defend its own investments in Azerbaijan and Kazakstan. It is also trying to guarantee the security of the strategically vital Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline.

    A military presence on the Caspian would give the United States an opportunity to at least partially offset its weakening influence in Central Asia, as seen in the closure of its airbase in Uzbekistan, the increased rent it is having to pay for the Manas base in Kyrgyzstan, and the diplomatic scandal that resulted in the expulsion of two Americans from Kyrgyzstan.

    According to analysts, genuine security in the region can be achieved only if the military interests of all five Caspian countries are coordinated. At an international conference in Astrakhan in July 2005, Russia proposed the formation of a Caspian naval coordination group, but to date the initiative has not had much of a response.(Ibid)

    Iran War Games coincide with those organized by the CSTO

    The entire region seems to be on a war footing. These CSTO war games should be seen in relation to those launched barely a week earlier by Iran, in response to continued US military threats. These war games coincide with the showdown at the UN Security Council and the negotiations between permanent members regarding a Security Council resolution pertaining to Iran's nuclear program. "They are taking place within the window of time that has been predicted by analysts for the initiation of an American or an American-led attack against Iran" (see Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya, Global Research, 21 August 2006):

    "War games and military exercises are now well underway within Iran and its territory. The Iranian Armed Forces—the Regular Armed Forces and the Revolutionary Guards Corps—began the first stage of massive nationwide war games along border areas of the province of Sistan and Baluchistan1 in the southeast of Iran bordering the Gulf of Oman, Pakistan, and NATO garrisoned Afghanistan to the east on Saturday, August 19, 2006. These war games that are underway are to unfold and intensify over a five week period and possibly even last longer, meaning they will continue till the end of September and possibly overlap into October, 2006". (Ibid, emphasis added)

    While Iran is not a member of the CSTO, it has observer status in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), of which China is a member.

    The SCO has a close relationship to the CSTO. The structure of military alliances is crucial. In case of an attack on Iran, Russia and its CSTO allies will not remain neutral. In April, Iran was invited to become a full member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).

    Sofar no concrete timetable for Iran's accession to the SCO has been set. This enlargement of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which also includes observer status for India, Pakistan and Mongolia counters US military and strategic objectives in the broader region. Moreover, China and Russia, which are partners in the SCO also have a longstanding bilateral military cooperation agreement. In August 2005, China and Russia conducted joint militart exercises.

    The conduct of the CSTO war games must be seen as a signal to Washington that an attack on Iran could lead to a much broader military conflict in which Russia and the member states of the CSTO could potentially be involved, siding with Iran and Syria.

    Also of significance is the structure of bilateral military cooperation agreements. Russia and China are the main suppliers of advanced weapons systems of Iran and Syria. Russia is contemplating the installation of a Navy base in Syria on the eastern Mediterranean coastline. In turn, the US and Israel have military cooperation agreements with Azerbaijan and Georgia.

    China War Games

    In recent developments, China and Kazakhstan have initiated war games (August 24, 2006) under the auspices of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). These war games are being held concurrently with those conducted under the CSTO, which are also being held in Kazakhstan.

    India-Russia military Cooperation

    India and Russia have signed on August 20th, a farreaching military cooperation agreement. Although not officially directed against the US, the purpose of this agreement is understood. The two countries have "agreed to focus on joint war games in services-to-services interaction, joint development of new weapons systems and training of Indian military personnel", (Press Trust of India, 21 August 2006).
    • crazydiode, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1india and russia have been allies since a looooooong time. that's old news. did not know about the new alliances that Russia has been promoting. thanks for the info.
    • AirRaven, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Barring an incalculable act of stupidity on the part of the USA's war planners, we could be looking at a reasonable equivalent to the development of Pre-WW1 network of alliances. Only a complete idiot would set the west up for a confrontation with an alliance of that scale.

      The principle of "Mutually Assured Destruction" worked perfectly back in 1914. All we need's another Franz Ferdinand and we're set for World War III, barring some absolutely herculean diplomacy.
    • MichaelBradley, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1This article means nothing me as soon as i started seeing "Experts say.." and "According to analysts.." with no sources....
  • rupaw, on 10/11/2007, -7/+34Wow, now the U.S. starts another Cold War. For the rest of the world this period was over, for good but not for the Reagan's, Clinton's and Bushies and the american industrial military complex. I know that it's all about money and that the US economy would take a deep dive if the government there wouldn't spend money on military research projects and WMD like a drunk sailor.

    As a European citizen I couldn't care less. It's not my money anyhow. It's not my economy either. If there wouldn't be the problem that the lunatics in the White House try to invole Europe by bribing some underdeveloped countries like Poland and the Czech. I just say this: Back off America, otherwise you will have to protect your embassies in Europe similar as you do it right now in the Middle East. Europeans are so fed up with your foreign policy. You might be able to line the pockets of some 3rd class politicians in Europe and "convince" them that a missle shield is a great idea, but know that this is against the will of the people ANYWHERE!

    Leave Europe alone! Withdraw your troops from European soil and stop whining about WW2 and how ungrateful we are... We don't owe you anything anymore the same way as you don't owe anything to the French anymore just because they saved your asses during the war against England and the Spanish. Got that?
    • crote, on 10/11/2007, -21/+6"...you don't owe anything to the French anymore just because they saved your asses during the war against England and the Spanish."

      When the hell did the Europeans help us win a war against the Spanish? We tapped that Iberian ass on our own circa 1898, but I can't think of any other time when we were even fighting with them much less in dire need of assistance militaire français.
    • tuzziel, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5"US economy would take a deep dive if the government there wouldn't spend money on bla bla..."
      Exactly the opposite, this kind of spending is causing major drag on economy.
    • smackywentz, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Tuzziel, the only reason our economy is still standing is because of the Military-Industrial Complex. Go read a book or two.
  • Nocturnalis, on 10/11/2007, -1/+24Seems like everyone is aiming their missiles at the wrong funking people if you ask me.
  • ElFredo, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3Relax y'all, it's just russian inner politics. Elections are getting closer. Remember when Ieltsin threatened to use its nuclear arsenal back in the days?
  • AceTracer, on 10/11/2007, -9/+4Seriously, what the ***** is up with this guy as of late? Has he lost his *****?
  • 4eloBek, on 10/11/2007, -17/+4yes putin is ***** crazy, he is worse than bush i tell ya!
  • break99, on 10/11/2007, -5/+4Wow, this should end well.....
  • MisterFlaut, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11Why is he aiming missiles at Europe? Why not the US?
    • DarthMalcontent, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6They're already aimed at the U.S. Just saying "We've had missiles aimed at the U.S. for fifty years" doesn't give him the chance to make a grand, meaningless gesture. It's when he starts making grand, *meaningful* gestures that we need to be worried.
    • Exodin, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1This is hilarious: "...but why not the US?"

      "Yeah umm.. about that missle you are pointing at Europe? Send it to America.. we're not really friends anyway"

      Thanks buddy.
  • graberc, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4It sounds okay. MAD assures everyone is nice, most of the time. Though If a missile is already targeted on a Europe nation I hope no one accidently pushes go
  • DesuKN, on 10/11/2007, -0/+21Ah, I've always wanted to know how Digg would've covered the cold war.
    • Pixelante, on 10/11/2007, -2/+0By reviewing John Badham's "Wargames" ?
    • AirRaven, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4Misguided Tools: RAWR! COMMIE SCUM!
      Hordes of FSF supporters: RAWR! BOURGEOISIE FIENDS!

      Misguided Tools: DOWN WITH SOCIALISM!
      Hordes of FSF supporters: DOWN WITH CAPITALISM!

      Misguided Tools: YO MAMMA'S FAT!
      Hordes of FSF supporters: No- YOUR momma's fat!

      Etc ad infinitum. You don't need to look any further than the Anti-DRM crusade to see just how things'd have gone.
    • MichaelBradley, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3What you guys fail to realize is.. a new cold war has begun (if the old one ever really ended) and our foreign policies are the cause of it. We had to stick our ***** in the Middle East and piss off the world.
      The tension in the world is the highest it has been since WW2. It isn't good. We could be on our way to WW3, or at least another missile crisis.
  • Pixelante, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5I fail to see how this should be a Bad Thing. Europe has had Soviet missiles aimed at it for the best part of the '70s and '80s and we've had Punk, Metal, New Wave and Synthpop. We were Goths, Bromley Contingent wannabes or New Romantics.

    Then wretched peace broke out and all we had was hip-hop ***** and slutpop, and pretentious ***** effete intellectual "music".

    Bring back the Cold War! Bring back Mad Max!
  • jlunski, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9I gotta quit reading Clancy novels, they seem to have a way of being relevant even 20 years after they were written...
  • Waiting2awake, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11 WooHoo

    Everything old is new again!!!

    Where are my parachute pants??

  • Stevethegreat, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5From what I can understand is that Putin tries -lately- to be as much of a prick internationally as Bush already acheived to be. So we have two people trying to take the prize of the most dangerous nutcase, since Russia can only stay to insults (Putin is too smart to launch Nukes), I think Bush will ultimately win this round. Whatever the case -albeit I'm much of an anti-military guy- I would like, for once, EU would have had a strong enough military so that it could kick both US and Russia's asses off it's territory. We have a saying in my place which can be translated as such "Two donkeys are quarrelling in a foreign barn", which is exactly the case....
  • funkmachine, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3He's already got his missiles aimed at Europe anyway. Why would we believe otherwise?

    The big shame though is that Russia could be part of the West if only they weren't so anal about giving up their "honour". If Russia would try to earn an honest living as part of a group of democratic states rather than by deliberately countering them then they'd be alot better off anyway. The Russian people seem pretty nice. The problem they've always had is wanting to be the biggest kid on the block. They should align themselves with us and stop supplying weapons to people who want us (and them) dead.
  • spawnfree, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1Russia is run by criminals.

    But then so is the USA and Europe.

    we are living in the moment when the last few bubbles of 'leadership' have a fake turf war over the control of all of us; the victim-base.

    Blow your ***** horn Putin, I'm not afraid of you.

    I'm not running to my government or anyone else's to protect me.

    They are all working together (thanks to the interests of the world bank that has every nation by the balls)

    they wont nuke their bread and butter.
  • nils, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4HIS cold war showdown?

    It's the Americans who have been violating treaties (ABM treaty, in this case) left and right.

  • Albionshores, on 10/11/2007, -9/+13Its economic gerrymandering. The US clock is literally ticking down.

    Look at how much is being spent in Iraq, another $100 billion has just been given the ok. Each year well in advance of $500 billion is spent directly on the military-industrial complex, national debt is out of control, spiralling and held over seas. Reports on how the dollar was linked to the market were stopped and ceased to be released in early 2006. The market is is not aligned with the currency and other countries know it. The Euro has outperformed the dollar by 30% in recent years.

    The only thing tying everything together right now is that the vast majority of oil sold in the world is valued in Dollars. Every country needs oil, not just for transport but for its commerce and energy requirements - the economy , therefore every country keeps accounts in dollars keeping the dollar in demand and afloat. If an oil bourse is launched priced in Euros countries cash in the dollar and to flood their hedge fund accounts with Euros. You buy oil valued in dollars, you keep dollars; its priced in Euros, you buy Euros...its just the way it is. America's economy is about to crack...it cannot sustain what it is going through and when that looks about to happen China will drop the dollar first, followed by the world. The people that want this aren't just the so called 'enemies' of the US. Norway a stalwart of coldwar NATO is very keen to move its oil over.

    America desperately needs to secure gulf oil in dollars for the sake of its economy. Nobody wants to shoot it. Nobody wants to bomb it. A lot of people just want it to shut up and realise there are more people on this world. You cannot buy cheap Nike shoes, 3 Walmart T-shirts for a $1 without somewhere in the world people being exploited. In wanting to secure the oil look what has happened. An oil pipeline through Afghanistan to gain access to the Caspian reserves. Invasion and occupation of Iraq. Spending $500 million on an embassy the size of the Kremlin...you really think we're just there because we want to restore peace. That building says oil in dollars, stays in dollars. But this is the thing...time is running out.


    And now Putin calmly announces it is not happy with the way America has been breaking international agreements and is talking of a new cold war. Putin is a communist...he too wants to have an external bogeyman to rally his people against. The US made up Al-Qaeda, Putin is going to make the US his bogeyman. Putin aiming his missiles at Europe. LMAO.....Putin loves the Euro for the stability it brings....its a crutch to lean on, a currency that can be relied on which isn't the dollar. He wouldn't nuke it. The White House administration/US military industrial complex might and blame it on somebody else, say the Iranians or the Ruskies. That would be a good excuse to take the Iranian oil fields. All Putin has done is create a bogey man to bring back his beloved KGB.... AND make the clock on the US economy tick down even faster. More threats, more pressure, less stability in the dollar.

    And the natural response is fine we'll fight them all but if that's the case then you're not listening. This is a war without bullets. Hell, you won't be able to afford bullets. Its a war about currency and resources. And in this war Russia works with China. China works with Iran. India is in the picture, so is Brazil. Look at those militaries..yes a few have ballistic missiles but so do you. Their armies cannot be mobilized. Not even as far as the gulf - OPEC themselves have already said as much....the US is under no threat from their armies. But look what else they do. Look at their exports. Brazil, backward soccer loving country - MASSIVE agricultural exports. Look at the manpower that lies in China and India and see where those American and British jobs went overseas when 1980s industry began externalising costs. Call centres: hubs of communication and customer service, textiles, banking...all over seas. Our entire consumer lifestyles. In 2000 the US was set to have paid off all national debt within 25years - now its a record levels and the level of spending/lending goes up each month

    Putin isn't a threat to Europe.
    Putin isn't a threat to the US.

    The US Administration/military-industrial, the Homeland Security Act and numerous Presidential Directives already passed mean that when this counts down you will know exactly where you are: the 4th Reich. That's the threat to the U.S.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroeuro
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iranian_Oil_Bourse
    • whaambulance, on 10/11/2007, -2/+17The Canadian Dollar is poised to surpass the USD in value in the next few months. It is currently about .93 cents. It's going to feel good to turn those dollar jokes around on the US :p
    • Albionshores, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7Totally,

      Not only that in actual fact because to dollar is so dislocated from reality the Canadian Dollar is already there. That and when eveything goes pear shaped there's a precedent in Canada for free Healthcare. In the US it disappears overnight. Insurance companies go bust, unemployment goes up, forget medicaid - zipp....no healthccare.

      No healthcare, lots of guns, single ply dollar that can buy diddly leads to looting....woohoo! Its just gonna be like the Wild West.


      *Telegram*
      Expect *stop* American *stop* cousins *stop* on *stop* doorstep. *stop* *end*
    • Dasickninja, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I like how people spout pseudo-intellectual opinions about the world then link to Wikipedia.
    • kuzotz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1I'm glad I'll be in Canada within 2 years. I'm getting tired of eating the ***** food in America(because so much crap does get put into it)
  • Chupatumama, on 10/11/2007, -4/+6Im not up to date with our current bulls...I mean foreign policy.
    Is it Iraqui WMD's and Iranian missiles or vice versa?

    And the russians arent buying the missile excuse? Really?

    Does anyone have the number is countries we have bases or military personel in?
    The russians?
    Seems like the numbers dont lie in this case.
    WE are the evil empire. I wonder if Chad Vader knows about this.
    • reaganite, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2@chupatumama

      Geographic Distribution of U.S. Military Personnel (AD)a
      Total Number on Active Duty 1,381,401
      United States and Territories b 1,092,586
      Europe and Former Soviet Union b 97,658
      East Asia and Pacific b 78,369
      Africa, Near East, and South Asia b 8,254
      Western Hemisphere (excluding USA) 2,112
      Undistributed b 102,422
      Source: DOD, Worldwide Manpower Distribution by Geographical Area, June 30, 2006
      Notes: aComparable data not available for Reserve Components; however, on Jan.24,
      2007, there were 91,344 RC personnel called to Active Duty (OASD-RA).
      bIncluded are those assigned AD troops now deployed with the 203,700 AD,
      Reserve, and National Guard members of Operations Iraqi and Enduring Freedom
      in Iraq, Kuwait, and Afghanistan who are undistributed or accounted for in the
      United States, Germany, Italy, Japan, South Korea, and United Kingdom.
    • cjswerve, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1@Chupatumama (#7009683)
      Sorry don't mean to be stupid but who is Chad Vader? Thanks...
    • geekee, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3"Seems like the numbers dont lie in this case.
      WE are the evil empire."

      You really think S. Korea wants US troops to leave? I'm not sure if you are intentionally misleading people, or just an idiot.
    • Waiting2awake, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@cjswerve;

      Chad Vader is a youtube show in which, AFAIK, Vader having lost his empire is forced to be the day time grocery store manager, which he in turn looses and is forced to become the night time store manager. Pretty funny stuff.

  • DeFex, on 10/11/2007, -5/+3Putin crime family vs bush crime family.
    or is it, this could be just the national threat bush needs to cancel elections etc.
  • theratdotus, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3putin is just trying to get money from selling arms like america again. they will sell guns to our enemies as we sell guns to....our enemies as well. ww3, here we go! w00t!
  • 7952, on 10/11/2007, -6/+3George Bush should go over their and give Putin a damn good spanking.
    • MichaelBradley, on 10/11/2007, -0/+11Now there is a mental image i didn't need...
  • KanosWRX, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Russia had just as many bases around the world as the US post WWII. The reason they don't have them now is because they were treating those countries much worse then the US was. Just look at West Germany vs East Germany, remember that?? The Russian's didn't just give up all their countries they occupied after the war, they lost them due to immense pressure from those countries. I don't see Germany or Poland really putting up much of a fuss over a couple US bases there like they did when Russia was there. Plus with today's ICBM's it doesn't matter if the US is half way around the world, Russia could easily launch missiles against us, they don't need bases in Cuba anymore. The US is just trying to protect itself and its allies from rouge states like IRAN and N. Korea. We even want to share that technology with Russia so they could do the same. Plus its funny when Russia says they have been demilitarizing more then the US. It's not because they really want to, but its because they can't afford to keep an army like they had in the cold war, they don't have the money. They didn't even have the money in the cold war and had to use smoke and mirrors to make it seem like they were stronger. It's a well known fact Russia would fake the size of its military back then.

    Seriously Russia is just looking to get some attention.
    • Barryke, on 10/11/2007, -5/+8Russia is not evil. The USSR was.
      In fact I find the USA worse than Russia when considering international politics.
    • MichaelBradley, on 10/11/2007, -5/+4Yet another fool believing the media. Protecting Europe from what? Missiles from Iran? The closest thing they may have are SCUD missiles. These are old news. Very old and unreliable technology.

      This is nothing more than Russia finally standing up and confronting the US on their attempt at world dominiation. When Russia was the superpower it once was, it kept the powers in check. Neither America or Russia could become too powerful. Once Russia collapsed the US has been on a power trip trying to push around the world. Russia is trying to get back into the ring to put a stop to it.. and frankly.. it's about goddamn time.

      Whether they can succeed or not? Well thats another story.
  • taintedzodiac, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2We need to be careful here. If George Lucas gets a hold of our defensive missile systems, they just might start firing first.
  • EatingPie, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1deleted
  • worldorder, on 10/11/2007, -6/+12Finally a country the US can't push around. Hopefully Russia can help put an end to the US terror all over the world. Unfortunately, the American education system (CNN, Fox, MSNBC, etc..) shows otherwise and the average US citizen is easily manipulated.



    • Exodin, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2and your "informed" hate against the US wasn't manipulated by TV? The news is considered as trash here, not fact.
  • Barryke, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2Guys .. calm down. Nothing going to happen anytime soon.

    USA has bases in EU.
    Lots of EU ppl dont like that.

    Reflection:
    In the cold war the USSR build rocket-bases in Columbia.
    USA "diplomaticly" forced the USSR to demolisch them.

    To me, it seems only fair to see the USA bases in the EU "diplomaticly" removed by Russia.
    I'm dutch, and i dont thrust the USA government for a eurocent. The last thing i would want to worry about is weither the USA is monitoring my actions. Thats not a far future, Echelon is real.
    • kuzotz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1just be glad you don't live int he US like I do... We're knowing my kids will get a ***** primary education, and the fact that most Americans are always always scared of their own shadows. Once I move out of the US. I plan on getting my citizenship changed. Then applying for protection lol. Within the belly of the beast. Things are bad.

      From the crap that is being added to the US food supply to how we have an education system that doesn't reflect the real world at all. Even to how our police treat us.

      My god dude. My sister got pulled over for no reason last night.. The cop said she ran 3 stop signs(when she stopped on all three of them). The guy was shining his light into the backseat of the car(searching illegally)... It was if the police officer wanted to find something illegal.. So he made up a ***** charge. He spent an hour running through my sister's car tag repeatedly.

      You're guilty until proven innocent in the US man.

      Don't plan any vacations here is all I can tell you.
  • meretricis, on 10/11/2007, -7/+5***** richardnixon, you still have your head in your ass about WWII
    "Would you have preferred to write that comment in German? Admit it, we saved your asses!"

    May I remind you that your country sold metal to the Nazi's for some time prior to intervening, years after the damage had been done and an obvious threat to U.S interest was evident did the U.S finally interfere, never forget that. So do us a favor, have your opinion but make it intelligent and not pig headed. You make the rest of us look like idiots.

    As for Russia, it's not a pretty scenario but what can you expect? I surround the western border of your country with military bases and silos and your supposed to be happy? Russia has every right to threaten those bases with destruction because there is no reason to have them there in the first place. If relations between Europe, Russia and the U.S were actually STABLE, then the U.S could depend on those sovereign governments to help keep the peace in the event of a launch from Iran. Simple.

    Enough with the justification of U.S militarism, no one should have that much expansionism without checks and balances. Like it or not Russia is doing it's part.
    • JimmyTheClam, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8@meretricis,
      Might I remind you that it was Russia/USSR that was selling Nazi Germany the petroleum used to fuel the planes that bombed England during the Battle of Brittan.
      They continued to trade with the Nazis up until they were invaded in June of 1941.

      US trade with Nazi Germany was almost non-existent after 1938.
      That slack was eagerly picked up by "neutral" countries like Sweden who was a major source of Germany's Iron ore and a significant source of ball bearings.
      Portugal and Spain provided nearly all of Germany's tungsten, used to produce weapons-grade steel.
      In some years, Turkey provided 100 percent of Germany's chromite, used to harden steel to make armor.

      Beware of historical revisionists fellow Diggers.
    • JimmyTheClam, on 10/11/2007, -8/+2...
    • Waiting2awake, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Difference being though that Sweden was neutral...Also those other countries don't try to claim they have never done anything wrong, unlike a certain Country we both know.

      Now I could care less what IBM's envolvement with the Nazi's were, Or prescott Bush's, or any number of other countries, companies and associations. Just don't claim you saved people from a problem you helped create and you won't be a hypocrite.

      However, on topic.. The U.S.S.R wasn't bad or evil. They were/are just a collection of countries that handled things in a certain way. The U.S, isn't /wasn't good or benevolent. They are just a collection of companies that handle things in their way. What, IMO, makes either side good or bad is how far they take it. As long as the U.S.S.R was there to balance American empiral nature then the US remains in check. Likewise for the other side.

      The only reason why the US has been enabled to do what they have is because there hasn't been a counter balance to it.

      Until now. Maybe the great bear has awoken?
    • giggity22, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2@waiting2awake

      "The U.S.S.R wasn't bad or evil..."

      This is an incredible statement - just another example of the farce of moral equivalence. It is simply not possible for an informed and reasonable person to believe this, so I have to assume you are either ignorant or simply so filled with anti-US rage that your emotions have completely overcome your ability to reason. I can't type here all day in an attempt to list the major atrocities of the USSR that simply have no comparison in the US, but I guess I can mention a few. Josef Stalin found time during his reign to systematically murder 15 million of his own citizens, simply because of his own paranoid delusions of rebellions or coups, among other reasons. Even the USSR's roots were covered in blood - Lenin had 200,000 people killed during the Red Terror, and another 100,000 put in concentration camps - simply to protect his power after an assassination attempt. How about the USSR forced famine of the 1930s, which starved millions of Ukranians to death. If millions of murders aren't enough, how about the simple fact that people in the USSR had no basic rights and were forced to live under a police state for their entire lives? If a government that murders millions of its own citizens, doesn't provide basic rights, and had stated goals of conquering the world ("The victory of world socialism") isn't "bad or evil," what is? The implication that the US and USSR were the same except for a few mere differences of approach to government is simply insane.

      And no, the war in Iraq is not the same as lining up 15 million of your own people and shooting them. Taking non-uniformed combatants off of a battlefield and keeping them in Guantanamo Bay where they're treated better than criminals in US federal prisons is not the same as an established policy of public terror to punish the populace for an assassination attempt. The US has made no lack of errors in the world, but to say that the US and USSR were the same would be laughable if so many misguided and academically dishonest revisionist "historians" like yourself didn't believe it. The truth is that we in the West have no idea what living under true tyranny and oppression is like.
    • giggity22, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1browser error, digg down
    • donnyburnside, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Too many isms...
  • opiophile, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11This is what happens under a President who doesn't believe in diplomacy. This could have easily been avoided. Heckuva job Mr. Bush.
  • baronfel, on 10/11/2007, -2/+7 For all the arguments about the people in the EU hating the fact that US bases exist in their countries, I personally have seen very little of that played out. I lived in Germany for three years on the economy, and every single person was nothing but kind, courteous, and even friendly, with the odd exception of the punkster types that every youth generation has.

    I grew up a military brat, and in my travels around Europe, yes, there was dissatisfaction with American Policies, but not the hatred that has been portrayed in this topic. Everyone has different opinions, but they don't have to become so strong that people hate each other on account of them. I was as foreign as it came in Deutchland, but people were still kind. It's that kind of response to people that bolsters my faith in American-European relationships. So long as respect is there, we can get past the crap that gets smeared over the papers every day.

    -baronfel
  • theratdotus, on 10/11/2007, -4/+4worst thing i know of russia doing was cutting off oil to europe a few days due to high frequency of it being stolen down the pipeline
    • Albionshores, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3They've played silly beggars with Estonia and put some air bubbles in the oil supply to some other Soviet satellite states. Then there's the diplomatic issues with London and Polarium assassinations which could have been either side, or even both. But nothing to cause an escalation in Cold War tactics. The US missile defense in Europe is obsolete to the multiple warheads of Russian missiles. The US system in Europe is not designed for 'shotgun' type blasts, only individual 'rifle fire' ICBMs.


      Russia is just putting another hole in the bucket which is the US' leaking economy.
  • techmaster, on 10/11/2007, -6/+1For those of you who doubt Russia's power...

    Nuclear Bomb Compilation: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ULSA5wktywI
    The Tsar Bomba, largest bomb ever made by man: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=16cewjeqNdw

    The US always focused on accuracy, and being able to carry out "surgical strikes", but Russia always seemed to focus on simply making bigger bombs. Pretty scary, indeed. On the good side of things, at least the US are no longer the "bad guys" of the world, now there's a new guy for everybody to hate.
  • AlexYY, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2And now tell me how smart is Putin? Hm... who's gonna buy their gas, petroleum? It will hart Russia more then US.
    Its anti-missiles not missiles which are better to have then not to.
    Actually missiles from Russia to US fly to north rather then west, look at globe not map. So its not as much of protection from Russia as something else
  • rowlodge, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2so we need putin for president?...i dont think so.
  • kurtwinter, on 10/11/2007, -4/+6Thanks Bush!

    Not many people can ***** up everything that they come to, but your foreign policy is as brilliant as Michael Brown's disaster preparedness, Rice's anti-terrorism, Cheney's bird shot, and your own personal best skill, getting drunk and hitting your head on the coffee table - perhaps the only thing you can do competently.

    We should all listen to Bob Barker and spay or neuter our government critters before they start something we won't survive.
    • kuzotz, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1WEll the fact that he got a DUI in the 70s.

      That is something that is extremely hard to accomplish....


      I mean you have to be drunk beyond the limits of alcohol poisoning in order to get a DUI in the 1970s.
  • Scheissen, on 10/11/2007, -11/+2Who the hell cares? Eurotrash should stay in Europee even when it's raining missles. Now when all of a sudden their country is threatened they want our help. Love it.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 98 of 98 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.