Will the Russian Bear Reduce the America Bashing?
For as far back as I can remember it has been a popular sport of many Canadians, Brits, French, and Germans to condemn America for most every problem in the world. It goes without saying that this also includes the extreme left of the Democrat Party in the U.S.
More recently I see that many of these same folks are now holding up China and Russia as positive models for the world. Have not these people learned a thing from the past 70 years!
As Mark Steyn has frequently said, it seems that the Bushitler Derangement Syndrome prevents many from ever saying a nice thing about America.
After what has happened in Georgia, is it most interesting that the Poles seem to like America these days ... a lot! The citizens of Poland actually understand what it's like to be underneath the boot (and tank treads) of their Russian oppressors. My father and his family also acutely understood what their fate would be if they ended up in Russian controlled territory.
If the Russian Bear starts causing trouble westward in Europe, will the Germans, French, and Brits suddenly change their tune?
It's fascinating how a crisis to one's own personal liberty tends to make people look at the situation with a much more realistic and less rhetorical lense.
8 comments:
Hold on here, which major power was the one that took advantage of and made provocative advances into another power's backyard while their victim's house was falling apart a decade ago?
Ah yes, the United States.
Now that Russia has regained the means and ways to re-assert it's power to defend itself, you're complaining about Russia being a threat while all along supporting the Americans running amok and abusing their power?
http://www.ericmargolis.com/archives/2008/07/kicking_sand_in.php
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/real_world_order
Just so we're all clear, are you supporting the pre-1989 status quo in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Belarus, the Czech Republic, the Slovak Republic, Belarus, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria, Ukraine, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, and others?
It sure sounds like it.
No, absolutely not. What made you believe that was the case?
However, the former Iron Curtain and ex-USSR states can and should be neutral, like Finland, an ex-Russian Empire nation, in that they can be part of the European Union(if applicable) but not a member of NATO.
Therefore, both ends of Europe can have a buffer zone that can provide a degree of security for all.
Now, should the Poles be afraid of Germany going after the lands lost in the aftermath of WWII?
"Should be neutral" according to whom? How is that you feel that you speak on behalf of the peoples of the ex-USSR states?
If I heard a German or a Brazilian or even an American say, "Canada should be or do 'X'", my prime reaction would be, "Who on earth are you to be telling me how many country should be run?!"
I'm curious, what part of the world is that you live?
I get the sense that you keep on drawing a complete moral equivalency between the U.S. and Russia, with each being no better or no worse than the other. Would that be correct?
Just so you know, I've never said that America is perfect but for the most part I deeply believe that they're a force for liberty in the world. Yes, I know that the Hate-America crowd would mock me for such a statement. C'est la vie.
As for your question about Polish fears about Germany, they've likely past now but in the years after WW2 they were very prominent.
But it seems clear that every ex-USSR state has legitimate reasons to fear a newly aggressive Russia.
You've recommended several articles to me. I'd like to recommend an excellent book to you: Postwar: A History of Europe Since 1945 by Tony Judt. It's long but is endlessly fascinating.
Amen! to your post. I doubt any of the above mentioned European countries would agree to be used as a buffer zone. I don't think they feel expendable or would enjoy being sacrificed to keep more western countries safer.
So because of the fact that I am not a citizen and/or resident of a certain country/state, do you believe I am prohibited from freely expressing commentaries or suggestions on geopolitical matters regarding said country/state?
As for morals, nation-states don’t have any. They only have interests that they express with power and force, be it economic, diplomatic/political, or military.
The United States of America and the Russian Federation are just states that are spaces on an international geopolitical chess board along with every other state in the world. Some are bigger, more powerful or influential than others but they are all just states with instincts of self-preservation and the pursuit of its interests. As such they carry out what is good for their own purposes and nothing more.
Therefore, one needs to view macro-geopolitics with complete impartial objectivity that is free of bias in order to see the whole picture accurately. In doing so, it makes it easier to try to view events from multiple points of view so that one can try to understand the motivations behind the actions taking place.
As for the USA being a force for liberty, that horse left the barn a long time ago. Do I need to point out how many times the actions of the United States government has compromised and betrayed the principles of liberty and freedom?
I never said you weren't entitled to your opinion. Rant on, brother!
I just don't share your Hate-America-First views, that's all. It's reassuring to see that you finally had the cojones to freely express your deep biases. Now at least we all know where you're coming from.
Incidentally, did you actually type this with a straight face: "one needs to view macro-geopolitics with complete impartial objectivity that is free of bias in order to see the whole picture accurately"? No one - I repeat NO ONE - has impartial objectivity or is free of bias. It's one thing to lie to someone else but to lie to yourself is the worst delusion of all.
Why all the secrecy about where you live?
Post a Comment