Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Is Obama Handing Over "Top Dog" Role To Anyone?  
User currently offlineQXatFAT From Israel, joined Feb 2006, 2404 posts, RR: 5
Posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2901 times:

President Obama was speaking in Russia and was mentioning pretty much that the future does not belong to those with big armies and those who pretty much "carry a big stick".

Is Obama handing over our top dog role to whomever wants to take it? It seems like the President has made it very clear that he wants to appologize for everything America has done and stands for, wants to keep people in office to demand more and more power, and now wants to give up major defense systems and unarm ourselves.

Sounds like Russia has a free path to world domination and the "top dog" role. Do you really think that Russia will decide to roll over like President Obama wants America to do? No! They will take every chance they can to be head hancho.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationwo...-speech7-2009jul07,0,2715814.story


Don't Tread On Me!
55 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2888 times:

Russia won't become top dog, NATO is perfectly positioned for purposes of encirclement of Russia...

Yes, Obama is stepping the U.S. back a bit, but Russia won't take over the world...


Blackbird


User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined exactly 11 years ago today! , 7405 posts, RR: 50
Reply 2, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 9 hours ago) and read 2888 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Dictators around the world are just laughing themselves silly over this guy. He his hell bent on polically castrating this country.

Quoting QXatFAT (Thread starter):
Is Obama handing over our top dog role to whomever wants to take it? It seems like the President has made it very clear that he wants to appologize for everything America has done and stands for, wants to keep people in office to demand more and more power, and now wants to give up major defense systems and unarm ourselves.

We're going to pay a heavy price for this guys administration. Once the Russians and the Chinese BOTH surpass us militarily, it will be up to the Republican president(the easy winner in 2012), to re-ignite a military build-up. An armed conflict with the Iranians is inevitible, not with Obama but with the next administration as Obama will appease the Iranians and every other dictator to no-end.

Quoting QXatFAT (Thread starter):
Sounds like Russia has a free path to world domination and the "top dog" role. Do you really think that Russia will decide to roll over like President Obama wants America to do? No! They will take every chance they can to be head hancho

Will they roll over? No, they'll manipulate the US at every turn.



Made from jets!
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2874 times:

Jetjack, what did we get it from the Bush way, which is the logical comparison? We got government by paranoia and fear; we started one war that had absolutely no justification to be fought, and ruined our reputation around the globe.

Plus, why is it that conservatives are always saying "get out of foreign conflicts, and take care of our own first", but now that this President seems to be doing that in some regard, the same people critisize him for it? You want us to be the world policeman, or don't you? Mr. Bush said we should not be. He didn't follow through, and some of it was not his doing (Iraq was, though). It's a policy MANY Americans want us to do.

I don't think we're abdicating our role in the world whatsoever, but look how thin we're stretch, fighting two conflict that aren't even as large in size as Vietnam was in it's prime? And while we need a strong military, how much can or should we really expand it in this tough economy?

As for Russia, they'll always be a world player, simply because of their size. But they have their own problems to deal with, and they won't take over the "top dog" spot now or ever. If they couldn't do it when they were the USSR, and they had huge military expenditures, they can't do it now.

The only one out there that could ever be "top dog" is China, by size alone. But, thankfully, so far for the rest of the world, China, even under the communists, have never had the zeal as the Soviets and Nazi's did, to try to conquer the world.

The U.S. will be the #1 dog for quite a long time to come.

And, besides, Jetjack, what is wrong with actually trying to get others to cooperate with us, instead of trying to dictate to them, as Bush did? Perhaps, had we done that in Iraq, we wouldn't have had the mess we've had for the last 6 years there.


User currently offlineQXatFAT From Israel, joined Feb 2006, 2404 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2849 times:



Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 2):
Will they roll over? No, they'll manipulate the US at every turn.

 checkmark  Very true words

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
Plus, why is it that conservatives are always saying "get out of foreign conflicts, and take care of our own first", but now that this President seems to be doing that in some regard, the same people critisize him for it?

But he isnt taking care of our own! If you disarm America of defense systems and say we will put away all of our nukes, you are putting our own at risk of attack. You MUST have a strong defense in order to stay a live in these times and to protect ourselves. If you think that we can survive with a disarment and massively decreased defense, you have no clue what can happen to us.

When you are a home owner, do you start implementing things to protect your family? You might put up some sensor lights to scare someone off...put in an alarm system...maybe even buy a gun to protect your family! Taking care of your own first is keeping an army that is strong and a defense system that beats the offensive of other countries.

He very much so deserves to be critizised for what he is doing. Its putting us all at risk.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
But they have their own problems to deal with, and they won't take over the "top dog" spot now or ever

Well they could just launch a few missles at the US, Britian, Germany, Israel and some others who might get in their way and they just crippled some big players. Then again, if those are nukes, we dont have Earth anymore.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
The only one out there that could ever be "top dog" is China, by size alone. But, thankfully, so far for the rest of the world, China, even under the communists, have never had the zeal as the Soviets and Nazi's did, to try to conquer the world.

Well in one respect, it seems that China has America in its little hands. It controls and buys our debt. Once they stop, America is in some deep doo doo and China can start to play puppet master.



Don't Tread On Me!
User currently offlineConnies4ever From Canada, joined Feb 2006, 4066 posts, RR: 13
Reply 5, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 8 hours ago) and read 2846 times:

I think the US will remain #1 for quite some time, at least militarily.. Economically perhaps not for much longer, ads the Chinese are 'moving up' fairly swiftly. I wouldn't see China as a 'peer competitor' military for another 20+ years. They are only now getting into a blue water' navy, for example, with their recent deployment to Somalia.

As for the Russians, they'll be a power I think only about as long as the gas & oil lasts, but not much longer. It's still a resource-based economy.



Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2836 times:



Quoting QXatFAT (Reply 4):
But he isnt taking care of our own! If you disarm America of defense systems and say we will put away all of our nukes,

Easy there, partner. You know a well as I do, he won't get rid of ours, unless the rest of the world does the same. And he won't be reducing ours unless China, Russia, etc, do the same. There's a difference between saying "I would like this if the world could do it", and unilaterally doing it. It's not going to happen. It would be great if the world did get rid of nukes, but you've taken that one way out of context.

Quoting QXatFAT (Reply 4):
When you are a home owner, do you start implementing things to protect your family? You might put up some sensor lights to scare someone off...put in an alarm system...maybe even buy a gun to protect your family!

You might, but I don't. I don't need any of those things. I'm not so frightened of the world that I need to wall myself off from it.

Quoting QXatFAT (Reply 4):
Well they could just launch a few missles at the US, Britian, Germany, Israel and some others who might get in their way and they just crippled some big players.

You're smarter than that. The launch a few, you don't think we'll launch a few back? And we can do more damage to them than they can do to us, because we have a superior submarine-based program. MAD is still around. It always will be in the nuclear age.

Quoting QXatFAT (Reply 4):
Well in one respect, it seems that China has America in its little hands. It controls and buys our debt. Once they stop, America is in some deep doo doo and China can start to play puppet master.

Agree with you on that. But that's a problem outside the nuclear realm. That's because of 40 years of letting our best jobs leave this nation, and allowing nations like China to steal patents of our products, without any consequences to the theives.


User currently offlineAGM100 From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 5407 posts, RR: 16
Reply 7, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2830 times:

The President stated today that ..the new way is a world where no nation is superior.... he raised one hand to signify one level then dropped the other to signify a lower level. He said something about countries using there military to maintain superiority ...

I cant recall all the other stuff shown , pretty much a fantasy vision...sorry. I am trying to find the transcript .. he also apologized for us being arrogant again . Just playing to the crowd again ...



You dig the hole .. I fill the hole . 100% employment !
User currently offlineFlyMIA From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7119 posts, RR: 9
Reply 8, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2828 times:

Honestly I don't think even President Obama could mess up that much. (I hope) The US is just too strong to be taken over in the foreseeable future. People say what about China they have more people they have money etc.. But why would China want to be better than the US?? With out people in the US buying things China is no where near as strong. US will be top dog economically and militarily. Economics can change but since the world still revolves around the US dollar aka oil I don't see it happening. And Militarily the US is just too strong. Sure China may have more numbers but no ones Military technology is as advanced as the US's and who can forget all those nuclear weapons and having the strongest Navy and Air Force helps a bit too.

As for President Obama if I would have told half the people who voted for him in October that 6months into his term the US would have an even worse economy, would be in even more debt, more jobs gone more government take overs, there were problems in Iran, North Korea, and Latin America and to top it all off he said he might have to tax the middle class more and raise taxes for everyone I don't think he would have won? Again he is just like any other politician saying what the people wanted to here at election time. "Hope" "Change"
(But this discussion is for another thread) Hopefully in a year I will be able to look back at this post and say man I was wrong about President Obama but I don't see that happening any time soon.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineFalcon84 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 7 hours ago) and read 2826 times:



Quoting FlyMIA (Reply 8):
As for President Obama if I would have told half the people who voted for him in October that 6months into his term the US would have an even worse economy, would be in even more debt, more jobs gone more government take overs, there were problems in Iran, North Korea, and Latin America and to top it all off he said he might have to tax the middle class more and raise taxes for everyone I don't think he would have won?

Do you think the same problems would not exist had McCain won, or would have all those things magically gone away?

For all the hosannah's the right gives Reagan, his first two years in office were nothing to write h ome about. But if you want to judge a presient after less than 6 months on the job, then you're bucking history in a big way.


User currently offlineFlyMIA From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7119 posts, RR: 9
Reply 10, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2814 times:



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 9):
Do you think the same problems would not exist had McCain won, or would have all those things magically gone away?

Absolutely not. The problems would still be there only difference is I think there would be more confidence in the market, people would not be worried about their taxes being raised and the government would not be on a spending spree with money they do not have.
As for Iran and North Korea president Obama has done fine dealing with those situations. I would have liked him to have a little bit of a more serious response for Iran but he handled it fine. Did I expect if McCain won problem would be gone, no way. But the thing is I think many of the people thought who voted for Obama thought that their problems would go away in a few months and that is the reason they voted for him and not who was best fit for the job.

Again hopefully in a year we will all praise President Obama his but even VP said they messed up pretty bad already.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined exactly 11 years ago today! , 7405 posts, RR: 50
Reply 11, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 6 hours ago) and read 2809 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
We got government by paranoia and fear; we started one war that had absolutely no justification to be fought, and ruined our reputation around the globe.

An old argument that is no point in arguing anymore. The degree of respect is something that can't really be guaged. I mean the public opinion around the world for US was largley skewed by negative reporting, with figures that were distorted or overblown. And the any corrections to erroneous reporting was never done or tucked nicely away on the last page where no one reads it. If you read negative reporting everyday, what's your opinion be? Oh wait, you watch CNN, MSNBC, I rest my case. And who gives a crap about how the French, the Spanish or or the Greeks view us. They'll still dislike us anyway.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
Plus, why is it that conservatives are always saying "get out of foreign conflicts, and take care of our own first", but now that this President seems to be doing that in some regard, the same people critisize him for it?

Uhh, that's something I hear more out of the liberals rather than conservatives. Conservatives have always been more concerned about domestic security and foreign policy than the social cause. The social concerns have always been the battle cries of the left, or at least the pretend to care about that BS. So I don't know where you're getting that from

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
You want us to be the world policeman, or don't you? Mr. Bush said we should not be. He didn't follow through, and some of it was not his doing (Iraq was, though). It's a policy MANY Americans want us to do.

Yes, becuase I less trust the Russians and the Chinese to do it. These 2 countries are enablers of dictatorships as the Russians have proved over the last decade, in Chechnya in the 1990's and Georgia last spring. They also have been supplying the Iranians with the centrifuges to enrich uranium, bolstering the bullsh!t nuclear programme. And the Chinese refuse to do anything about North Koreans and have been a thorn in the side of us over the years in their dealings with aggressive regimes.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
I don't think we're abdicating our role in the world whatsoever, but look how thin we're stretch, fighting two conflict that aren't even as large in size as Vietnam was in it's prime?

You'd never know that by the way media protrayed it. They would have you thinking that millions died every day by there accounts. Very distortive reporting.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
And while we need a strong military, how much can or should we really expand it in this tough economy?

Enough to stay several steps ahead of our enemies, whomever they turn out to be. Cutting defense spending on missile defense which is the very thing that threatens us from rogue regimes whose weapon of choice is ICBM's that can be armed with nuclear warheads. Yes, I think that is irresponsible, grossly irresponsible.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
As for Russia, they'll always be a world player, simply because of their size. But they have their own problems to deal with, and they won't take over the "top dog" spot now or ever. If they couldn't do it when they were the USSR, and they had huge military expenditures, they can't do it now.

Don't you kid yourself Sonny Jim. They have vast oil reserves which can certainly fund defense spending, and as they sell weapons systems to nation unfriendly to the US. Just like China, who supplies the North Koreans with conventional weapons. These are our enemies by-proxy. They aren't our friends. The people under that impression need to smarten up their ideas.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
The only one out there that could ever be "top dog" is China, by size alone. But, thankfully, so far for the rest of the world, China, even under the communists, have never had the zeal as the Soviets and Nazi's did, to try to conquer the world.

One thing you forget Falcon, is that China holds most of our debt, they don't have to attack us militarily, they can just devalue our currency and send us deeper into depression. The Chinese RMB is worth more than the US dollar at this point and is on the verge of replacing the US dollar as the world currency(the Chinese are pushing to have that done). And with Barack Obama's outlandish spending, Hyper-inflation is almost a virtual certainty. Someone grab that Visa card out of his hands. Blimey.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
And, besides, Jetjack, what is wrong with actually trying to get others to cooperate with us, instead of trying to dictate to them, as Bush did? Perhaps, had we done that in Iraq, we wouldn't have had the mess we've had for the last 6 years there.

There's nothing wrong with persuading opponents to come along with us as long as there is something tangible in it for us. But selling out this country by the pound in order to get in the good graces of "other" countries is futile and we'll never get us anywhere except a lump of coal for christmas.



Made from jets!
User currently offlineJetjack74 From United States of America, joined exactly 11 years ago today! , 7405 posts, RR: 50
Reply 12, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2790 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting AGM100 (Reply 7):
The President stated today that ..the new way is a world where no nation is superior.... he raised one hand to signify one level then dropped the other to signify a lower level. He said something about countries using there military to maintain superiority ...

That's been Obama's vision from the very beginning was take this country far to the left and make the US a European-style socialist form of gov't. He's at war with capitalism.

Quoting AGM100 (Reply 7):
I cant recall all the other stuff shown , pretty much a fantasy vision...sorry. I am trying to find the transcript .. he also apologized for us being arrogant again . Just playing to the crowd again ...

He didn't in France and Egypt, why not for the Russians, make it a hat-trick.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 9):
Do you think the same problems would not exist had McCain won, or would have all those things magically gone away?

I think there would've been a swifter response to the Iranian civil unrest and to North Koreas threats. It's hard to say since we're still in the infancy of the verbal altercations. If Obama still decides he's going to sit down with the Iranians, he will lose all credibility. The Iranians have reminded most of us that they are not a regime than can be dealt with in a diplomatic manner.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 9):
For all the hosannah's the right gives Reagan, his first two years in office were nothing to write h ome about. But if you want to judge a presient after less than 6 months on the job, then you're bucking history in a big way.

Well, 9-11 was Bush's fault. He never got his year of a pass. That's only reserved for Democrats



Made from jets!
User currently offlineQXatFAT From Israel, joined Feb 2006, 2404 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2788 times:



Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 6):
Easy there, partner.

I am trying to stay easy haha. President Obama though seems to be a little too free going and also seems like he can be pushed around quite easly to make people happy. He is trying to do it with his approval ratings here in America and seems like hes doing it so far as well internationally.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 6):
You're smarter than that.

Yes I like to think that I am but under Obama, I think things would be hesitant. Under Bush, things would have been launched of course cowboy style. Thus, the end of the world. WTF mate.

Quoting FlyMIA (Reply 8):
With out people in the US buying things China is no where near as strong.

Well considering the countries I have traveled too, a whole lot of their stuff is made in China as well. Brasil, Kenya, Canada all had stuff made in China still and at large quantaties. Mexico had a lot still made there and some of the other latin countries Ive been to too. China sells to everyone.

Also, China doesnt seem to like us being the police. They constantly block things to Iran, Syria, want to hold back on North Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan. They are using their powers along with Russia to block America.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 9):
Do you think the same problems would not exist had McCain won, or would have all those things magically gone away?

Under John McCain I think the economy would be heading in the right direction with not having these huge bail outs but still having a struggling economy. I think that he would want the private sector to bring America back and not creating thousands of government jobs.

Safety of America? I think we would still be in a good position but I do believe it might be the same as it was under Bush. The only thing we have going for us now is the "rock star" status of Obama overseas...although my German buddies that live there have told me they still dont really like him and dont really understand fully what he says.

So all together, most things would be the same currently but some would be heading in the right direction rather than putting our future at risk with more than half our money going to the government.

By the way, I didnt vote for Obama or McCain but voted for someone else. I thought we were kind of S.O.L. with either one going into office.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 11):
Enough to stay several steps ahead of our enemies, whomever they turn out to be.

 checkmark 

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 11):
The Chinese RMB is worth more than the US dollar at this point and is on the verge of replacing the US dollar as the world currency

Source? I hope that was just like a figurative speech because its obveusly not worth more than the American Dollar in trade but only maybe because China owns so much of us. China wants something else rather than the American Dollar but I have never read replacing it with the RMB.



Don't Tread On Me!
User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21515 posts, RR: 55
Reply 14, posted (5 years 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 2778 times:



Quoting QXatFAT (Reply 4):
You MUST have a strong defense in order to stay a live in these times and to protect ourselves.

We do. Nobody comes close to the capabilities that the US has. Russia and China may be able to be regional powerhouses, but they could never hope to project the sort of power that the US can on a global scale. Russia, for instance, would never have been able to pull off what the US did in Iraq. Nor would China.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineFYODOR From Russia, joined May 2005, 658 posts, RR: 15
Reply 15, posted (5 years 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 2745 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting QXatFAT (Thread starter):
Sounds like Russia has a free path to world domination and the "top dog" role.



Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 2):
Once the Russians and the Chinese BOTH surpass us militarily,

Hi guys,

So nice to be Russian to read many things are above. If I'd be Russian 'conservative' cold war mind freezed chauvinist your words guys would be a sight for sore eyes - but I'm not - I'm local westernist.   However truth is very different from your understanding of Russia's perspectives. Because as Mir said:

Quoting Mir (Reply 14):
Russia and China may be able to be regional powerhouses, but they could never hope to project the sort of power that the US can on a global scale.

Guys, could you ever imagine the time Russia passed through the last 20 years? Do you know anything about economic, scientific, military development of modern Russia? I guess - very little if not nothing. Russian Army with almost no supply of new equipment for the last 17 years, officers salaries which in 90s, ealy 00s were about 150-200USD per month - do you think it all help fot the achivement of 'top dog' position? Spare me of the need to describe how still we are week after the collapse we had at the past years. Even to became the effective regional military power we have to do a lot and it will take years to bring it all in a basic order. Regarding 'Russia and China both' - many local experts have clear inderstanding that with all current friendly status of Russia-Chine relations - China stays one of the potential threats for Russia in mid and long-term future.

Russia is no a real threat to NATO. The point is - Russia today recognises NATO as a threat. Independently of the reasons of the actions against Yougoslavia in 1999 or Iraq the major message was - if US and NATO have somethere political or economic interests - they are ready to use military power. And in practice Russia has very limited abilities for defence from global military actions except nuclear weapon. Anti-air defence was destroied after former Soviet republics became separate. Western part airports became inactive - look for the examples - 3 airports cover Saint-Petersburg - second largest Russian city:
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=5...3849&spn=0.032489,0.07699&t=h&z=14 - not active almost completely
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=6...018&spn=0.015369,0.038495&t=h&z=15 - (sorry - just a small part at the map) Veschevo is demolished completely - even no more rwys.
http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=6...538&spn=0.015347,0.038495&t=h&z=15 - Gromovo, ex-MiG-31 base - active only for very limited transport operations.

Should I remind you about NATO aviation activity in East Europe including bodering states?

It is just an exapmle. We can spend hours discussing anti-missle defence, NATO enlargement etc. Actualy no wish to do it...

I'm very far from propaganda matters of current political regime but I have to say that if tomorrow I would became a Russian leader - I also would be worry about it. Indded I think I'd behave on more frandly manner   But if I'd get same reaction from West we had during the last few years - I don't know how long I'd have a chance to be friendly. Friendship is something mutual. Reducing our own military facilities (stimulated or as a good will) we in fact surrounded by military alliance very active in military achievements of its goals.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 11):
These 2 countries are enablers of dictatorships as the Russians have proved over the last decade, in Chechnya in the 1990's and Georgia last spring.

Russia is not a 'dictatorship'. It is rather complicated political case, I'm rather pessemistic on political model we have here but it is definitely not dictatorship. Regarding war in Chechnya - I can give you another example - member of NATO and US ally Turkey operates against Kurds for the years. Is it mean Turkey is dictatorship or is looking for the top dog role? Georgia is very complicated matter with deep responsibility of Georgia itself, Russia, US and governments of RSO and Abkhasia. Let me not to talk about it right now.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 2):
An armed conflict with the Iranians is inevitible not with Obama but with the next administration as Obama will appease the Iranians and every other dictator to no-end

I just wonder mate there is the final point of your destination... Let me ask you one rhetorical question. Do you think US war in Iraq realy made local people life better. Do you think that you realy helped them replaced dictatorship by all charm of military occupation, endless and hopeless civil war, economic and socal infrustrucure dislocation etc. Do you think people became more free in such kind of 'freedom'. USSR was very lucky case of peaceful change of political regime from dictatorship to the kind of democracy. Even this was very tough exercise. Don't you think war is not good way to help people? As I said this is rhetorical question - no need to answer. It is more about internal values people have. Escuse me but reading you posts I see the 'man who first shooting and asking 'Who is coming&!' after'. We simply might have different basic points of view.



Quoting Connies4ever (Reply 5):
As for the Russians, they'll be a power I think only about as long as the gas & oil lasts, but not much longer. It's still a resource-based economy.

Well, I think this 'no longer' is for the next 20-30 years. Good time to develop many other industries. Unfortunately current development gives us no much hopes for the fast renaissance. In many aspects we copy the Latin America way - popular and populistic leader, growing corruption, week rule of law, leftish agenda in politics etc. Not the best way to economic progress. Lets see. And also do not forget about metals, forestry (potential) and rural abilities.

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
and ruined our reputation around the globe.

Mate, just +1 for you wise and openminded posts. Regarding this point I hate to agree especially. In early 90s US was very positively reconised in Russia. Indeed there were a lot of people 'contused' of the cold war, but they were not dominating. I myself worked as a lecturer (I'm an economist) with International Republican Institute (Republican party related International NGO). We had very succesful projects in Russia with very positive reaction. Nowdays reaction on US is completely different - people are scared and very disappointed. Indeed there is a huge role of official propoganda on local media but those guys have an easy task...

Quoting Falcon84 (Reply 3):
The U.S. will be the #1 dog for quite a long time to come.

No doubts. But it also very important to understand that military abilities is only part of the US global dominance and not the major one. Economic role of US is the cornerstone of its leadership. There is only one actual competitor of US - it is EU. Luckely western world seems have learned the lessons of two world war and hopefuly will never repeat old mistakes in future - this competition for the top dof place will not come to combat phase never. China has a chance to be 3rd largest player however it will need deep changes within the economy including liberalisation. Overwise China can reach the bar but will not be able keep position (as USSR was not able). There are 3 other potential runners - India, Brazil and Russia but it will take a time to come in equal role as US or EU if it ever will happen.

But we live in very unpredictable world anyway. Never say never  

[Edited 2009-07-08 05:25:13]

User currently onlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21406 posts, RR: 54
Reply 16, posted (5 years 2 weeks 4 days 22 hours ago) and read 2714 times:

Interesting post, Fyodor!


To the americans seeing the sky falling down:

One thing which needs to be understood is that Bush's brash and ignorant behaviour never really increased the USA's power in any way, quite the contrary.

Obama has simply made clear that he doesn't talk down to Russia but instead on the same level. That gives absolutely nothing away in substance but it is a welcome and necessary demonstration of respect which takes a lot of ammunition away from the russian hardliners.

It is well understood by everybody what the real power relations actually are, but it is a sign of weakness to insists on everybody else explicitly acknowledging their supposed inferiority. That would be – and was – how you're making enemies when you could have friends or at least partners in good faith.

Both in the USA and in Russia some people still believe in saber-rattling and aggression as demonstrations of strength, but we have seen too many times how pathetic the outcome of this tactic usually is.

Russia does not respond well to intimidation either, but a positive, respectful partnership on the diplomatic level with no disruptions from the other levels could go a long way towards a more stable and benefitial situation for everyone, not least because it reduces the influence of the escalation-loving militants on both sides.


User currently offlineFlyMIA From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 7119 posts, RR: 9
Reply 17, posted (5 years 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2686 times:



Quoting QXatFAT (Reply 13):
Well considering the countries I have traveled too, a whole lot of their stuff is made in China as well. Brasil, Kenya, Canada all had stuff made in China still and at large quantaties. Mexico had a lot still made there and some of the other latin countries Ive been to too. China sells to everyone

Absolutely but no country in the world can compare to the US buying power just too much money in the US compared to any other country. Hence when the US economy is trouble so is the rest of the worlds.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 12):

That's been Obama's vision from the very beginning was take this country far to the left and make the US a European-style socialist form of gov't. He's at war with capitalism.

The last thing I would ever want in the United States and now the senate as 60 who knows what will happen. Since this economy is bad and I don't see it getting better in 2010 I would not be surprised to see Republicans gain some seats back since people will see the Democrats are not doing a great job.

Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 12):
I think there would've been a swifter response to the Iranian civil unrest and to North Koreas threats. It's hard to say since we're still in the infancy of the verbal altercations. If Obama still decides he's going to sit down with the Iranians, he will lose all credibility. The Iranians have reminded most of us that they are not a regime than can be dealt with in a diplomatic manner.

If he sits down with Iran he needs to be impeached as simple as that. Its a shame Iran has such a horrible leader it could be a great country and the economic hub of the Middle East.

Quoting QXatFAT (Reply 13):
Safety of America? I think we would still be in a good position but I do believe it might be the same as it was under Bush. T

There are two things President Bush did very well. Help out Africa and improve aid to the region and keep America Secure after 9/11.



"It was just four of us on the flight deck, trying to do our job" (Captain Al Haynes)
User currently offlineMichlis From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 737 posts, RR: 2
Reply 18, posted (5 years 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2677 times:



Quoting Jetjack74 (Reply 2):
Will they roll over? No, they'll manipulate the US at every turn.

Of course they will and we of course will manipulate them. The President did this during the summit. He took a potential rivalry between the top two Russian leaders and played it against them. The name of the game in international politics is gaining leverage wherever possible against another country and vice versa. It's the same game that has been going on since the dawn of civilization and it will continue to go on.



If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the outcome of a hundred battles.
User currently offlineCaliAtenza From United States of America, joined Dec 2006, 1555 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (5 years 2 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 2666 times:



Quoting FYODOR (Reply 15):

what if they just have Russia join NATO, oh like in that Clancy book i read where Russia gets attacked by China....


User currently offlineCaptaink From Mexico, joined May 2001, 5109 posts, RR: 12
Reply 20, posted (5 years 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2653 times:



Quoting FlyMIA (Reply 10):
But the thing is I think many of the people thought who voted for Obama thought that their problems would go away in a few months and that is the reason they voted for him and not who was best fit for the job.

I think in some way it is the peoples fault for being so ignorant. Obama did promise change, and I too was skeptical about his being able to see that through. Yes has slowed down a bit on the 'change' but more importantly I remember him saying quite often that "the road to recovery would be long and hard, and that things will get worse before they get better." Or something that effect. I have heard those words from him a number of times.

So..?

I think people need to get a bit realistic in his being able to see his plans through. And whoever mentioned it is right about one thing, he has only been president 6 months of the possible 4 years of his term.



There is something special about planes....
User currently offlineFYODOR From Russia, joined May 2005, 658 posts, RR: 15
Reply 21, posted (5 years 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2643 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!



Quoting CaliAtenza (Reply 19):
what if they just have Russia join NATO

Today it is a good joke but it was a chance in the past. At 90s. But as I talked to NATO people - they always were completely against. There were a lot of reasons for this position. But I have to say in general that West lost opportunity for the new Marshall Plan. In early 90-s Russian population was splited but it was not anti-Western. It could work then, there were a lot of abilities to integrate Russia to World and European community. Instead of this we were puted to the side of the road with clear message - you better dead and quite when alive. Fine - it was a choice, choice to keep out instead to have influence and it was made.

Talking about West reaction I still can't get the sense - why positive experience with Germany in 1945 was not somehow realised with Russia at 1991. I understand that situations were very different but very few things were realy done by US and EU to prevent situation of stupid and senseless opposition we have now. This opposition is worse for us but it gives no benefits for the rest of the world as well. Might be with only exeption for US military industry lobby  Wink


User currently offlineBlackbird From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (5 years 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2642 times:

One could argue that the the US backing down as the "muscle of the world" and with NATO moving to encircle Russia are steps in the advancing of a world government.

Blackbird


User currently onlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21406 posts, RR: 54
Reply 23, posted (5 years 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2632 times:



Quoting FYODOR (Reply 21):
It could work then, there were a lot of abilities to integrate Russia to World and European community. Instead of this we were puted to the side of the road with clear message - you better dead and quite when alive. Fine - it was a choice, choice to keep out instead to have influence and it was made.

Actually, the main problem complex at the time from a western perspective seems to have been that the western (especially american) side tried to push Russia to a market economy not least in order to gain entry to the russian market for western industries but neglected to support the development of true democratic structures beyond its more superficial aspects.

There was a widespread illusion that a market economy would somehow "automatically" bring about prosperity and democracy. As some had predicted, however, things are never that simple.

A russian NATO membership was never really in the cards, I'd say. The intra-russian resistance to such a move was too strong and NATO would have had major problems accomodating and integrating Russia, given the political developments at the time.


User currently onlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21406 posts, RR: 54
Reply 24, posted (5 years 2 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 2621 times:



Quoting Blackbird (Reply 22):
One could argue that the the US backing down as the "muscle of the world" and with NATO moving to encircle Russia are steps in the advancing of a world government.

One could argue that the sky was green...!

The USA aren't "backing down" in any substantial way. They are merely re-tuning the tone of their diplomatic relations with Russia.

And NATO "encircling" Russia has more to do with the mistrust and open fear of neighbouring countries towards Russia driving them to seek the aid of NATO than with any comprehensive strategy on NATO's part.


25 Charles79 : Fyodor, thank you for such a great post in what I thought would be another pointless thread to hide inferiorities under a guise of machismo and chest
26 FYODOR : Things are not simple indeed however if we would not implement market economy in 1992 we would not have achievemnts we have now. Tough reforms of 92-
27 CaliAtenza : Fyodor, do u think Russia stood a better chance of being integrated with europe back in 91 then it is today?
28 Klaus : Well, thank you! No doubt. It was definitely necessary, just not sufficient. I wouldn't really use China with its corrupt ultra-capitalism and its tr
29 Ken777 : And we are not paying a heavy price for the last Administration. Talk to the families of the 4,000 KIA or the WIA. Talk to the people who have lost j
30 Klaus : If you're referring to a potential EU accession, that chance has always been extremely remote. If Turkey would already be very difficult, Russia woul
31 FYODOR : Thats very good but very compliccated question I have spend few hours for just a brief explanation of differenet points of view. Let me be very brief
32 Klaus : I don't think that that is really true – but it was the only interest which gained significant traction on the russian side. The problem is that th
33 Jetjack74 : Hrrmmm, remains to be seen whether that is true. Putin and cronies are certainly on the path to reclaim the glory of the "Mother Russia". It may not
34 QXatFAT : I do believe McCain would have kept us safe just as under Bush. On the other hand, we have Obama and I do not feel as safe as I felt under Bush. And
35 Post contains images FYODOR : You mean Russia has no right for glory? What about the glory of UK? US? France? Have they such right? Russia will not be similar to USSR. It can be 1
36 FYODOR : In 1992 major traction in Russian side was food supply. Bit later - political system composition and approaches in privatising. Oil and gaz became in
37 Mir : Normally, the smart thing to do is not to take the bait. -Mir
38 Michlis : Or probably because Iran is good leverage for Russia at the moment. Russia has strategic concerns about Iran and as such it probably does not want to
39 Mir : But Saddam wasn't making things easy on himself by interfering with the inspections. All he really had to do, if he actually had no weapons, would ha
40 FYODOR : This factor is also presented indeed. Always.
41 Michlis : I'm not defending Sadam in any respect, but by being belligerent he was creating the uncertainty about his possession of chemical and nerve agents th
42 Mir : I understand him being belligerent up until 2002-2003, but after that a US invasion should have been a much bigger concern than an Iranian one. But t
43 Blackbird : Those in desire of a World Government would be very keen to want to take the US out of the top-dog role. NATO would be far more desirable for such peo
44 HAWK21M : Looks like Obama is trying to convince the world that he wants to restart peace efforts,but he should realise all countries are not sincere & will tak
45 QXatFAT : Part of restarting the peace efforts is taking America off of the top dog role aka make us vulnerable. Just how stiff is Russia and China on the Nort
46 Yellowstone : I disagree. Remember Teddy Roosevelt's line about speaking softly and carrying a big stick? Well, we've got a gigantic stick - thousands of nuclear w
47 DocLightning : I dunno. Most European countries don't have military forces that, combined, even approach that of the U.S. And yet they're still alive. Obama has dec
48 QXatFAT : In which Obama wants to cut. But they rely on England the United States have their back and help them. Why spend a lot of money when the West will co
49 Mir : Yeah, because being able to destroy the world three times over isn't really enough - we need to be able to do it four times over. Those things do cos
50 DocLightning : You know, I've been hearing about this "world government" ever since I was old enough to know what a government is. I have yet to see one. I also kee
51 Ken777 : In reality just how many nuclear weapons do we really need? I would actually like to see the DoD sit down and look at the numbers, distribution, and c
52 MD11Engineer : Well, Saddam needed the uncertainity about the nukes to keep his status as would-be Arab leader, especially against his arch enemy Assad of Syria. Ad
53 QXatFAT : I agree with you that our tax dollars go to things that are IMO outrageous. But, America's intrests are in these areas such as Israel and Japan. I be
54 Klaus : What are you talking about? When the north korean ship was being approached by the american forces and faced an impending search, it turned around to
55 HAWK21M : True.....Make this a more democratic union........representing the true break up of the modern world in terms of Area,importance,population & wealth.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why Is It Unfashionable To Be A "Liberal"? posted Sat Nov 11 2006 05:13:59 by Singapore_Air
Why Is Australia Referred To As "oz?" posted Tue Sep 28 2004 14:27:00 by Ual747
Is It Legal To Sell "Jarts" On Ebay? posted Wed Jan 14 2004 22:47:03 by LHMark
Is It Possible To "steal" A Girl posted Mon Mar 3 2003 05:17:42 by Fly_yhm
Is "South Park" Ever Going To Go Away? posted Mon Feb 11 2002 05:42:44 by PanAm747
Is It Ok To Delete Files Under Windows "temp"? posted Tue Aug 7 2001 03:37:24 by H. Simpson
Toyota To Release Luxury "Prius", The Lexus HS250h posted Tue May 26 2009 16:48:17 by StasisLAX
Another Obama "Scandal"? posted Thu May 7 2009 20:42:09 by Phoenix9
"Freedom Tower' To Be Renamed WTC 1 posted Fri Mar 27 2009 04:31:12 by LTBEWR
Abramovich Trying To Sell "Chelsea" posted Sat Jan 17 2009 22:56:05 by Kevin