- Politics and Social Issues»
- United States Politics
What is wrong with congratulating Russian President Putin?
Diplomacy versus War, Allie versus Enemy
Putin gets reelected president of Russia
What is the advantage of keeping Russia as the arch enemy of the United States?
There is no advantage, as far as I can see. Do we really want to recreated the cold war that lasted for almost forty years? Do we want to sink more money into NATO, as we have been doing since it was created. It was created during the Cold War, and it seemed to make sense then. But, does it still make sense today? Not really, Russia while still posing a major military threat because of its nuclear arsenal is being overshadowed by new nuclear threats.
North Korea was allowed to not only have a nuclear weapon's program, but thanks to the previous presidents and US congresses since the Korean War Armistice have even perfected their Nuclear Weapons. And unlike the USSR and Russia, they have not demonstrated restraint in the nuclear weapon's program. That is in all the years of the Cold War and decades later, Russia, nor any country having nuclear weapons used them. We have always had a conventional war, that never escalated to the use of the backup Nuclear Weapon.
The Cold War made those four decades look like one of the Nuclear powers would try a first strike on the US. Fortunately this never happened. But, Today we have a very militaristic show of the Military by China, N Korea, and others that make Nuclear Weapon stability become less stable to the point of being chaotic.
While China has become a world economic contender, why do they still show their military with such volume. They are only less scarier than North Korea, who not only shows off their military development, but add the state of their nuclear weapon's might.
The United States has been involved to some extent in a continuous war with someone since the end of the war that for the second time was to end all wars. When the first World War started, it wasn't called World War I because that war was going to end all wars. Then came the next World War, so the historians had to go back and add a I to the nomenclature and call it World War I, that meant that the new World War would become WWII.
WWII was also the last constitutionally congressional authorized war. Yet, authorization became unnecessary as the president's started wars on their own authorization as commander and chief of the military. Once started, no congress has shutdown a war. The United States has also not won a war since 1898. My definition of winning means exactly what the initial World War was to mean, and end to War.
The benefactors of war were not the United States, nor the American People. It was the military defense contractors that made a fortune on having continuous wars. Every thing that the military had was in need of being upgraded, as the enemy had countered their defense or offensive effectiveness. This became a spiraling challenge. After all, insolence was going to protect the country.
Fortunately, all these upgrades were focused on conventional weapons as you only use a nuclear weapon once. The smart bombs of today cost millions, but they replace the inaccurate and ineffective mass bombings of the past.
What does this history of military might have to do with president Trump congratulating Putin?
The connection between the history of weapons and wars with congratulating Putin is we could use one less enemy, and really use another ally.
The common threat to both the United States and Russia today is the Radical Terrorists that are no longer contained in the Middle East. They are running rampant in the world. And, we have seen the many kinks in the armor of the US intelligence agencies. Information is the necessary asset to counter terrorism.
It was the information gathered in the Austin bombings that found and cornered the bomber. His bombing days are over like Achmed the Jeff Dunham created Terrorist.
A quid pro quo between Russia and the US would be worth the effort. The reason in my opinion that we didn't win the Korean War, and we totally lost the Vietnam War was that the USSR, along with China backed them. And the US politicians didn't want to bring these two countries directly into the War. They had been backing N Korea, and N Vietnam but not officially as members to the war.
The left now is going full mental because president Trump is showing diplomacy to Russia and Putin.
The left is not upset that once again there was a leak in the WH, that
"President Trump did not follow specific warnings from his national security advisers when he congratulated Russian President Vladimir Putin Tuesday on his reelection, "
Consider that Russia was OK for the democrat president Barack Obama and his Sec of State Hillary Clinton to ALLOW the sale to Russia of 20% of all US Uranium Production. President Obama also gave billions of dollars in cash to Iran. Iran also has a nuclear program, and with those billions from Obama they can afford to buy US Uranium from Russia.
This leak also contained a section in his briefing materials in all-capital letters stating “DO NOT CONGRATULATE,”.
- And who are these officials familiar with the call. Why are we still protecting leakers. Isn't that important to the national defense of the US. There seems to be no limit, or no level of classified information that won't be leaked.
Then the leak goes on to say, Trump didn't follow the instruction to condemn Putin based on the poisoning in the UK of a former Russian Spy.The fact is that Trump is the president, and his advisors are just that, They don't make his decisions, they advise. He is the president, he chooses what he needs to do, and what he doesn't have to do.
Here is a question for those that support the notion that it was definitely a Russian kill of the agent.
- Why isn't the UK allowing Russia to see and examine the evidence. These gases contain identification to show the source, yet the UK is refusing to let Russia see that evidence.
- Also, this agent could have been taken out when he was in Russia. And the only reason for his death to be caused by a nerve gas is to try and implicate Russia. Would Russia or Putin be so stupid as to use nerve gas that could be traced backed to them. A park bench was the scene of the alleged Russian crime.
- We have all seen enough spy movies to know that is an overkill, and unnecessary.
- It is sad that one of our longest Allies has colluded with our now known to be corrupt intelligence agencies in this Russia did it scenario.
Apparently, President Trump doesn't believe that the Russian's or Putin killed the agent.
Remember when our 17 US intelligence agencies swore that Iraq had WMD. So GW Bush takes us into Iraq, when N Korea and Iran also contained WMD. Then when we invade the country, oops no WMD.
Where were our crack US Intelligence agencies on 911, when 19 Terrorists successfully and without an single US defense attacked the US on its own soil.
Also, all 17 US intelligence agencies said that they agreed that the Russian and Trump colluded and their proof was the Clinton DNC created opposition paper they paid Christopher Steele to do in cooperation with the Russians. Now there is the real Russian Collusion to influence of elections.
The fact that all 17 agencies used the same unverified Steele Document is proof that no one them did any independent investigation. They all relied on a document that on its face declared that the information in it was never verified. And none of these agencies even investigated it, much less verified it.
By congratulating Putin for his reelection, president Trump extended diplomacy to Putin. It is the democrats that created the rumor that Russia is the big bad bear. And what did president Obama do after he declared that the Russian's influenced our election. Basically a slap on the risk, send Russian diplomats home. Oh boy, that is telling them not to mess with our elections.
Why does our president behave this way?
Because that is the way that an intelligent US president does things. He is not the war monger that the democrats want him to be.
What drives him to defer and subjugate himself to murdering dictator Putin? Is there a rational explanation? Is this good foreign policy?
The answer to these questions is the rational explanation is that this is what a good foreign policy looks like. He is neither deferring, nor subjugating himself, he is -----------------------
acting in the best interest of the country and the people.
And, once again why are leaks from his national security team not being taken seriously. Where is the security, if these leaks keep continuing?