Why defeat peace and prosperity again? When
President Ronald Reagan brilliantly ended the cold war with President
Gorbachev he had no way of knowing that a succession of Presidential
runts would follow up with botching the peace so far as they could.
Even Pentagon careerists warn of Russia as a threat instead of being
aware that to fail to be good friends with Russia creates the threat
for-itself. Runts just don't make good foreign policy and that is
expensive.
N.A.T.O. should be mildly anachronistic today except for the potential Chinese danger. Russia knows the line is drawn on the free Balkan states and Poland. To equate the security of those N.A.T.O. members and affiliates with Ukraine, Crimea or Soviet speaking regions of upper Georgia is silly. Yet many have done so and work to increase tensions quite stupidly.
Syria was a more or less stable free nation before President Obama stimulated rebels and terrorists to attack it with hundreds of thousand dead years later. Larger human tragedies would probably follow if the Alawi-Christian government is replaced by some offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. Administration policy rather than Russia was the problem the last four years. Russia might be given thanks for helping the U.S. not to bungle its foreign policy even further than it has in places such as Libya.
It
may be that the military-industrial complex requires a belligerency
with Russia to maintain adequate weapons sales and maint. contracts.
To win the cold war with peace however, and then to lose the peace and prosperity potential through daft political leadership is the bad old way.
Former communists hoping to return communism's stature and growth perhaps require that U.S.-Russian relations remain hostile and essentially divided without developing an egalitarian, reformed free-enterprise environment with liberty and justice for all. In such a better world with good ecospheric recovery communism even with some Chinese communist support would not fare well. What if there are sleeper cells of communist warriors in the Pentagon seeking to drive conflict with Russia instead of peace and prosperity?
Former communists hoping to return communism's stature and growth perhaps require that U.S.-Russian relations remain hostile and essentially divided without developing an egalitarian, reformed free-enterprise environment with liberty and justice for all. In such a better world with good ecospheric recovery communism even with some Chinese communist support would not fare well. What if there are sleeper cells of communist warriors in the Pentagon seeking to drive conflict with Russia instead of peace and prosperity?
No comments:
Post a Comment