« Farewell to the New Europe | Main | Drudge Mixes Up Old and New Hillary Pix »

Buchanan: How the West Lost Russia

Real Clear Politics commentary:

Within three years, the Berlin Wall had come down, the puppet regimes of Eastern Europe had been swept away, Germany was reunited, the Red Army had gone home, the Soviet Empire had vanished and the Soviet Union had broken up into 15 nations. The Baltic republics were free. Ukraine was free.

Yet, on the eve of the G-8 summit, Vladimir Putin has announced that Russia would re-target missiles on NATO. We must, he said, counter Bush's decision to put anti-missile missiles in Poland and radars in the Czech Republic. Why are we doing this?

The United States says the ABM system in Europe is to defend against an Iranian attack. But Tehran has no atom bomb and no ICBM.

We appear to be headed for a second Cold War -- and, if we are, responsibility will not fully rest with the Kremlin. For among those who have mismanaged the relationship are presidents Clinton and Bush II, the baby boomers who appear to have kicked away the fruits of a Cold War victory won by their Greatest Generation predecessors.

How did they do it?

Really great insight by Pat Buchanan. Once again, the arrogance or the NeoCons marches us toward disaster, only this time the consequences could be terminal. No matter how hard the Bush Bunch tries to rewrite the rules and act like the US is the only nation that matters, great nations will continue to have spheres of influence that they will not tolerate being disturbed.

Note: Wizbang Blue is now closed and our authors have moved on. Paul Hooson can now be found at Wizbang Pop!. Please come see him there!

  • Currently 3.7/5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Rating: 3.7/5 (3 votes cast)

Comments (6)


Well, we THINK they have no nuclear weapons, YET - although even the Iranians claim to be working on them, and it's not out of reason to wonder if someone in Russia sold them enough fissionables to make one or more (they have a working bomb design from A Q Khan), they certainly have IRBMs (Intermediate Range Ballistic Missiles), and have at least TWO models of ICBM in test phases.

Meanwhile, the only real reason Putin is so pissed off at the ABMs in Poland is because it makes it harder for him to sell Russia's 1970s-era missile tech to, well, Iran. As far as any sort of "threat" to Russia, that's been shown to be really, really stupid, in several Wizbang Blue posts and comments.

Lee Ward:

Ah, "cirby the missile expert" explains Putin's real intentions.

Thanks for stopping by and modeling your new hat, cirby - but please explain the hairy zipper that runs the length from front to back...

The threat is that the US will not do what they're saying they'll do, and is lying about our intentions - and the reason Putin makes issue of this is that the US has lost a tremendous amount of credibility and trust internationally.

If only Bush had an nice hat like yours to wear I'm sure the whole mess could be cleared up in no time.


Ah, "cirby the missile expert" explains Putin's real intentions.

Well, yes, I did, or at least part of them. I left out the part where idiots keep defending Putin, even though everyone with an ounce of knowledge about the ABM systems currently in use and/or development knows that Putin is lying his ass off.

I've only been studying missile defense for about, oh, thirty years now, by the way. You, on the other hand have been seriously NOT learning about it for pretty much all of your life, including the last couple of weeks, when you've posted several really, REALLY stupid comments about it (and you can't even understand the corrections that several people have handed to you, apparently because you don't realize that ten is less than 3,000, not to mention that you have less than zero idea about what trajectories are, and how they work for long-range missiles).

What sort of fantasy did you come up with this time? Are we going to build several thousand ABM system interceptors and place them in Europe, instead of the ten?

Paul Hamilton:

A couple points:

First, even if Iran has some early designs for missiles, they wouldn't be able to carry an atomic warhead because primitive designs are both large and heavy.

Second, if the countries involved don't want the freakin' missile shield, why are we insisting on putting it there?

John in CA:

Many in Europe didn't want Reagan and the US to put Pershing 2's there either. We did it anyway and that just turned out so badly.

Bush to Putin: The Cold War is over...and OBTW, you got p3wnd!

Paul Hamilton:

Those Pershings were just one more effort to throw massive amounts of cash at the cold war to bankrupt the Soviets. And it worked, in a sense, but it was a Pyrrhic victory because of the massive debt it caused us as well.

And Putin survived everything that happened to the Soviet Union and rose to rule Russia, so I sure wouldn't act as if he's negotiating for a position of weakness. We can attempt to bully places like Bush' Axis of Evil, who can't strike us back, but we better not try it with Russia.


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]





Add to Technorati Favorites


Publisher: Kevin Aylward

Editors: Lee Ward, Larkin, Paul S Hooson, and Steve Crickmore

All original content copyright © 2007 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark. Wizbang Blue™ is a trademark of Wizbang®, LLC.

Powered by Movable Type 3.35

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.