Click to enlarge to readable size |
59 share
<<<< While Obama is destroying our military preparedness, all in the name of unilateral "peace" (how can there be war if we don't fight?), China is doubling the size of its army, across the board; so too, Russia.
Why "now" is critical to our enemies.
J Smithson
Clearly, at least to me, Russia and Mr. Putin , have decided that now, with three years remaining in the term of the weakest US president, Putin has personally known, now is the time to press international changes that challenge both the leadership of the US and its very sovereignty.
Understand that Crimea did not “just happen,” as the natural consequence of the passing of time. Rather, the recent turn of events, began in 2006, when Obama and other “peace at any price” One Worlders, helped to disarm Unkraine, with promises to support that country, militarily, if that should be necessary in the future.
Again, in 2009/2010, Obama, as president, chose to violate treatises with the Czech Republic and Poland, and invalidate the effort to create a missile defense system in each country. Those systems were strongly opposed by the Russians, but initiated by Bush in a display of decided leadership. These were to be defense systems against projected Russian and Iranian aggression. Obama vacated those treatises in an arrogant and unilateral display of "I know better than all my generals, all of world leadership," and did so without consulting the Czech Republic or Poland, or giving heed to their protests. And, so, the stage was set for Russia's invasion of Crimea and its rebuilding efforts, as it returns to Cold War conduct.
We can do nothing to stop Russia, today, because Obama and his fellow Peacenikes did nothing, 5 years ago, and before.
Obama's empty threats against blatant aggression in the European region and the Middle East, have proven to be laughable acts of verbal cowardice, and, as a result of all this, the theme of this post is confirmed, as Russia sees "now" as the perfect time to act.
Putin is taking a calculated risk now, believing the next American President will not be as weak-kneed as Obama; that Obama will not strike back with a heavy hand, fearing that he will take on blame for intensifying hostilities if he does act decisively, and, finally, believing that sanctions will be no more effective against his (Putin) country than they have been against Iran and Syria.
Because "now" is the time, we can expect to see continuing acts of aggression, not only from Putin, but from Syria, Iran, the Pakistani Taliban, N Korea and, China.
Which brings us to the following news about a Russian/Chinese partnership, designed to increase their physical presence in Central and South America, knowing, full well, that the United States has a coward for a president.
The following news excerpt adds to the warnings of this post. The future belongs to us, but only if we read with understanding AND act on that understanding.
Write letters, make phone calls, email your complaints or views. It works. I mean, look what "we" have accomplished in our battle against domestic forces that hate our traditions and founding documents. We are winning.
Here is what is continuing and about to happen in our part of the world. Will Obama surrender our very future as a nation, or, present a demonstrative resolve that threatens the security of those who would threaten ours (think "JFK - 1960's - Cuban Missile Crisis") ?
WASHINGTON – As Russia continues to take strategic
initiatives that put the United States on the defensive, Russian President
Vladimir Putin is teaming up with China to help construct a trans-oceanic canal
in Nicaragua that gives Moscow an even greater foothold in Washington’s area of
influence
The prospect comes as Moscow not only intends more massive arms sales in Latin America but, as WND recently reported, moves to establish a base in Nicaragua besides using existing facilities for refueling for aircraft and port calls for Russian warships.
In addition to Nicaragua, Moscow also is looking to establish bases in Cuba and Venezuela.
The establishment of permanent Russian bases and a major Russian presence in the Western Hemisphere will challenge U.S. policies and threaten to diminish Washington’s influence in the region.
And like a repeat of events leading up to the 1962 Cuban missile crisis, it will give Moscow a basis to stage offensive weapons in the Western Hemisphere, placing another formidable challenge to U.S. homeland defenses from potential missile threats.
Obama the peacenik that killed bin Laden and more al Qaeda than Bush ever did.
ReplyDeleteThe Russians are a joke. NATO and the US could crush Russia in a conventional war. Hell, the Italian navy alone could beat the Russian navy. But then, if Smithson were in charge, he'd start a nuclear war with Russia and kill millions so he pound his chest and show 'em whose boss.
Bush 40,000 dead terrorists; best estimates on Obama's war against the Taliban is 60 dead and 6,000 bystanders killed via his anonymous drone strikes.
ReplyDeletePeacenik is correct. He is for unilateral disarmament and against private gun ownership, world wide. I say "unilateral." Do you have a clue as to what that is? In practical terms, it means he is a peacenik. Because he is one of the more convoluted "idealist" we have ever seen makes no difference to me. He disarmed Unkraine, unilaterally. Ditto Poland and the Czech Republic. He is on record taking a military response "off the table," leaving him with nothing that is proven to work.
Your hysterical response, proves to me your level of insanity. Unreal. There is nothing in that second paragraph that is true, so why do you write such nonsense? Anyway, no need for a response from me.
BTW, the death of Bin Laden means absolutely nothing. Show me any indication that his death has done anything but increase acts of terrorism. bin Laden was in hiding. He was a nobody with no leadership power, no authority. No one in the terror had referred to him in years, prior to his death. Besides, bin Laden's murder shows Obama's convoluted nature. It is balls to the wall to show how tough he is, but refuses to wage a winning war in Afghanistan.
ReplyDelete