Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

yurbud

(39,405 posts)
Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:52 PM Apr 2014

Any chance our new Cold War with Russia will be cancelled due to budget deficit concerns?

If not, wouldn't our government have to make a plausible argument that Russia is a direct threat to us here in the US?

I might be a little rusty on my history, but since they sold Alaska, they haven't invaded any territory in the Western Hemisphere or even got much further than some islands pretty close to the Eurasian land mass.

It also seems unlikely that Russia would want to start a nuclear exchange that would leave the whole world dead, including Russians.

Or are we going to back to the pre-Iraq War logic of our enemies are like the villains in cartoons and action movies who don't mind dying and taking their whole country with them if they can wing the good guys on their way out?

1 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Any chance our new Cold War with Russia will be cancelled due to budget deficit concerns? (Original Post) yurbud Apr 2014 OP
I think it was always there, in some form or another jakeXT Apr 2014 #1

jakeXT

(10,575 posts)
1. I think it was always there, in some form or another
Thu Apr 24, 2014, 03:30 PM
Apr 2014

THE ROVING EYE
US 'pivots', China reaps dividends
By Pepe Escobar

Let's start with a flashback to February 1992 - only two months after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. First draft of the US government's Defense Planning Guidance. It was later toned down, but it still formed the basis for the exceptionalist dementia incarnated by the Project for the New American Century; and also reappeared in full glory in Dr Zbig "Let's Rule Eurasia" Brzezinski's 1997 magnum opus The Grand Chessboard.

It's all there, raw, rough and ready:

Our first objective is to prevent the reemergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on
the order of that posed by the Soviet Union. This ... requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power. These regions include Western Europe, East Asia, the territory of the former Soviet Union, and Southwest Asia.


That's all one needs to know about the Obama administration's "pivoting to Asia", as well as the pivoting to Iran ("if we're not going to war", as US Secretary of State John Kerry let it slip) and the pivoting to Cold War 2.0, as in using Ukraine as a "new Vietnam" remix next door to Russia. And that's also the crucial context for Obama's Pax Americana Spring collection currently unrolling in selected Asian catwalks (Japan, South Korea, Malaysia and Philippines).

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/World/WOR-03-240414.html



It could get more overt/cartoonish with more neocons in government, not just a Nuland

Mission Statement; Conflict with China, Russia - FPI’s mission statement says that the “United States remains the world’s indispensable nation,” and warns that “strategic overreach is not the problem and retrenchment is not the solution” to Washington’s current financial and strategic woes. It calls for “continued engagement—diplomatic, economic, and military—in the world and rejection of policies that would lead us down the path to isolationism.” The statement lists a number of threats to US security, including “rogue states,” “failed states,” “autocracies,” and “terrorism,” but focuses primarily on the “challenges” posed by “rising and resurgent powers,” of which only China and Russia are named. Kagan has argued that the 21st century will be dominated by an apocalyptic struggle between the forces of democracy, led by the US, and the forces of autocracy, led by China and Russia. He has called for the establishment of a League of Democracies to oppose China and Russia; the FPI statement stresses the need for “robust support for America’s democratic allies.” Apparently, confrontation with China and Russia will be the centerpiece of FPI’s foreign policy stance, a similar position to that taken by the Bush administration before the 9/11 attacks.
Reactions to New Think Tank - Steven Clemons of the New America Foundation says: “This reminds me of the Project for the New American Century. Like PNAC, it will become a watering hole for those who want to see an ever-larger US military machine and who divide the world between those who side with right and might and those who are evil or who would appease evil.” Reporters Daniel Luban and Jim Lobe write, “[T]he formation of FPI may be a sign that its founders hope once again to incubate a more aggressive foreign policy during their exile from the White House, in preparation for the next time they return to political power.” (Inter Press Service, 3/25/2009)

Entity Tags: Jim Lobe, Dan Senor, Christian Whiton, Daniel Luban, Jamie Fly, Rachel Hoff, Steve Clemons, Foreign Policy Initiative, Project for the New American Century, William Kristol, Robert Kagan

Category Tags: PNAC, Other Think Tanks, Paul Wolfowitz, William Kristol, Overall US Foreign Policy
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Any chance our new Cold W...