Free Markets, Free People


Russia’s New Found “Comrade”

A couple of paragraphs from a story about Obama and Russia’s Medvedev which seem pretty telling to me:

Russia’s Dmitry Medvedev hailed Barack Obama as “my new comrade” Thursday after their first face-to-face talks, saying the US president “can listen” — even if little progress was made on substance.

The Russian president contrasted Obama as “totally different” to his predecessor George W. Bush, whom he blamed for the “mistake” of US missile shield plans fiercely opposed by Moscow.

Of course many on the right are making a big, if sarcastic, deal about Medvedev calling Obama “comrade”. To many that seems more than appropriate. However, there’s a lot of diplospeak in this which seems key.

First, although not much of substance was accomplished, note the Medvedev says that unlike Bush, Obama “can listen”. In diplospeak, that means he thinks he can roll Obama, while Bush, not so much.

Note too that it appears that Obama has caved on the missile defense. In his desire to reduce nuclear stockpiles, he’s given up something which our allies such as Poland and the Czech Republic were keen for in order to see warheads dropped from 2,200 to 1,500. That’s a laughably cheap price for Russia to pay to kill the missile defense they opposed so adamantly.

Yup, after a capitulation like that, I’d be clapping Obama on the back and hailing him as my comrade too, if I were Medvedev.

Nothing, apparently was mentioned about Russia’s plan to rearm its military, its pending sale of the S-300 air defense missile system to Iran or it’s bluntly worded warning about Georgia:

Russia sent a strong warning to the United States Thursday about supporting Georgia in the U.S. ally’s efforts to rebuild its military following last year’s war.

The Foreign Ministry said helping arm Georgia would be “extremely dangerous” and would amount to “nothing but the encouragement of the aggressor.” 

Nope, apparently Obama just listened. That’s a comrade any Russian could love.

~McQ

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

15 Responses to Russia’s New Found “Comrade”

  • First, although not much of substance was accomplished, note the Medvedev says that unlike Bush, Obama “can listen”. In diplospeak, that means he thinks he can roll Obama, while Bush, not so much.

    Yeah, the Obamaphiles took that as a compliment.  I don’t think it was really meant as one.  My dog listens when I call him too.

  • I’m probably mistaken in this, but maybe Obama agrees with Vladimir Putin that the collapse of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical tragedy of the past century.

    Don’t you all think that as he was being mentored as a boy by CPUSA member Frank Marshall Davis (and I will remind you that actually being a member of the Party was not a small matter) that young Barack was allowed to feel all the warmth emanating to the world from the noble USSR, and told how criminal the U.S. was in the way it waged the Cold War?

    Honestly, does anyone think that Davis would have failed to impart that to his young protege?

    And the child is, after all, the father of the man.

  • I’ve never understood liberal opposition to missile defense.  Effective missile defense would make stockpiles of nuclear missles worthless.  If you can’t hit your target, what good are they?  Reagan proposed this thing as a solution to MAD, which lefties railed against during the 80′s.  It represents a technological solution to a problem of war!  You think they’d be the ones promoting it while conservatives bemoan the impossibility of hitting a bullet with a bullet.

    And why wouldn’t the Russians want to defuse our massive nuclear capability?  If memory serves, they’ve scoffed about this thing since Reagan offered to share the technology!

    Making nuclear missles a moot point is a HUGE step towards “world peace.”  The drive to accomplish missile defense should rival the moon race, but it’s not.  I just don’t get it.

  • Missile defense is unlikely to make serious nuclear arsenals ineffective. What makes serious arsenals ineffective is mutual deterrrence, which is what the U.S. and the Soviets had, and what still exists between the U.S. and the Russians. Getting off into what the Russians object to about a missile defense system would probably involve something more along the lines of diplomatic prestige and their addiction to agitation and propaganda.

    But where missile defense is important is as a line against the rogue state (Iran, North Korea) or a terror outfit that gets its hands on the means to launch (with the help of a rogue state or even more clandestinely via a nascent or senescent superpower). It’s a brave new world out there, with technology circulating a lot faster than ever, black markets moving faster than the CIA can chase through them, and hard currency always able to open forbidden doors.

    The greatest danger to the U.S. is when any potential enemy believes that it can get away with an attack.

    Or when some of them even think it might be worth a try to find out if they can get away with it.

    • I’m a believer in Peace through Strength, and I realize that Reagan’s original, sweeping idea for “Star Wars” is borderline science fiction.  I’m just stunned by the antipathy the left has for missile defense.

  • I believe that the actual delivery of the S-300 system is the trigger for the Israelis. Both the Russians and the Iranians know this. That’ why the delay.

    • I think that’s an excellent analysis and I agree, Roy. Israel must get to the nuclear infrastructure there before the S-300 is delivered and becomes operable.

  • No no!  I much prefer life the way it was before when I was growing up!  You know, no global warming,all oil scheduled to run out in 1975,  an ice age a couple years later, and being held as a permanent hostage to Soviet thermo nuclear missile strikes on our major metropolitan areas!  It was always comforting to know that in the blink of an eye I too could become a shadow after image on a concrete wall

    Things like that last one made the Cuban Missile crisis so much more exciting!

    • It sounds like you a little bit older then me, but I remember the joys of watching “The Day After” as a tyke and the pursuant nightmares.  Yes, let’s please go back to the days when “Red Dawn” seemed credible.  ;-)

      • I’d almost welcome the idea that our ‘red scare’ wasn’t coming from the White House.  At least I knew the Russians were up to no good that would result in their ultimate downfall at the hands of spirited American defenders.  This clown in the WH…who knows?

      • Rather like finding out your dad is the creepie guy they’ve been warning you to watch out for.

    • Dear Looker,

      You have no idea how close that one was.

      Regards,
      Roy

    • At least with the Soviets we had the dubious, grim satisfaction of knowing that we could take them with us.  With the a**holes running the country now, not so much.

      Welcome to Animal Farm.