Facing Russia, needing spine
The day after Barack Obama’s election to the presidency, Russia Prime Minister Dmitri Medvedev delivered a speech threatening missile deployment to Russia’s border near Poland if the United States moves forward with its missile defense plan against Iran in Poland and the Czech Republic. Peter Brookes wrote in the New York Post today that Obama’s response lacked spine :
A few days after the Medvedev speech, a senior Obama aide came out after a phone call between the president-elect and Polish President Lech Kaczynski saying that Obama had “made no commitment on” missile defense.
Ugh. That’s not a certain retreat by Washington in the face of Moscow’s threats, but it’s a very troubling start for the Obama team on a key national-security issue.
Going wobbly caused heartburn in Warsaw and Prague, where both governments went to the mat to get approval for the missile-defense deal – and glee in Moscow, Tehran and Pyongyang. What rogue doesn’t love a whiff of wobbliness?
Well, Obama isn’t the president yet, and President Bush has a couple months yet to “interact” with the Russians. But it had to be clear that Medvedev was testing the waters for the next administration.
But the issue isn’t just bullying – there’s the policy, too. This system is designed to defend against the Iranian missile and nuclear threat – which is growing fast.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran’s leader, sent Obama his congratulations after the election, which Obama didn’t acknowledge. Instead, he condemned Iran’s nuclear program and the government’s support of terrorists. How does Obama rank so far on the spine barometer?




Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!








Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top14 Comments to “Facing Russia, needing spine”
What spine?
Report comment to moderator
Oh, this is just the beginning. Unilateral nuclear disarmament is clearly a possibility. Or at least a permanent stand-down.
Report comment to moderator
So far, he’s 0 for 2. Perhaps he’s just voting “present.”
Oh, but America looks so much better to the rest of the world, now!
Report comment to moderator
Because showing spine requires tossing gasoline on the situation…
Report comment to moderator
It’s not going going a bit wobbly. It is full sail naive retreat, surrender and woosieness the left is so famous for – the the surrender monkey moniker that fits so well with their War in Iraq policy and their anti war, anti defence platform. There is no confrontation worth facing regardless of merit with this crowd.
Their belief is that the attack and murder of 2,800 Americans on 911 was somehow Bush’s adn America’s fault and that our president somehow blew the WTC up and blamed the poor Islamic terrorists for it start a war with them in order to steal their oil. These people are insane adn pathological liars.
Report comment to moderator
As I said in an other thread
Polish President Lech Kaczynski is not fountain of wisdom and a good source of information. In all likelihood, Kaczynski probably thought he would get one over the new guy and try to make it sound he had a confirmation when in fact it never happened. Kaczynski is well known for similar attempts at manipulation and bullying in Polish politics. (actually these tactics are pretty much the norm in Poland). And the fact that the Obama team wouldn’t tolerate this attempt to back them into a corner speaks well of their spine. Putin will see no weakness in Obama’s rebuff of the Poles.
Bush does have two months to reply but he’s too busy letting his friends loot the Treasury one more time. Any threat of missile placement by Russia is in itself a bluff. Despite new found oil money, the Russian military lacks modern equipment and standards as demonstrated by the sunken sub and a dismal performance in Georgia (they made up for it with sheer numerical strength) Russia’s bluffing, Poland is bluffing and Obama knows it.
Report comment to moderator
I hope we will not eventually need to put a suffix on spine (-less) to describe our president-in-waiting. I also hope he doesn’t think standing up to our enemies is above his pay grade.
Report comment to moderator
The Russians aren’t stupid. They know that the U.S. missile shield in Europe isn’t to defend the Europeans from Iranian missiles. The shield is to protect Europe from Russian missiles.
Anyone trying to convince you otherwise is a fool.
Iran hasn’t threatened anyone outside of Israel with its missiles.
The Russians have threatened the Europeans, NATO and the U.S. with its nuclear missiles. Heck, the Russians established military doctrine is the use of nuclear weapons, including short-range missiles, to defend against a conventional attack on Russian soil or even a threatening presence in their “near abroad.” That would include Poland.
Report comment to moderator
Does anyone actually read??
Obama had “made no commitment on” missile defense.
He doesn’t have his cabinet assembled and he isn’t president yet, but you want him to make hasty statements? You always want quick and easy answers to everything. Wouldn’t you rather have Obama privy to classified intel before he starts making statements? You think the CIA had been sharing the presidential briefs with him all this time?
Why would you want him burning bridges before he has even weighed the trade-offs and alternatives?
And btw, isn’t Bush the sitting president?
Report comment to moderator
LLAMA: It’s not going going a bit wobbly. It is full sail naive retreat, surrender and woosieness the left is so famous for
How exactly is “no commitment” going a bit wobbly? Just because someone in the MSM said it? Meet the echo chamber.
Report comment to moderator
Joe Biden was quite the prophet after all, no??
Report comment to moderator
#10 GOD,
Are you still on a first name basis with your Son or van you read his mind? I said Obama is a surrender monkey and so is the left. Even you must know all about this
Report comment to moderator
I said Obama is a surrender monkey and so is the left.
Why is this important other than in revealing yourself to others?
Report comment to moderator
the Russians established military doctrine is the use of nuclear weapons, including short-range missiles, to defend against a conventional attack on Russian soil or even a threatening presence in their “near abroad.”
Actually, due to Russia’s overwhelming numerical superiority during the Cold War, its always been basic NATO doctrine to use nuclear arms as a response to a Russian invasion. Without this doctrine, they were afraid the Russians would risk a conventional war. As for your opposite assertion, I find it hard to believe that the Russians would change hundreds of years of Russian military doctrine — their response to any threat to Russia has been fall back until the invasion has been overextended. Its worked so far so I doubt the Russians have changed their doctrine.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!