Selling out to the Russians in hope of getting their "help" against the Iranians, who won't negotiate the issues of nukes or missiles at all. Foreign Policy wise, he is looking like a repeat of Carter only 10x worse.


PRAGUE/WARSAW (Reuters) - President Barack Obama has told east European states he was backing away from plans for an anti-missile shield there, in a move that may ease Russian-U.S. ties but fuel fears of resurgent Kremlin influence.

Poland said Obama would announce a final decision on the project, a major source of tension between Washington and Moscow, later on Thursday.

The shield, involving interceptor missiles in Poland and a radar complex in the Czech republic, was promoted by Obama's predecessor George W. Bush to defend against any missile launches from "rogue" states such as Iran and North Korea.

"Today, shortly after midnight, Barack Obama telephoned me to announce that his government is backing away from the intention of building a missile defense radar on Czech territory," Czech Prime Minister Jan Fischer told reporters.

"The Czech Republic acknowledges the decision."

A senior Polish source close to the negotiations told Reuters Warsaw had received a similar message. "We will not have the interceptors for now."

The Obama administration seeks to "reset" battered ties with Russia so that the two former Cold War foes can cooperate on Iran, on fighting Taliban insurgents in Afghanistan and on reducing their vast arsenals of nuclear weapons.

Russia is allowing the United States to move trains carrying supplies for U.S. forces across the country via Central Asia to Afghanistan, avoiding routes through Pakistan that had come under frequent attack from the Taliban.

Washington is also seeking Russian support in economic sanctions against Tehran, which it accuses of developing nuclear weapons.

Diplomats in Moscow say Russian hardliners could read the shield backdown as a sign of U.S. weakness. Far from doing the bidding of the United States, they may instead press for further gains to shore up Russian power in the former Soviet bloc.

Eastern European states, especially Poland and the Baltic states, saw the missile plan as a symbol of U.S. commitment to the defense of the region against any encroachment by former Soviet masters 20 years after the collapse of communist rule.

IRANIAN MISSILES

Some east Europeans see Russia's brief war with Georgia last year and confrontations with Ukraine over gas supplies as symptoms of a Russian 'neo-imperialism' driven by a view of eastern Europe as belonging to Moscow's sphere of influence.

"This would be very bad," said Witold Waszczykowski, deputy head of Poland's National Security Bureau which advises President Lech Kaczynski. "Without the shield we would de facto be losing a strategic alliance with Washington."

Ignoring U.S. assurances that the system was not targeted at Russia, President Dmitry Medvedev threatened last year to station missiles in a Russian enclave near Poland if the United States implemented the plan.

For Poland, the timing of the announcement is particularly sensitive. Thursday marked the 70th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of eastern Poland following a pact between Moscow and Nazi Germany, an event seen by Poles as "a stab in the back."

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/i...17?sp=true

Not shocked at all by this. The appeaser and chief always intended to scrap missile defense. There will be more shoes to drop. Look for funding to be cut as well.

Say what you want about Bush, but he wasn't naive about the nature of Iran's leadership, or Russia's. Obama is a fool.

You realize this is also the anniversary of Russia invading Poland?

Talk about one huge FU to our allies, yet again.




problem of worldview, Obama is such a clueless/useful idiot. Horrible Economy made worse by idiot leaders, same leaders accomaditing the jackals around the world...sounds like late 1930's UK/USA

Obama is treating our enemies better than Shrub treated our friends.
Both are equally wrong.

read it and cry: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/wo...838377.ece

Tyrany marches on

Total Victory for Putin

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...ussia.html

Obama proves at every turn that he is a weak ineffectual leader, just what the Left wing American people ordered. He may live to regret it. Or he may just continue off the deep end like Carter. Either way the US is being weaken by a president who took an Oath to preserve, protect and defend. None of which IMO he is doing.

(09-17-2009 08:23 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Obama is treating our enemies better than Shrub treated our friends.
Both are equally wrong.

What do you mean OUR enemies?

There are no enemies............... just competeting interests. The trick is to align those interests. The guy's above are living in the 70's stuck in the cold war. The military inductrial complex is a formidable beast because of this mentality.

Quote:Thursday’s decision is another sign that “the Americans are not interested in this territory as they were before,” said Mirek Topolanek, a former Czech prime minister whose government signed treaties with the United States to set up the shield.
“It’s not good,” said former Polish president and Solidarity leader Lech Walesa.
“I can see what kind of policy the Obama administration is pursuing towards this part of Europe,” Walesa said. “The way we are being approached needs to change.”…
The decision to scrap the plan is sure to have future consequences for U.S. relations with eastern Europe.

“If the administration approaches us in the future with any request, I would be strongly against it,” said Jan Vidim, a lawmaker with Czech Republic’s

Oh, I see. A permanent, long range land based system is better than a shorter range, mobile, land and sea system.

(09-17-2009 12:30 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  There are no enemies............... just competeting interests. The trick is to align those interests. The guy's above are living in the 70's stuck in the cold war. The military inductrial complex is a formidable beast because of this mentality.

While I was in the Navy during the Cold War, my feelings are not based upon hostility to the Russians. The US ABM system that was to be based in Eastern Europe didn't have the capability to intercept Russian IRBM's headed to targets in Western Europe.

The bases were specifically placed and designed to intercept re-entry vehicles on trajectories coming from the Middle East.

The Russians were raising hell just because they didn't want any more US bases in that they still consider to be "their turf"...

We gave in to the Russian complaints on the "hope" that they would do something to restrain the Iranian nuclear and missile programs. The Iranians have already told the US, the UN and everyone else that these programs are not for negotiation.

I'm pissed that we gave into Russian bitching for nothing.

Now if I wanted to tweak the Russians, I'd bring Ukraine into NATO and base a wing of F-15E's in Kiev.

(09-17-2009 12:30 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  There are no enemies............... just competing interests. The trick is to align those interests. The guy's above are living in the 70's stuck in the cold war. The military industrial complex is a formidable beast because of this mentality.

Not true.

At the very minimum, there will always be those whose interests are perpetually aligned against yours. You may choose not to call them enemies, but that's what they are.

The cold war "guilt by association" concept, that anyone who is friends with, say, Russia is automatically an enemy of ours, is the kind of thinking that does need to go away. As does the idea that we can somehow save the world by exporting democracy (although at the rate we're going, it may soon be the only thing that we can export).

How long do you give before Putin starts to reclaim "their turf", i.e. the Eastern Bloc countries? Georgia first or Ukraine? Putin wants control of all the oil pipelines that feed Europe

(09-17-2009 12:49 PM)GGniner Wrote:  How long do you give before Putin starts to reclaim "their turf", i.e. the Eastern Bloc countries? Georgia first or Ukraine? Putin wants control of all the oil pipelines that feed Europe

What makes you think those efforts are not already underway?

(09-17-2009 01:01 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(09-17-2009 12:49 PM)GGniner Wrote:  How long do you give before Putin starts to reclaim "their turf", i.e. the Eastern Bloc countries? Georgia first or Ukraine? Putin wants control of all the oil pipelines that feed Europe

What makes you think those efforts are not already underway?

Oh I do, they planned and setup the Georgia invasion last year for months if not years then played the Western Media(or is it theirs?) into repeating their version of what happened.

Question is when do they figure they have things in place to go the full nellie and get away with it, with little condemnation from the West.

Barack Obama is all about empowering other countries imperialism

(09-17-2009 12:30 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  There are no enemies............... just competeting interests. The trick is to align those interests. The guy's above are living in the 70's stuck in the cold war. The military inductrial complex is a formidable beast because of this mentality.

I can tell you've never fought in a War if you honestly think this way.

We have many many enemies and they are not ashamed to admit it either.

There are no "Competing Interest" when you are on the wrong end of a Russian or Chicom AK47 or Dragunov Rifle.

The powers that control them may be working the scene like the back door at the Stock Market, but the Grunt in the Field believes he is Fighting a War for his Cause ..... and that makes his tiny ass an "ENEMY".

.

(09-17-2009 12:47 PM)WMD Owl Wrote:  I'm pissed that we gave into Russian bitching for nothing.

Not true. In return, we get this: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8251531.stm

(09-11-2009 12:00 AM)BBC News Wrote:Putin warns against Iran attack

Iran insists its nuclear programme is for peaceful civilian purposes
Russian PM Vladimir Putin has warned against military action targeting Iran or imposing new sanctions to curb its nuclear programme.
Iran's latest proposals on its nuclear ambitions have brought diverging views from the US and Russia.
Earlier, a US official told the BBC that Washington was unhappy with the proposals, submitted on Wednesday.
Correspondents say parties involved are making their positions clear ahead of the UN General Assembly this month.
President Barack Obama has given Tehran until the end of September to respond to his friendlier overtures or face new sanctions.
But the US and Israel have never ruled out the option of air strikes on Iran to stop it acquiring an atomic weapon.
In contrast to Washington's negative response on Iran's new proposal, Russia's foreign minister described them as a positive step forward and ruled out sanctions on Iran's oil sector.
Terror warning
Mr Putin, speaking in Moscow, said any attack on Iran would be "very dangerous, unacceptable and would lead to "an explosion of terrorism".
"I doubt very much that such strikes would achieve their stated goal," he added.
However, Mr Putin called on Tehran to "show restraint" in its nuclear programme.
"This is a dangerous region and Iran should show responsibility, especially by taking into account Israel's concerns," he said.
The five-page Iranian proposal was submitted to the group of six global powers negotiating over its nuclear enrichment programme - the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, plus Germany.

Mr Putin has warned Iran to show restraint in its plans
Details have been published on the website of the US non-profit investigative journalism group, ProPublica.
In it, Tehran offers to hold "comprehensive, all-encompassing and constructive" negotiations on a range of security issues, including global nuclear disarmament.
But the document makes no mention of Iran's own nuclear programme.
On Friday, France called on Tehran to attend a multilateral meeting before the UN General Assembly on 23 September.
French foreign ministry spokeswoman Christine Fages said EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana was in contact with Tehran to try to organise a meeting.
Mr Solana's spokeswoman, Cristina Gallach, said the six had agreed to seek a meeting in a telephone conference earlier on Friday.
She said Iran's proposals did not answer key questions about its own nuclear programme.
"The document is more focused on global questions than on nuclear ones," she added.
Philip Crowley, US Assistant Secretary of State for Public Affairs, earlier told the BBC's World Today programme that Iran had to prove it was ready to live up to commitments it had made.
"Our concern is that the response itself did not really address what is the core issue of the international community and the core concern, which is Iran's nuclear ambitions," he said.

.

Oh screw Putin ..... he needs to go back out to Chernobyl, take his shirt off, and prance around with his Man-Boobs some more.

I am sure Maxim Magazine just can't get enough of this Truly Rugged and Savage Individual being all manly in the Russian Outback.

What a Maroon !!!!!!!

.

(09-17-2009 12:30 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  There are no enemies............... just competeting interests. The trick is to align those interests. The guy's above are living in the 70's stuck in the cold war. The military inductrial complex is a formidable beast because of this mentality.

I have two complimentary political philosophies (in effect, I am Hobbesian)

A) Politics is ALWAYS a zero-sum game.
B) Life is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short

So I believe you are absolutely positively wrong. The world is zero-sum, and that makes many of the have-nots intrinsically believe that the US is their enemy.

Think of it this way. The world is a cake, and every slice I take is a piece removed from your ability to eat cake. It is impossible for my interests (eating cake) to align with your interests (eating cake.) It's physically impossible.

You simply will never be able to globally align interests, whether political, economic or social / religious. Attempting otherwise (Obama's foreign policy) takes our cake and tries to shoehorn a sum-sum result into a decidedly and incontrovertably Hobbsian world.