U.S. offers Russia significant new concessions to gain support for missile shield

[rodeodance]

Source: iht



> http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/10/19/africa/nato.php

U.S. offers Russia significant new concessions to gain support for missile shield
By Judy Dempsey
Saturday, October 20, 2007

BRUSSELS: The United States has offered significant new concessions to Russia in its drive to gain Russian support for the antiballistic missile shield the Pentagon intends to deploy in Eastern Europe, according to U.S. and NATO officials.

The offer, made last week in Moscow by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Defense Secretary William Gates, was formally presented Wednesday to NATO ambassadors and top Russian security officials.

NATO diplomats said it was an important shift by the Bush administration as it seeks the endorsement of the 26-member alliance. The United States says the shield is a response to potential threats from rogue nations, principally Iran, while Russian officials have called the system a Trojan horse designed to counter Moscow's strategic rocket forces

"I consider the U.S. proposal on missile defense as very important," Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, the NATO secretary general, said in an interview. "The Americans have made a substantial and fundamental offer. I sincerely hope the Russians will pick it up."

.............

U.S. officials said the offer to Russia contained three main elements:

First, the antimissile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic would be deployed on the basis of threat. The United States and Russia would jointly decide the nature of the threat.



Read more: http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/10/19/africa/nato.php

[tom_paine]

1. New Hitler is trying to lull New Stalin into laxing the defense on his western border

I am sure I don't have to tell new Stalin that New Hitler's intentions aren't honorable, because New Stalin knows New Hitler as well as he knows himself, for they are Soul-Mates and Peas in a Pod.

Watching the New Grand Chessboard unfold is the a repeat performance of the Serial Idiocy of Humanity.

HINT and a peek into the mind of a tyrant: No matter what Bushler SAYS, the ONLY important thing when push comes to shove is WHO WILL PHYSICALLY CONTROL THE MISSILES? Treaties mean nothing to New Hitler and New Stalin, just like the old versions, and they both know it. So, Bushler is content to offer Putin AAAAAALLLLLLLLL the concessions he wants. Concessions are easy when you have no intention of honoring your part ofthe bargain.

It's all depressingly familiar. This kind of bullshit is happening for the thousandth time...literally. :boring: It is woven into the Old American Republic's old culture of the Defense of Liberty, which no longer exists today and what still does has largely been turned to serve the opposite (BushPutinism) of what it thinks it is defending.

Hell, the Star Wars Prequel Trilogy is so much like the story of Bush, Cheney, and Dukoo Bin Laden, people think he wrote it to criticize them, when all Lucas was looking at was past incarnation of how past tyrants have rose up and taen over nation;s from within while pretending to be it's greatest defender. Again, it's been done. :boring:

It is woven into our culture almost universally as warning, pre-2000, and now we watch as what we were being warned against happens, step-by-step, before our eyes.

[allisonthegreat]

12. yes but for the millionth time. n/t

[David__77]

2. NATO should disband. That would be a good concession.

NATO is a relic of Cold War strategy and was set up entirely as a means to place a cordon around the then-Soviet Union. Now it is doing the same with regard to Russia. Putin would be foolish to give more than passing consideration to such marginal "offers" presented.

[aquart]

3. NO!

Good grief, that's the last thing you should want. Right now, NATO ties Europe to us in mutual defense agreements. Remove that, and all the new defense agreements worldwide will NOT include us.

Personally, I don't wanna be that naked in the world.

[creeksneakers2]

4. We need mutual defense from whom?

Nobody is going to militarily attack us. Nobody has enough hardware to begin to do it. Nobody even wants to attack us. What do we need a mutual defense pact for?

[aquart]

14. Lord, you think it's 1980.

The mutual defense pacts will be formed by others to protect themselves FROM us.

Go away. You haven't the smallest tiniest idea what's involved and what's happening here.

[Progressive Friend]

13. Exactly, disolve NATO!

We should also remove all of our military bases from Europe (and the rest of the world) as well.

Down with the empire!

[TheLastMohican]

19. Putin is no fool

Unlike Bush, he can see not only into Bush's soul, but into the soul of Condi, Rumy, and their enablers.

[creeksneakers2]

5. Bush is both nuts and dishonest

Iran doesn't have missiles to hit Europe with. Iran doesn't even have a reason to attack Europe. If Iran did attack Europe, Europe would level Iran.

Of all the possible threats in the universe, Bush loves the ones that will never happen most of all.

Somebody has to be making big money off this missile defense stuff. It doesn't even work and Bush pays $10s of billions to install it everywhere. There is no other logical explanation for what Bush does other than obedience to the military industrial complex.

[Dover]

7. Well, France certainly seems concerned.

With Russia, the 'Stans', China and Iran in a loose alliance, I can't imagine European countries are feeling terribly secure. And I can't imagine Putin taking Bush's bait. It is well known this administration holds no reverence for laws and official agreements.

[creeksneakers2]

8. Then France should pay for the missile shield

The Russians don't want to take over Europe. They lost money on it last time. The Chinese don't want to take over Europe. European investors create most of their jobs. The Stans are no threat even combined. Europe has lots of money. More than we do measured some ways. Let them defend themselves if they want to guard against nonexistent threats.

[Dover]

9. Defend themselves? You might find this article of interest:

General Bentegeat: 'Paris could boost defence Europe'

http://www.lefigaro.fr/english/20070926.WWW000001554_general_bentegeat_paris_could_boost_defence_europe_.html



And here's what France's leader is saying:

"Nobody could be more peaceful than me": during a visit to Moscow yesterday, Bernard Kouchner tried to lessen the shock imparted by his remarks Sunday, when he said that the world must "prepare for the worst," namely, "war" with Iran. "There is no threat of war, in any case not from France," the foreign minister said, describing the warlike interpretation of his remarks as "manipulation." "We must negotiate, negotiate ceaselessly, without fear of rebuffs," he added. However, "we must not hide from the truth": this is the essence of the message that Bernard Kouchner, following Nicolas Sarkozy, is keen to convey. "There is a catastrophic scenario that is making rapid headway and that we want to avert," Quai d'Orsay sources explained yesterday. "All the risks are on the table now," they added: "swift and strong action is needed to avert these risks." According to one senior diplomat, "there is a feeling of urgency, that exists not only on the F! rench side but that is increasingly shared."

German hesitation

This being so, Paris is advocating a stiffening of sanctions, partly by means of binding measures drawn up by the EU countries, outside the UN framework. Such an approach is designed to show Iran the international community's resolve and to press that country to abandon its uranium enrichment programme. "It is a matter of demonstrating the great seriousness that we attach to the sanctions process," sources said. ...>

http://www.lefigaro.fr/english/20070919.WWW000000390_paris_wants_to_stiffen_sanctions_against_iran.html

[creeksneakers2]

10. I did find that interesting, thank you.

France plays games with the other EU nations confident that the Americans will protect them.

[cliss]

6. Isn't that a funny headline?

The US offers major 'concessions' to the Russians so they can get support from the Russianss to get up a missile shield. The missile shield is going to be aimed at Russia.

And they are supposed to go along with this? This is every bit as bad as the "negotiation" they had with Saddam: prove you don't have WMD's or we'll invade. Another impossible negotiating point to Iran: Prove you are not developing nukes or we'll bomb you.

I hope the irony is not lost on the Russians.

[MetaTrope]

15. So Bush is giving Russia control over our missile defense?

Why am I not surprised?

[TheLastMohican]

20. From what I gather from the Russian sources

the 95% public consensus is that this missile shield has only "Anti-Russia" purpose.
Iran doesn't have the kind of missiles to counter them with this shield, nor it will have them in the nearest 20-30 years.
But the radars can control Russian airspace up to the Urals.

This is a "stand or die" situation for Russia and Bush shouldn't count on the person succeeding Putin as the head of state. The next person will be just opposed to this as Putin. This is a question of russian sovereingty put forward.

[HuffleClaw]

11. wow, what a waste of money

for something that will never work.

[Daphne]

16. Don't worry...

Bush has "looked into Putin's eyes"

Oh God, I'm climbing under my desk now....

[Strelnikov_]

17. Translation

There is a chance we may not be able to steal enough votes to win the next election, so we have to get the contracts awarded to our cronies ASAP.

[0007]

18. I think some nice and shinny beads would work if junior

invited Putin over for a sandwich and a cool drink of cola.