Talk to Russian Bear, forget ‘War on Oil Supplies’
If you're new here at 2thinknow, and you're interested in the latest ideas on trends, companies and innovation, subscribe to our RSS feed. Thanks for your visit!
ANALYSIS,
The Russian Bear has always viewed the concept of diminished power as rather misleading, hence the recent ‘strong-man’ photos of Putin fishing as well as renewed nuclear force deployment and military investment.
Russian & America
Of course, no one in the US really thought about how Putin would react. This was Putin’s point these past weeks. Don’t underestimate Russia.
Engineering and building weapons systems including ICBMs is something the Russians have proven themselves very talented at. North Koreans have not.
Russian ICBMs are a far greater threat to Europe than a few North Korean missiles which most likely will blow-up before leaving
The Bush Administration is to be blamed for shifting the War on Oil Supplies (or WOS?, better known as the War On Terror, or WOT?) to the front foot over traditional strategic concerns like European power.
Bush may be good for a beer and a blonde joke, but Texas & GOP power-brokers did the wrong thing promoting him as their choice to secure ‘world oil future’.
Cheney and some good ol’ boys may have drove bus, but nobody thought to check whether circumventing the road rules that protect us from political opportunism was actually a good idea. The bus hit a roadside mine and seems to be smouldering.
Accusations of stupidity or Machiavellian thinking miss the point. If you digest Machiavelli’s instructive book The Prince, the Iraq War still appears a bad idea. Machiavelli would have turned over in the grave.The whole plan (such as it was) cannot have been executed very well.
“Bad plan, done bad, …pass the pretzels”
The point is not just that Bush Jnr went to war, but that he did so in such a spectacularly untalented fashion. This talentless duck-shoot was the administration’s fault, not the military.
A war is a political option (hopefully of last resort) to achieve an objective.
But did achievement of those objectives (which we can only surmise) really necessitate the destruction of massive value & reputation of the
“Was it worth it?”
There was a net increase in wealth and power to a few
But the Iraq adventure really get anyone anywhere or accomplish even the objectives it set out to?
How much this war damage
“Is there an alternative to war for oil?”
I’d like to believe there are smart people globally who can solve the problems of the environment and energy supplies. I would like to think we are smart enough.
I have faith that we are.
As a Christian I’d like to reclaim something stolen by a few dogmatic Bush supporters.
The Iraq War has not been a war of faith.
“Is a lack of faith, faith”?
When I hear the media regurgitate “war of faith” I want to throw a dictionary.
The Iraq War is a war of lack of faith in humanity’s God-given brains and talent.
It is a sign of lack of faith and idolatry to think you have to seize control of the world because no one can be trusted. Not even God?
The Bush takeover of the White-House was allowed by the GOP because the message was Bill
This is not partisan, this is dumb, faith-less conduct (Bush) versus intelligent thinking (Clinton). Read opponent Al Gore’s book “The Assault on Reason”.
In the end Bush can be accused of both doing the wrong thing in Europe and the Middle East and leaving Americans and the world far worse than he found it.
And here we return to Communism
Europe is not always right. 1980s GOP hard-line President Reagan, although much belittled by Europe, solidly contributed in some ways to ending Communism, something
The
But now nobody at the top in the USA has been watching
Being asleep at the wheel of the bus is not a defence. Nor is 100+ holidays a year.
And ignoring our long-standing allies the French to fight in the
France almost bankrupted it’s own country in the 1770s to bankroll the US War of Independence from Britain, and set in motion the wheels that lead to their own 1789 French Revolution and the overthrow of their own French monarchy.
More’s the pity the US have the sharp Condoleeza Rice, who cut her teeth on KGB case files. They also have dozens of generals and top brass who war-gamed
My wife and many friends lived under a Communist regime, if you do not believe it was terrible, we are happy to arrange a ‘live-like-a-communist-trip-of-a-lifetime’.
Balance of power
Communism ended in
This will necessitate a counter-balancing pole of power, which
In other words, we have a map not dissimilar to post-Bismarck Europe and broader
Problems are created when broad balance strategies are not pursued.
Power inbalances lead to stupid follies where the ‘dominant’ powers overcomes common sense because there is no constraint on their option. Such as the ‘War on Oil Supplies’.
The broad poles of power are shaping, which means that
If so does this compare with the power of a military and political force the size of
If the terrorists had 1 dirty atomic bomb would we be more worried than 100 ICBMs? Terrorists are stateless criminals and should be treated as a police action. Wars are against governments and are treated separately.
Russia is saying at this stage “treat us with some respect”.
Compare this with the map of the Middle East. The best that could be said about the War in
Smart is as smart does.
And nobody in the US & UK has done anything too smart recently.
A Russian Future
It is dangerous to assume that Russian citizens are as bothered by their supposed poverty as they are by a loss of power. Historically Russians have had a huge and powerful military country, even under the Tsar and before Communism.
To forget
To say
On the other hand it is also simplisitic and naïve to look at
Russia will always attract strongman leaders, brutal tactics and demand some respect both for its sheer size, military muscle, nuclear arsenal and above all for it’s political clout as a pole of power.
Russian pole of power
It may be the digital age, it may be all 24/7 all the time.
But fact is, power still comes down to lines on a map, trade routes and military strength.
It may not be idealistic, but if anything history has shown the view to be correct.
Worry about the guy with the biggest stick or ICBM.
Not a few thousand AK-47s, some nut-bags, some Semtex and a whole lot of desert.
Terrorism? Pah. Compare that to 100 targeted ICBMs.
We don’t have the luxury to be British snobs about real power.
Dosvedanya!
Christopher
Speaker. Author. Editor-In-Chief. Executive Director of Innovation, 2thinknow.
What's your View?
Or Follow us on Twitter or StumbleUpon