Going Nuclear: Will Russia Stop Iran?
Yet there is much working against a bargain with Russia. Moscow will undoubtedly try to complicate the situation and broaden the arrangement to include other things it wants. Some of those items on the Kremlin’s wish list are, from our perspective, desirable — an extension of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, for instance — and others are deeply objectionable, such as the exclusion of allies Ukraine and Georgia from NATO membership.
Yet the problems go beyond the intricacies of Russian negotiating tactics. Moscow, unfortunately, has core interests that would be undermined by such a deal with the United States. First and foremost, any arrangement might actually calm the Middle East. Russia, as British historian Niall Ferguson has pointed out, is the only major power with no interest in seeing peace in the region. The world’s biggest supplier of hydrocarbons is helped when troubles in that neighborhood send oil and gas prices skyward.
And Russia is hurt when those prices decline. The country’s gross domestic product dropped from an impressive 8.1 percent in 2007 to 5.6 percent last year due largely to the plunge in energy and metal prices in the second half of the year. Russian officials are now saying their country’s economy will contract by 2.2 percent this year, but even that assessment appears optimistic unless there is an unexpected recovery in commodities. Unfortunately, development of the industrial and service sectors lagged during Vladimir Putin’s tenure, so Russia is still held hostage to daily price changes in oil and gas. “I cannot remember a worse year since the end of the Second World War,” said Russian Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin, referring to 2008. Then I guess he is not looking forward to this year. Russia put together its 2009 budget on the assumption that oil would average $95 per barrel. After a small bounce upward, it is now trading around $50.
The precipitous fall in the Russian economy could make Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin more aware of the limitations on their ambitions, but it appears to be moving them in the opposite direction. President Medvedev, for instance, announced this week a major rearmament plan of both conventional and nuclear forces, despite the deterioration of the Russian economy. And senior Kremlin officials are continuing to blame the United States for the global downturn even though it is in their best interests to improve economic relations with Washington. There is no explanation for it except the one an analyst offered a few years ago: “The Russians are acting like Russians again.”
The fundamental problem with relying on Moscow, however, is not that the Russians are naturally hostile or that their interests are diametrically opposed to ours. It is that they will not make the decision to lend a hand until it is too late. The Obama administration has yet to acknowledge that the Iranians are close — perhaps within months — to acquiring all the knowledge and expertise needed to make nuclear weapons. We are, unfortunately, at the “last chance saloon.” Russia, even if it might be inclined to help avoid disaster, will not do so in time.
What country has lots of oil and gas it would like to sell at much higher prices? Russia. What country would be able to sell their oil and gas at much higher prices if the flow of oil from the Mideast was badly disrupted? Russia. Why would Russian leaders act to prevent what would be clearly in the best interest of Russia? No reason at all.
Putin may be a nasty person, but he isn’t stupid . . . unlike a good many I can think of in the Obama administration and Congress. A fairy godmother isn’t in the cards as of now, particularly a Russian fairy godmother.
unexpected recovery in commodities
uhm, it’s happening
Agreed, LarryOldtimer.
There’s no chance of Russia reining in Iran. Why would Russia want to ease the discomfort of the US?
For Russia, it’s still the old zero-sum game – whatever harms the US is good for them:
http://trackacrat.com/?s=russia
I think you are too sanguine about apparent competition between the Russian and Chinese states in the Middle East and elsewhere.
Let us grant that the conventional view – the view provided by the media – with respect to Iranian, Russian, and Chinese independence is accurate. Let us grant arguendo the proposition that cooperation and competition among these states is driven primarily by simple geography and economy. These are, after all, dispositive facts concerning any state.
And yet – clearly China has not been unaware that its sponsorship of Iran, through energy deals in excess of $100 billion over a decade and more, enables Iran to proceed on its apparently independent course. Moreover, perhaps it really is the case that China and Russia compete for Iranian influence: why would China stake a substantial chunk of its energy policy on a state of 70 million people governed by a tiny radical Islamic junta whose behavior brings it into near-crisis with the West, on whom China is utterly dependent for export markets? This is just for example.
And what are we to make of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which is holding its third joint military manuevors in northeast China in April?
Just for example. I think there is a persuasive argument to be made that these countries are not as distinct as some of their behavior and most or all of their official pronouncements would suggest.
Maybe the best thing the former Soviet satelite nations should do is to enter into mutual defense treaties with Russia. It is apparent no country in the west will protect the former satelites from Islam.
“Moreover, it should be possible for Washington to trade away missile defense for defanging Tehran.”
Evidence please! This is just more wishful thinking.
But wait, there is more!
“In fact, the Kremlin is key in just about everything involving the Islamic Republic. ”
Gordon, you need to check into rehab. The Mad Dog Mullahs will do what ever Allah tells them to do. MAD won’t work either, since MAD requires rational actors.
No, there is another BIG war coming. We can wait for our enemies to start it, which will happen as soon as they think they can win. Or we can start it ourselves, since we have overwhelming military power at this moment in history. Giving away that military power won’t help at all.
If the USA really wants to get the Russians to put pressure on the Mad Dog Mullahs, we don’t stop working on ADi. What we do is withdraw from the NPT. Once shed of that worthless piece of paper, we can do two thing. Sell Poland nukes and offer to turn Tehran into a glowing crater.
Let the Russians contemplate Poland with 50 or nukes and the TBM’s to mount them on and thier eagerness to cooperate will go way up. They will also stop their unseemly whining about SDI. They won’t block anymore UN resolutions either. They might even stop selling obsolete SAM’s to Iran.
Let the Chi-Coms ponder the possibilities of the ROC’s having a few dozne nukes and they will see the benifits of co-operation with regime change in Iran.
All we need to do is withdraw from the NPT, which isn’t working anyway.
This plan is based on good, basic, sound Machiavellian politics, the kind that makes the world go round. Your pipe dream is based on Democratic politics, which work fine within or between democracies, but not in a real world peopled with tyrants and dictators. As the greatest Tyrant of them all said;
“One mans death is a tragedy, a million deaths is a statistic.” In a democracy, people shudder at that quote. In the real world, Iosif Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili was merely stating a fact.
Anything that happens in the Russia/Iran equation cannot possibly be considered a “coup” for the obama “administration”. That would imply that someone in the obama “administration” actually had (1) developed a plan, (2) implemented the plan and (3) did something that was good for America.
They might do (1) and (2). But they will NEVER do (3). That is not what they were elected for.
in 1997. PNAC was founded by radical israeli americans of the AEI, kristol and kagan.
exxon started its overt support for the AEI in 1998.
in december of 2002, lee raymond, CEO of exxon, was named vice-chairman of the AEI’s board of trustees.
in late 2003, khodorkovsky, the israeli russian boss of yukos, attempted to sell yukos to exxon, exxon still run by CEO lee raymond —the same lee raymond who had become the vice-chairman of the board of the israeli american AEI think tank in 2002.
raymond retired from exxon at the end of 2005 with a $400 million dollar golden parachute (a bonus for his role in setting up the invasion of iraq?) and slid into his position as head of the National Petroleum Council in October of 2006.
raymond has lately disappeared from the AEI, and his disappearance may be an indication that the AEI is feeling some heat for its role in lying us into the PNAC oil acquisition project, not to mention the dawning suspicion that the AEI/PNAC outfit had something to do with staging 9/11.
if peak oil and global warming threaten israel, and if 9/11 was staged by PNAC signatories as the trigger for the AEI/PNAC/exxon oil and land acquisition project, and that project is intended to be the solution to peak oil and global warming, would that explain why the AEI and exxon are the most prominent deniers of global warming?
…would that explain why daniel yergin, CERA and exxon are the most prominent deniers of peak oil?
now then, if america’s been built from the ground up dependent on cheap oil, and if israel is dependent on america for its survival, and if america is threatened by peak oil, that means israel is threatened by peak oil.
since oil produces co2, and israel is threatened by sea level rise caused by global warming caused by co2 caused by burning oil, an effort must be made to curb co2 production by curbing use of oil, especially seeing as how china recently overtook the US as the world’s biggest producer of co2… curbing chinese use of energy means grabbing control of enough oil to forcibly restrict chinese access to oil… not to mention these PNAC dreams of global hegemony through control of energy, enforced, as a last resort, by nuke first strikes on russia and china.
…the sort of missile defenses that the United States might plausibly deploy would be valuable primarily in an offensive context, not a defensive one — as an adjunct to a U.S. first-strike capability, not as a standalone shield.
If the United States launched a nuclear attack against Russia (or China), the targeted country would be left with a tiny surviving arsenal — if any at all. At that point, even a relatively modest or inefficient missile-defense system might well be enough to protect against any retaliatory strikes, because the devastated enemy would have so few warheads and decoys left.
The Rise of U.S. Nuclear Primacy From CFR Foreign Affairs, March/April 2006
the project is a mostly a response to threats posed to israel by peak oil and global warming.
it wasnt much of a problem getting the duty warmongers to sign on, because they never met a war they didnt like.
it wasnt much of a problem getting exxon to sign on, because the US taxpayer would be footing the bill for exxon’s oil acquisition costs, at a time when access to big fields is declining and exploration and production costs are skyrocketing… exxon tried to start building nuke electric plants, but they gave up after the chernobyl disaster…
many americans might be driving electric cars by now had exxon continued to develop nuke electricity… but that would have reduced israel’s importance in US foreign policy.
…not to mention the fact that this is the last chance for anyone to achieve global hegemony before the oil runs out.
if you’re a radical jew, you might even see this as the last chance to make the world safe for ashkenazi supremacism, which is apparently what bill kristol is talking about when he says he wants “benevolent global hegemony”… as he conveniently overlooks the fact that his benevolence has caused a million needless deaths so far, and the project’s just getting started.
israel is dependent on the US for protection. the US isnt dependent on israel for anything.
israel must be protected as it continues its land acquisition project to compensate for land that will likely be lost to sea level rise.
the looters, some of whom have no allegiance to anything or anyone but themselves, see peak oil coming, and as they loot america, they, too, are jeopardizing israel’s chances of survival by prematurely crippling israel’s american protector.
the israelis, who have self-selected for paranoia and psychopathy for a few generations now, seem unable to grasp the fact that their best chance for survival depends on cooperation with their neighbors.
but maybe it’s all gone so far that common sense no longer has a chance.
Israel will stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons. The first test of an Irainian weapon will be the last thing the mullahs ever do.
if there was any proof of iran’s intentions of pursuing nuclear weapons, you might have a point… but there’s no proof, is there…? …other than evidence on a laptop computer that was probably planted by the same people who fabricated evidence of iraq’s WMDs.
how many times are we expected to fall for the same lame trick?
in the meantime, israel needs a war with iran to close hormuz, which will herd persian gulf oil to the med via pipelines to israel, which will make israel the oil hub of the middle east, which will give israel an income from oil transit revenues, which will give israel a way to make a living once its american protector expires from oil shortages and looters who see the peak oil handwriting on the wall.
map of the PNAC project
how long do you think you can keep this logic and these facts bottled up?
oh.
i forgot.
you’re an empire now, and when you act, you create your own reality.
at the risk of repeating myself…
we’ve got PNAC —a spinoff of the likud’s AEI, located in the same building as the AEI and bill kristol’s neocon flagship publication, the weekly standard— saying they need a “new pearl harbor” in september of 2000, a year before their “new pearl harbor” happens.
a couple months after PNAC says they need “a new pearl harbor”, PNAC signatories are installed into positions from which they can make their “new pearl harbor” happen —they are installed into those positions by an election recount in a state governed by the president’s brother, jeb bush, a PNAC member— and a few months after that, their hoped-for “new pearl harbor” happens.
once the “new pearl harbor” happens, on september 11, 2001, bibi netanyahu declares the 9/11 operation was “very good“… we have to assume that a handful of little nukes going off in american cities would have been even better… but maybe they’re saving that for “next time”.
what “next time” is that? …why, it’s the “next time” that cheney and chertoff have been warning us about.
it’s the “next time” that some neocons have said they need.
so if the neocons and their exxon allies needed the first “new pearl harbor”, and admit they need a new “new pearl harbor”, what’s a poor boy to think?
poor boys are led to the inescapable conclusion that PNAC, the AEI and their exxon allies had motives to stage 9/11.
…and once we’ve established they had a motive, the rest —means, opportunity and character— is duck soup.
MOTIVES: security for israel, oil for exxon: US taxpayers foot the bill
it’s no secret that the israelis have been pushing for reassembly of the middle east for decades, and it seems reasonable to assume that israel —located as it is adjacent to the world’s biggest oil patch— would not be nearly as important to america if america were not so dependent on oil…. for instance, if america was supplying itself with electricity from nuke plants built and operated by exxon, fueled with uranium from exxon mines.
once exxon became aware of israeli americans’ determination to thwart development of nuke plants, once exxon became aware of the power of the israeli american media, once exxon became aware of israeli and israeli american determination to remodel the middle east, exxon gave up on their nukes and joined up with the israeli americans in their land and oil acquisition project.
since the american taxpayer would be footing the bill for the project —at a time when oil is getting scarce and exploration and production costs are soaring— an alliance with the israeli americans and their PNAC project is the cheapest way for exxon to grab a chunk of the biggest oil reserves in the world.
…not to mention the inconvenient fact that israel must be secured before their american protector runs out of gas and collapses from being looted by oligarchs who see the peak oil handwriting on the wall.
Flicker what ever…..Did you steal Gordon’s rocks? I think you have burned enough to clog the pipe.
When it comes to OIL, your far fetched theory bumps into a practical fact or two.
ONE. The USA has the technology to exploit the Shale OIL beds in the Western states, Those would produce about 80 times the OIL contained in the entire Middle East. It would be simpler and cheaper to just mine the Shale OIL here in America.
TWO. If the law is going to be broken for OIL, it would be a lot cheaper to round up the ‘swampies’ (AKA greenies, environmentalists, etc.) and shoot them behind the left ear. Plus the President could write a pardon for the shooters and the whole thing would be a done deal.
Your theory is complex AND expensive. NO conservative will do somthing complicated and expensive when they can get the same results with simple and cheap. Liberals are the ones that go for complex and expensive. I think you are projecting.
graph: oil production, drills, and price
Larry Oldtimer, you wrote: “A fairy godmother isn’t in the cards as of now, particularly a Russian fairy godmother.” Yes, there are no Russian ones.
lisa, there is? A small bounce in prices is not really a recovery, especially because it will not last. In any event, unless there is a major geopolitical disaster this year of economic downturn, oil won’t average $95.
dan, I am not “sanguine about apparent competition between the Russian and Chinese states in the Middle East and elsewhere.” I am concerned about it. This competition causes a race to the bottom.
typos_R_us, I was merely stating what should be possible. As you can see from the article, I am saying Russia will not help.
As to deterrence of Iran, I don’t think we can say that it will not work. I would phrase it this way: we cannot assume that it will. We end up the same place, of course.
typos_R_us, your thoughts on the NPT are interesting and not without merit, but ultimately the U.S. is the nation that benefits most from that treaty. Why? We would be relatively stronger in a world without nukes. In fact, we would be essentially invulnerable to harm. With nukes, any ten-cent nation can cripple America and kill Americans by the millions.
Nukes, we need to remember, are the great equalizer. If you want a strong America, you should be trying with all your might to get rid of these weapons.
Meryl, I agree that Obama was not elected so that he would adopt a strong foreign policy, but he does not want to go down in history as presiding over the destruction of the West. Maybe he will get it right. After all, we all know what the mother of invention is.
Wally Lind, you wrote: “Israel will stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.” Well, we should be stopping Iran ourselves. Israel, unfortunately, does not have the conventional means to do so. It can slow Iran down, but it can only buy a few years at most.
flickervertigo, this is not just a question of a stolen laptop. The bulk of the evidence so far suggests there is an ongoing Iranian nuclear weapons program. The reason there is no “proof” is that Iran is blocking IAEA inspections. If it did not have such a program, why is it impeding inspectors?
maybe then it’s about time you coughed that evidence up and showed it to elbaradei so he could bust iran’s chops.
but that wouldnt be much good, would it? …because what you really need is war to close hormuz to herd oil to israel.
PNAC plan map
israel proposes to ship oil and gas thousands of extra miles, through turkmenistan, across the caspian, through azerbaijan, georgia and turkey, piped to israel, then piped through israel, and finally loaded on tankers for shipment to india and points east.
russia has offered to extend its blue stream gas line to israel, probably a carrot to get the israelis and israeli americans to slack off on the PNAC project….
but it’s just too damn bad putin dumped the oily russians who were allied with the AEI, isnt it? …it makes the PNAC project kind iffy without those guarantees of russian oil.
we gots to herd oil and gas towards israel and away from china, which explains the commotion in pakistan and afghanistan.
operation enduring turmoil
and you must remember pepeters’ neocon map, dont you?
“Why? We would be relatively stronger in a world without nukes. In fact, we would be essentially invulnerable to harm. With nukes, any ten-cent nation can cripple America and kill Americans by the millions.”
Factually inaccurate on several accounts.
First, the NPT doesn’t get rid of nukes. It is delusional to think that ANYTHING, much less a piece of paper will put the nuclear genie back in his bottle.
As far as a nickle dime nation crippling America, it can’t happen, withor without nukes. The Rand study I was part of back in the 70′s determined that it would take over 800 megatons to cripple America. That is approximately 5,000 Hiroshima sized weapons.
Are you one of those “On the Beach” guys? Good Sci-Fi, but not based on reality. The Mazda plant in Nagasaki is built on Ground zero of a dirty bomb. No FLK’s ( funny looking kids. A term used by nuclear weapons guys) coming out of there. No Mazda employees dying of cancer in job lots. No, most of the victims of a nuclear weapon are killed by the after fires, which are no worse then those of a normal firestorm like what happened in Hamberg, Dresden or Toyoko.
Both Bush and Clinton screwed the pooch on Iran. They raised a fuss about Iran building their bomb. All that does is confuse the issue. That issue should be Iran violating the NPT, which requires unlimited access to nuclear sites. The Russians don’t want that since they violated the NPT by providing the Mad Dog Mullahs with the technology to build nukes in the first place.
I’m certain the Russians have a safeguard in place to prevent the MDM from waking up one day with an order fromAllah to nuke moscow. I’m just as certain the MDM’s have found a way around it. MOIS is about the best in the business. Plus they use techniques that would make a liberal pass out just to hear about.
No, to many nations have nukes now for any sort of MAD scheme to work. When a 30Kt device ignites in New York Harbor, it won’t destroy New York. It will leave a mark. It will also leave the Usurper with a problem. Who did the deed? Iran? the Norks? Pakistan? Israel? Yes Israel. If the nitty gets gritty, Israel nuking New York to trick the USA into Nuking Iran would be a good plan. One Mossad would be able to pull off.
The NPT was supposed to stop that sort of stuff, only the NPT isn’t working. It isn’t working because it was intended as a stop gap measure. Time has ran out.
Eventually, nukes will be used again. No way to stop that. We can limit the damage. We do that with SDI. Keep the delivery of a nuke the area of bad spy novels and they can only be sent one or two at a time. SPy vs spy is better then hundreds of ICBM’s crossing in space. Way better. As long as the USA has SDI, we have the advantage in any exchange of ICBM’s. Russia knows that and since they cannot match the techgnology, not even if they steal it, the Russians are trying to get the USA to give up our advantage.
The Usurper won’t be in the oval office in two years, so the Russians have a limited windo here. Any deal they make with this administration will be null and void after the Usurper is removed from office.
Any harm to America would come in the form of harming the Constitution, since they are one and the same. That attack has already been successful.
a nuke first strike on russia and china is the ticket!
yessir, and nevermind those russian and chinese missiles are underground, and our first strike missiles would put megatons of radioactive dirt into the air… just nevermind that, because the nuke fimbulwinter will shade the planet for at least four or five years, and that will be the end of all the exxon/AEI bullshit denying global warming.
from the council on foreign relations foreign affairs March/April 2006…
how do we justify a nuke first strike on russia, i wonder?
boris berezovsky is a mathematician and game theory guy, or more specifically, a “decision theorist“, with lots of heavy duty computer expertise. So he’s a psychohistorian….
the tricky part is figuring out whose side he’s on. He’s definitely against putin, he’s an israeli citizen, although he’s a little too classy to hang out in israel. But his citizenship gives us a hint of his leanings. Other than that, he may be just another run-of-the-mill psychopath who has only one side: his own.
we know berezovsky helped install the drunk yeltsin so he could help himself to russia’s assets as the soviet union collapsed. Some russians believe berezovsky was a major cause of that collapse. We know he’s a crook who faces russian charges of tax evasion, fraud and grand theft.
we know he’s been mixed up in murder cases –being boris’ buddy is one of the most hazardous occupations on earth– and we know he was displeased with paul klebnikov, the american editor of forbes’ russian edition who wrote a book about berezovsky’s criminal behavior, including the murder of one of russia’s most famous television personalities… so we got listyev, klebnikov followed by politkovskaya and litvenenko… all murdered, all connectied with mr. berzovsky.
berezovsky supported putin in the 2000 elections in russia, but started calling for violent overthrow of putin once putin cracked down on israeli russian oligarchs… israeli americans and the zionist media are also gunning for putin, because he threw a monkeywrench into neocon plans to use russian oil while they remodeled the middle east oil patch.
we know berezovsky is associated with bunnypants’ brother, neil bunnypants, in business, and lord knows how those boys define “business”. So that’s another indication of berezovsky’s leanings.
we know boris is involved with chechens, and he paid chechen terrorist leader shamil basayev millions of dollars… basayev was the great white hope for driving russians from the north caucasus and chopping off that chunk of russia that hangs down to the caspian and black seas…which would clear the way the PNAC pipelines, and would further isolate russia by blocking russian access to its southern european export port.
map 3309 x 3408
we know boris backed yulia, yushchenko and the “orange revolution” in ukraine, which supposedly would be more favorable to the PNAC european pipelines. yulia’s had her ups and downs, but is currently back in power, up to her eyeballs in the continuing shootouts between russia and ukraine over gas supplies… but that’s what the ”orange revolution” was about: installing PNAC puppets to block russian access to european energy markets.
we know boris has made secret trips to kyrgyzstan, site of the “tulip revolution” that was supposed to give israeli america another foothold in central asia, block russian access to markets and block chinese access to energy.
and you got to wonder how berezovsky’s “decision theories” dovetail with good ol’ doc aumann’s “game theories“, dont you?
and we got to wonder why there was such an uproar about aumann getting the nobel prize…. there must be lots of people who are beginning to understand the role of psychohistorians like berezovsky and aumann in planning wars, and incidents that trigger wars, and tiny applications of force that cause massive changes in the course of history.
but the most worrisome thing about berezovsky is his statement that chechens acquired nukes as the soviets union collapsed…
he’s planting a legend that can be used in a nuke false flag operation.
typos_R_us says…
think you could get away with it again?
and the jury’s still out on 9/11… it may take a few more years, but the logic cant be refuted and evidence is growing every time one of you people mouths off like you just did.
Mr. Chang – I meant to raise the possibility that Russian and Chinese governments are actually pursuing a coordinated strategy, one of the most important features of which is that they appear to Not be cooperating. I think the possibility is actually more like a probability, if not a certainty, given the suddenly strategic importance of the role of Iran just now – which is not, in my opinion, the result of the US intervention in the region. Since the strategic transformation of Persia began as early as 1998 when Russia agreed to produce Bushehr, or even 1996 when Russia and China founded the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, I’m persuaded that Iran’s strategic role was something Russia and China intended it to play, which Required US intervention in the region. Probable? I’m not sure, but it is possible, and these are not normal times, nor is this a normal role for an absolute quasi-barbaric state like Iran to play in the present geopolitical environment. I smell a trap.
typos_R_us, just one detonation of a nuclear weapon in or over the United States could end America as a world power for generations. America without its capital or New York would not be able to exercise power for long. The same is true if we did not have electricity or vital networks for six months to a year.
Without the NPT, what is your justification for disarming Iran?
dan, thanks for the explanation. There is a possiblity that both Russia and China are working according to a master plan, but, given their histories, I would be surprised if that were the case. They may work with each other, but only on limited issues and for limited times. China is cooperating behind the scenes on a long-term basis, but it is with North Korea and Pakistan.
Nonetheless, I will have to think more about the interesting possibilities of a Moscow-Beijing partnership. I very much appreciate your raising this matter.
flickervertigo, the Council on Foreign Relations take on missile defense is not well thought out. Missile defense is much more suitable for dealing with the Irans and North Koreas of the world, not the Chinas and Russias, which can hide many warheads on submarines. Sub-launched missiles can overwhelm any missile defense system, either the one in place now or any system in the foreseeable future.
gordon chang says…
what’s the US navy for? arent they shadowing russian/chinese subs? …or are all those billions we spend on the navy a waste?
dont you want nuke first strikes on russia and china? …how else are you gonna get them to knuckle under to the PNAC project?
how you gonna achieve “benevolent global hegemony” if you dont get russia and china to knuckle under?
i mean, we’ve demonstrated our benevolence by causing the deaths of maybe a million people so far, and the project’s just getting started… who’s gonna quibble about a few hundred million more dead?