Russia number 1 geopolitical threat: Mitt Romney.

[Sallow]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5weGTPkaL7o]Romney: Alarmed by Obama open mic gaffe - YouTube[/ame]

The last time we had someone that felt this way was George W. Bush. Because of the focus on Russia and China..the focus was taken off the "mosquitoes" as Bush called them..and one of those "mosquitoes" was able to pull off the greatest foreign terror attack in history.

As a New Yorker..it's scary when you hear someone talk like this. Boehner even took him out the the woodshed..

"Clearly while the president is overseas, he's at a conference and while the president is overseas I think it's appropriate that people not be critical of him or our country," Boehner said in response to a question from NBC News about whether he agreed with Romney's assessment that Russia is the "number one geopolitical foe" of the United States.
First Read - Boehner chides Romney for criticizing Obama while abroad

 

[Full-Auto]

Romney: Alarmed by Obama open mic gaffe - YouTube

The last time we had someone that felt this way was George W. Bush. Because of the focus on Russia and China..the focus was taken off the "mosquitoes" as Bush called them..and one of those "mosquitoes" was able to pull off the greatest foreign terror attack in history.

As a New Yorker..it's scary when you hear someone talk like this. Boehner even took him out the the woodshed..

"Clearly while the president is overseas, he's at a conference and while the president is overseas I think it's appropriate that people not be critical of him or our country," Boehner said in response to a question from NBC News about whether he agreed with Romney's assessment that Russia is the "number one geopolitical foe" of the United States.
First Read - Boehner chides Romney for criticizing Obama while abroad

Damn buddy, you are becoming pathetic. Enjoy the election season,

 

[uscitizen]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zv13ZnkpWos]Reagan Bombing Joke - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Old Rocks]

So, what we have here is one candidate wishes to advance the present state of affairs where the primary competitions are economic, and the other, to go back to the Cold War where they were primarily military. Where we were a hairbreadth away from the thermonuclear holocaust.

Now which vision of the future do you think the American Citizen would like?

 

[Sallow]

Romney: Alarmed by Obama open mic gaffe - YouTube

The last time we had someone that felt this way was George W. Bush. Because of the focus on Russia and China..the focus was taken off the "mosquitoes" as Bush called them..and one of those "mosquitoes" was able to pull off the greatest foreign terror attack in history.

As a New Yorker..it's scary when you hear someone talk like this. Boehner even took him out the the woodshed..

"Clearly while the president is overseas, he's at a conference and while the president is overseas I think it's appropriate that people not be critical of him or our country," Boehner said in response to a question from NBC News about whether he agreed with Romney's assessment that Russia is the "number one geopolitical foe" of the United States.
First Read - Boehner chides Romney for criticizing Obama while abroad

Damn buddy, you are becoming pathetic. Enjoy the election season,

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J0Qu6eyyr4c]Never before seen Video of WTC 9/11 attack - YouTube[/ame]

That really happened.

 

[Sallow]

So, what we have here is one candidate wishes to advance the present state of affairs where the primary competitions are economic, and the other, to go back to the Cold War where they were primarily military. Where we were a hairbreadth away from the thermonuclear holocaust.

Now which vision of the future do you think the American Citizen would like?

And here's the thing. For the first part of his Presidency..that's just what George W. Bush was doing..egging on a new cold war..with both China and Russia. So much so..they started engaging in joint naval training operations. Bear in mind..China and Russia are historic enemies. They had border skirmishes for years. In fact it was only very recently that they squashed that..like 2008.

AFP: China, Russia finally fix long-disputed border

The protocol, signed by the two countries' foreign ministers in Beijing, added to an existing agreement on their 4,300-kilometre (2,700-mile) boundary, meaning all of the frontier is now set.

"China and Russia have discussed their border for over 40 years. It's no simple matter that we have now demarcated the border in its entirety," Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi said, after the agreement was signed.

"At a political level, it's a mutually beneficial, win-win result," he told reporters at a briefing at the Diaoyutai State Guest House in the Chinese capital.

A bitter rift during the Cold War saw the one-time communist allies fight skirmishes along their border.

 

[Decepticon]

Mittens Romney =

 

[uscitizen]

So, what we have here is one candidate wishes to advance the present state of affairs where the primary competitions are economic, and the other, to go back to the Cold War where they were primarily military. Where we were a hairbreadth away from the thermonuclear holocaust.

Now which vision of the future do you think the American Citizen would like?

whichever one makes life easier for them.
We are a spoiled lazy bunch.

 

[uscitizen]

Whatever happened to the "Axis of Evil" anyway?

 

[Katzndogz]

We can all pretend that Russia is so friendly, the president is absolutely justified in giving them our defenses.

Are people really this stupid? I guess they are.

On the other hand, how bad would Russian control be? We have democrats would or could the Russians be worse?

 

[uscitizen]

Russia has lots of oil.

 

[Old Rocks]

You mean that with one-tenth of our nuclear arsenal, we could not totally destroy Russia, or any other nation, for that matter. And the same goes for Russia concerning us. Even little Isreal has enough nuclear firepower to take out one of the superpowers.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

Romney: Alarmed by Obama open mic gaffe - YouTube

The last time we had someone that felt this way was George W. Bush. Because of the focus on Russia and China..the focus was taken off the "mosquitoes" as Bush called them..and one of those "mosquitoes" was able to pull off the greatest foreign terror attack in history.

As a New Yorker..it's scary when you hear someone talk like this. Boehner even took him out the the woodshed..

"Clearly while the president is overseas, he's at a conference and while the president is overseas I think it's appropriate that people not be critical of him or our country," Boehner said in response to a question from NBC News about whether he agreed with Romney's assessment that Russia is the "number one geopolitical foe" of the United States.
First Read - Boehner chides Romney for criticizing Obama while abroad

I think its china, with russia being 2nd.

I also think you trying to say that his comments mean that as president his decisions will lead to another 9/11 type of event are bogus. Blaming bush for 9/11 is stupid too, sure he holds some responsibility but our policies over the decades prior to bush are what really led to the ability of the people who attacked us to do so.

 

[rightwinger]

Does Mitt still look at them as a bunch of Commies?

 

[Sallow]

We can all pretend that Russia is so friendly, the president is absolutely justified in giving them our defenses.

Are people really this stupid? I guess they are.

On the other hand, how bad would Russian control be? We have democrats would or could the Russians be worse?

What defenses is the President proposing to give up?

We outspend the rest of the world, combined, on our military.

So really..it wouldn't be "defense" we are giving up.

 

[Valerie]

Obama to Russia: More flexibility after elections - World - The Boston Globe

Also Monday, Obama took North Korea’s new leader, Kim Jong Un, to task for its latest military provocations. Meeting with China’s president, Hu Jintao, before the summit, Obama pressed Hu to help stop Pyongyang from proceeding with a satellite launch next month.

The United States views the impending satellite launch as a missile test that would be a breach of North Korea’s international obligations. The White House was stung by the announcement, which came only 17 days after the Obama administration had tentatively agreed to send North Korea desperately needed food aid.

In a speech at Hankuk University of Foreign Studies in Seoul, Obama said the United States will seek talks with Russia on steps to reduce the two countries’ arsenals of strategic and tactical nuclear weapons, as well as the number of warheads they have in reserve.

...


The comments gave the GOP new openings to question his sincerity and long-range plans.

Mitt Romney, the leading Republican contender to face Obama this fall, told a San Diego audience the unguarded comments were “an alarming and troubling development.’’

“This is no time for our president to be pulling his punches with the American people, and not telling us what he’s intending to do with regards to our missile defense system, with regards to our military might and with regards to our commitment to Israel,’’ Romney said.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/polit...-four-more-years-of-this-guy.html#post5021358

"The greatest threat the US faces is a nuclear Iran ... [But] who is it who always stands up for the world’s worst actors? It’s always Russia, typically with China along side,” Romney said. “Russia is not a friendly character on the world stage.”


Russia Is Mitt Romney's 'Number One Foe' - Global - The Atlantic Wire

What’s at Stake

In a 1939 radio broadcast Winston Churchill famously called Russia “a riddle, wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma.” The line is quoted often. But most leave out the rest of Churchill’s statement, where he offered a key to understanding Russia, and “that key is Russian national interest.” What is Russia’s national interest today? At the risk of oversimplification, we can say that Vladimir Putin, who is seeking a third term as Russian president in 2012, aims above all else to preserve his power, stoking Russian nationalist passions to maintain popular support, and using wealth garnered from energy and arms sales to stave off economic calamity. With the Kremlin’s leverage over the energy supplies of Central and Western Europe, its stockpile of nuclear weapons, its recent history of aggressive military action, and the power it wields in multilateral institutions like the United Nations, Russia is a destabilizing force on the world stage. It needs to be tempered.


Obama’s Failure

President Obama famously sought to “reset” U.S. relations with Russia. The ambiguity of that term cannot mask that the Obama administration has failed to move Russia toward a more beneficial working relationship with the United States and our allies. President Obama began his reset policy by withdrawing, without reciprocal concessions, from President Bush’s plan to place a missile-defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic, a move Russia strongly desired. He continued the same “we give, Russia gets” policy by signing the New START treaty in 2010. While the agreement compels the U.S. to reduce our nuclear launcher and warhead limits, the levels it sets for Russia are above what the Russians possessed at the time the agreement was reached. In other words, New START gave Russia room to expand its arsenal while requiring the United States to reduce our own. In any event, even if we put aside the demerits of the treaty, it was a squandered opportunity to extract concessions from the Russians that would have advanced our interests. Thus, President Obama failed to press for meaningful reductions not only in Russia’s strategic nuclear arsenal, but also in its extensive tactical nuclear force. And he failed to elicit Russian help in dealing with North Korean and Iranian nuclear ambitions.

Russia

 

[Douger]

Just fucking hurry it up. The expiration date on my popcorn is nearing !

 

[Sallow]

Romney: Alarmed by Obama open mic gaffe - YouTube

The last time we had someone that felt this way was George W. Bush. Because of the focus on Russia and China..the focus was taken off the "mosquitoes" as Bush called them..and one of those "mosquitoes" was able to pull off the greatest foreign terror attack in history.

As a New Yorker..it's scary when you hear someone talk like this. Boehner even took him out the the woodshed..

"Clearly while the president is overseas, he's at a conference and while the president is overseas I think it's appropriate that people not be critical of him or our country," Boehner said in response to a question from NBC News about whether he agreed with Romney's assessment that Russia is the "number one geopolitical foe" of the United States.
First Read - Boehner chides Romney for criticizing Obama while abroad

I think its china, with russia being 2nd.

I also think you trying to say that his comments mean that as president his decisions will lead to another 9/11 type of event are bogus. Blaming bush for 9/11 is stupid too, sure he holds some responsibility but our policies over the decades prior to bush are what really led to the ability of the people who attacked us to do so.

Yeah..like his father's administrations arming and training the muj..you know..Osama Bin Laden and the gang.

 

[Valerie]

MITT ROMNEY: PRESIDENT OBAMA'S COMMENTS TO MEDVEDEV ARE VERY TROUBLING - YouTube


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L2djPbbRak]MITT ROMNEY: PRESIDENT OBAMA'S COMMENTS TO MEDVEDEV ARE VERY TROUBLING - YouTube[/ame]

Avoiding a bad nuclear deal with Iran
March 7, 2012


...


The U.S. goal is to halt Iran's nuclear activities, and that has not yet been accomplished -- Iran is spinning more centrifuges, and manufacturing more and higher-grade uranium than ever before.


If the upcoming round of talks, like previous iterations, fails to yield progress, the U.S. will be left with little recourse other than additional pressure, while Israel will have additional incentive to carry out a strike. But another alternative exists, which President Obama has yet to rule out -- that the U.S. will draw back our own redlines and accept a nuclear weapons-capable, if not nuclear -- armed, Iran. This would be a dangerous miscalculation.

While the official U.S. and U.N. Security Council stance has long been that Iran must halt uranium enrichment as part of any serious talks, Washington has demonstrated tactical flexibility in an effort to allow Iran to "save face" and get negotiations started.


...


Recently, however, there have been signs of a U.S. shift. In his speech on Sunday, the President assiduously referred only to preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons, not a nuclear weapons capability.


Likewise, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta has asserted that the U.S. redline is that Iran not develop a nuclear weapon.


This leaves open the possibility of Washington acquiescing to a "latent" nuclear weapons capability, whereby Iran retains weapons-applicable components of its nuclear program, such its enrichment work, as long as it refrains from actually building a bomb.


Many analysts have urged President Obama to consider one of the various proposals that would allow Iran to continue enriching uranium, though perhaps under somewhat stronger supervision.


One of these is the so-called Russian proposal, under which Iran would address the IAEA's questions in phases and the West would reciprocally ease sanctions.


Another was the vague offer by Iranian President Ahmadinejad during his September visit to New York to cease Iran's production of highly-enriched uranium.

The allure of such a deal from the U.S. perspective is clear. Washington would cite the deal as a diplomatic triumph that averted war and limited Iran's nuclear capacity.


Likewise, the Iranian regime, having compelled the West to recognize its nuclear status and retained its enrichment program, would tout the pact as a victory.


In reality, allowing Iran to retain its uranium enrichment program would carry serious risks for the U.S. and our allies. The Institute for Science and International Security warns that "without [a halt to enrichment], Iran's enrichment program would continue to grow in capacity and increase Iran's ability to quickly, and perhaps secretly, make highly enriched uranium (HEU) for nuclear weapons in its centrifuge plants."

In other words, the Iranian regime would have its cake and eat it, too. The current sanctions drive would fizzle and existing sanctions would be eased or lifted. A military strike would effectively be taken off the table, including by Israel, which would likely feel constrained from attacking nuclear facilities blessed by the U.S. The Iranian regime, having succeeded in defying not only the U.S. but the entire Security Council, would be strengthened domestically. But the threat of Iranian nuclear weapons would not be removed; instead, Iran could perfect its nuclear expertise, stopping just one turn of the screw away from producing a nuclear weapon, or even building one clandestinely.

As our confrontation with Iran enters a new, more dangerous phase, the U.S. must avoid the temptation of redefining our redlines and objectives in a manner that fails to satisfy our national security requirements. To avert war and diffuse tensions through clever tactics and smart policies is admirable; to do so by abdicating our vital interests is not.

Nukes | Shadow Government

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Russia and China are serious threats to US hegemony. In particular, in currency wars. Russia has already called for ending the dollar as the world reserve over the last two years while China secretly buys up massive amounts of gold on the sly. The future war for domination, is in the form of trade and currency.

October 28, 2008: Interfax reports that V. Putin, Prime minister of Russia, advised Wen Jiabo, Premier of China, to abandon the US dollar as a transaction and reserve currency.

November 15, 2008: The AP reports that Iran has converted its financial reserves into gold.

November 19, 2008: Dow Jones reports that China is considering a target of four thousandmetric tons for its official gold reserves to diversify against the risks of holding US dollars.

Feb. 9, 2009: The Financial Times reports that transactions in gold bullion have reached an all time record.

March 18, 2009: Reuters reports that the UN supports calls for the abandonment of the dollar as teh global reserve currency.

March 30, 2009: Agence France Presse reports that Russia and China are cooperating on the creation of a new global currency.

March 31, 2009: The Financial Times reports that China adn Argentina have entered into a currency swap, which would allow Argentina to use Chinese yuan in lieu of dollars.

April 26, 2009: Agence France presse reports that China is calling for reform of the world monetary system and replacement of the dollar as the leading currency.

May 18, 2009: The Financial Times reports Brazil and China have agreed to Explorre conducting bilateral trade without using dollars.

June 16, 2009: Reuters reports that Brazil, Russia, India and China, at a BRIC summit, call for a more "diversified, stable and predictable currency system"

November 3, 2009: Bloomberg reports that India has purchased $6.7 billion worth of IMF gold to diversify assets away from the weaker dollar.

November 7, 2010: World Bank president R. Zoellick states that the G20 should "consider employing gold as an international reference point of market expectations about inflation, deflation and future currency values."

December 13, 2010: French prez N. Sarkozy calls for the consideration of a wider role for SDRs in the international monetary system.

Dec. 15, 2010: Businessweek reports that China and Russia have jointl called for the dollar's role in world trade to be diminished and are launching a yuan-ruble trade currency settlement mechanism.


Can you say, currency wars? Russia is paving the way for an eastern bloc and several "grey" countries to change the international capital market set up on cuirrency and if they go gold, we are in big trouble.