Back to the cold war

Ethics, Morality, and Sin

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
User avatar
2ndRateMind
Site Supporter
Posts: 1540
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:25 am
Location: Pilgrim on another way
Has thanked: 65 times
Been thanked: 68 times

Back to the cold war

Post #1

Post by 2ndRateMind »

So, Putin has for some time demonstrated he is more comfortable in a state of confrontation with the west than in amicable friendship. That might have a lot to do with internal politics; the pesky russkis like to have someone to blame (other than themselves) for the economic plight in which they find themselves. Or it might simply be that being ex-KGB he is reverting to type and training.

And now Trump has announced he is playing their ballgame by revoking an international treaty on nukes.

The new kid on the block, of course, is China. Whether a 3 party nuclear arms race will prove more stable than the previous 2 party standoff remains to be seen. But, somehow, I doubt it.

What do you all think?

Best wishes, 2RM

User avatar
marco
Savant
Posts: 12314
Joined: Sun Dec 20, 2015 3:15 pm
Location: Scotland
Been thanked: 2 times

Re: Back to the cold war

Post #2

Post by marco »

2ndRateMind wrote: So, Putin has for some time demonstrated he is more comfortable in a state of confrontation with the west than in amicable friendship. That might have a lot to do with internal politics; the pesky russkis like to have someone to blame (other than themselves) for the economic plight in which they find themselves. Or it might simply be that being ex-KGB he is reverting to type and training.

And now Trump has announced he is playing their ballgame by revoking an international treaty on nukes.

The new kid on the block, of course, is China. Whether a 3 party nuclear arms race will prove more stable than the previous 2 party standoff remains to be seen. But, somehow, I doubt it.

What do you all think?

Best wishes, 2RM


Stability depends on the stability of those leading a country. WW1 started because we had an unstable German king and WW2 started because Hitler was less than stable. Putin attracts a bad press, but he isn't far off the mark in his Syrian policy whereas the West continues its backing of groups that will eventually prove worse than what we have. There was an excellent chance for Russian -US cooperation when it was clear Putin could deal amicably with Trump. His quiet thunbs-up gesture in Paris to Trump might suggest all is not lost. Playgroud fights often start with two reluctant fighters being pushed into hostilities.

User avatar
2ndRateMind
Site Supporter
Posts: 1540
Joined: Wed Apr 19, 2017 4:25 am
Location: Pilgrim on another way
Has thanked: 65 times
Been thanked: 68 times

Re: Back to the cold war

Post #3

Post by 2ndRateMind »

[Replying to post 2 by marco]

Hmmm. So far as Assad goes in Syria, barrel bombing and gassing civilans and hospitals and schools in pursuit of a strangle hold on power does not strike me as policy the West should, by inaction, support. Similarly with Putin. Annexing the Crimea, and invading Eastern Ukraine, in clear defiance of international law seem equally questionable examples of statesmanship.

Of course Trump won't face either Assad, or Putin, down. Either he just likes ruthless dictators, or Putin has intelligence on him Trump would prefer not to become public. Either way, the alleged leader of the free world is neither living up to what is necessary nor what is required.

And as for Kim Jong Un, then we should have no doubt but that North Korea is continuing in its program to put nuclear warheads on icbms irrespective of last summer's summit. They have a track record of reneging on agreements, and Trump didn't even manage a substantial agreement.

Then there is the proxy Iran-Saudi War in Yemen. Millions hungry, and in danger of malnutrition and starvation. Don't see that Trump cares about that situation, at all, only the amount of export $ this conflict contributes to the American balance of payments.

I can't honestly conclude that Trump is the politician to deal with the subtleties and nuances of a three (or more) party nuclear arms race.

Best wishes, 2RM
Non omnes qui errant pereunt
Not all who wander are lost

Post Reply