Russians move SRBMs to Kaliningrad

[Bengalzona]

(12-16-2016, 03:53 AM)Dill Wrote: But we are between presidencies, and between presidents with very different levels of competence. Putin certainly watched the debates.
Can you see HIM in a late night name-calling tweet storm about some celebrity or journalist he didn't like?

He has had open media "battles" with celebrities before. Their were several Russian oligarchs where he wanted them to "donate" their companies to Mother Russia. And the girl band, ***** Riot. But he is not Trump. He is former KGB. In the case of the oligarchs, he seized their companies. In the case of ***** Riot, they ended up in jail. No tweets. Just quiet authoritarian action. 

[quote pid='319389' dateline='1481871236']

Quote:So, if you have time to think this over--two questions. What sort of "toughness" would you LIKE to see here. Beef up NATO? Missiles in Poland to maybe force a Cuban-style evacuation of K-grad? Combined with a punitive cyberattack like our response to N. Korea? More targeted sanctions?

And what sort of toughness are we LIKELY to see. Trump won't be up to speed by Jan. 20. He'll get competing advice from people he has picked, many from the fringes of the foreign policy establishment, and many like him, favor Russian interests. He may still feel he doesn't need his PDBs while looking for major foreign policy resets east, west, and south. If he contests CIA/FBI intel regarding the Russian hack, why would he follow through any retaliation begun by Obama? Especially against someone who says nice things about him.  Personally, I don't think we will see "toughness" at all once Trump is in office, though some of his people may urge him to do something. We may see toughness towards segments of our own populace--against flagburners and the like. Undocumented immigrants.  

[/quote]

It is not easy to answer that question without being fully aware of what we are already up to with Russia (or any other country, for that matter). I'd love to get inside Sen. McCain's brain for a few hours. 

I suspect we have been highly active in cyber-attacks throughout the world during the past decade. Also, I suspect we are probably much more adept at it than almost anyone else, because you don't hear about us getting caught. Something that the CIA has been really good at during the past 55-60 years has been enacting regime changes and fomenting rebellion in other countries. We do it regularly. And in the past couple of decades, we have done it without leaving much of a footprint. I have no doubt we have been supporting Putin-opposition in Russia since the George Dubya Admin. 

Some might ask why should we get to do that and still get mad when other countries do it to us? The answer is simple. Because we are America, damn it. You don't get to pick out leaders for us. I don't wave the flag around blindly often. Other countries picking our leaders will bring that out in me. It is pretty simple: "Screw what we have done. YOU don't get to do that to US."

The previous reference to "footprint" brings up something else in my mind: For a former KGB bigshot, Putin has not been overly concerned about leaving footprints. In fact, it is almost like he wanted publicity for Russia's actions, that he wants a reaction. The Obama Admin generally has not provided that for him. If someone wanted to know what we are doing in response to Russian actions over the past 20 years  (or any other nation, for that matter), what is the answer? We don't know. A common thread throughout successive Administrations is that we don't "kiss and tell". All of our admins since WWII have followed this wisdom. I am hoping the current admin continues that.

But back to the "footprint". Putin is acting out more because of the sanctions. They are having an impact. Therefore, they should stay until we get what what we want. 

We already have a Patriot battery in Poland, as I understand. And it really irks Putin. We just keep it there.

As for NATO, I actually agree with Trump on one thing: the European nations need to do more. It needs to be beefed up, but not necessarily with our troops and money. Some suspect that his overtures to have the U.S. leave NATO is just a whip to get the European countries to do more for their own defense. If so, I'm behind it.