One Sane Voice In The Asylum

Vladimir Putin’s comments on US aggression at a security summit in Munich “……may signal a more assertive Russia” according to some correspondents, says a BBC report.

US Senator Joseph Lieberman said Putin’s remarks were “provocative” and “sounded more like the Cold War.”

Are all American politicians total idiots, or is Lieberman atypical?

The BBC’s report says Vladimir Putin told delegates at the summit that America’s “very dangerous” approach to global relations was fuelling a nuclear arms race,” and that nations were “witnessing an almost uncontained hyper use of force in international relations……. One state, the United States, has overstepped its national borders in every way,” he continued, “”This is very dangerous. Nobody feels secure anymore because nobody can hide behind international law. This is nourishing an arms race with the desire of countries to get nuclear weapons.”

Since when was speaking the truth considered “assertive”, “provocative”, and reminiscent of Cold War rhetoric?

Whatever one’s personal opinion of Vladimir Putin and his handling of Russia’s problems, he should be applauded for speaking out against preemptive US aggression when other nations prefer to sit on their hands and pretend it’s not happening.

After the speech, Russian spokeman Dimitry Peskov explained:

[The speech was] “not about confrontation, it’s an invitation to think. Until we get rid of unilateralism in international affairs, until we exclude the possibility of imposing one country’s views on others, we will not have stability.”

Does any sane person find that illogical?

Just what does Joseph Lieberman hope to achieve by his arrogant, overbearing attitude to a voice of sanity on the world’s political stage? Is he so blind he cannot see what others see – that US policy is creating division, hatred, war and suffering throughout the world?

Earlier in the conference German hard woman Angela Merkel had announced that the international community was determined to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

By “international community” she, of course, means Europe and America, who between them have nuclear weapons sufficient to destroy the planet umpteen times over.

Rather than attempting bully boy tactics to persuade Iran away from its present policy, perhaps if those nations made some effort to implement the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty they signed way back in 1968, and agreed to extend indefinitely in 1995, it may persuade Iran that nuclear weaponry was not necessary to that nation’s security.

That is not going to happen. Instead the Big Five have consistently ignored their obligations under the Treaty while demanding compliance from the weaker, non-nuclear, countries.

By any standards that constitutes bully-boy tactics. The very same aggressive stance criticized by Vladimir Putin in Munich.

More from the BBC report HERE.

Filed under:

2 Replies to “One Sane Voice In The Asylum”

  1. Flimsy – this administration set itself a course of action, of which Iraq was only the beginning. Matters have not progressed well in that country, delaying the implementation of their further schemes, but it is only delay. The Middle East has to be conquered and subdued if ideals are to be realized. They expected that eight years would be sufficient for the realization of their plans. The “surge” of troops into Iraq is a desperate attempt to both subdue that country and have enough troops on Iran’s doorstep for “phase two”, which is expected to be completed using mainly air and naval strikes. (They never learn from their mistakes!)
    Anyone criticizing such aggressive tactics is automatically an enemy. Diplomacy plays no part in the grand plan, as proposed by the signatories of the PNAC, accept as a means to keep allies on board.

Comments are closed.