04-11-2006, 08:53 PM
A program on the History Channel television last week profiled U.S. presidents from George Washington to George W. Bush. Every segment featured bullet point summaries of each president and ended with a theme of each presidential administration. Reply
George W. Bush’s condensed profile was the most unfavorable. The channel didn’t make an ending theme for Bush because his presidential term isn’t over. But an article on IRmep.org suggests that Bush’s theme will be that of a president who was constantly surprised by many “predictable challenges“ that were caused directly by his decisions.
According to the author, Grant F. Smith, Bush will be remembered as the president who was handed warnings of imminent attacks by al-Qaeda but chose not to act until it was too late. He is the president who wasn’t willing to budget reinforcement of levies against the destructive consequences of predictable hurricanes, a mistake that led to the destruction of much of New Orleans. Bush is the president who declared an end to the Iraq War when it was just the beginning. He is the president who was surprised that American soldiers abused Iraqi detainees while he didn’t ban such abuses. Bush is the president who was undermined by the criminal persecution of corrupt officials of the same political machine that brought him into power.
But Bush’s biggest surprise is yet to come. Like past foreseeable surprises, it is a direct reaction to his own actions. His fatally flawed Middle East policy may drive Russia or China to base nuclear missiles in Iran. Moscow and Beijing resist U.S. and EU efforts to impose UN sanctions on Iran over its nuclear program. There is no surprise; both countries do not want to bully their friend. China has billions invested in Iran's oil/gas fields and Russia wants to make its own billions in reprocessing Iranian reactor fuel. Both sell millions in advanced weapons to Iran.
Moreover, Russia and China are moving closer to forming a strategic partnership. Their concerns about American global power, EU/NATO expansion, more Orange/Rose/Tulip revolutions and Japan's higher international profile, are encouraging the long-time rivals to give each other a second chance. Last summer, both countries conducted their first-ever joint military exercises. Russian and Chinese officials also meet annually for bilateral military and technical cooperation talks. Beijing recently bought strategic aircraft from Russia, and last week both countries signed a slew of energy deals. Moreover, China and Russia have been cooperating on foreign and military intelligence since the early 1990s, and both are growing counterintelligence problems for the U.S., Europe and Japan.
A Sino-Russian alliance poses a great threat to the United States, but it would present a greater danger if any of the two countries decided to base nuclear missiles in Iran. China may do it to ensure stable access to natural gas and oil reserves. Beijing didn’t also forget Washington’s rejection of its $18.5 billion bid to buy a U.S. petroleum company UNOCAL in 2005. Chinese missiles in Iran could also serve as a "strategic nuclear umbrella" in the region to counter the U.S.‘s forward Pacific naval deployment and maneuvers, endless administration rhetoric about Taiwan, and pressure for not doing enough to reign in North Korea. This move could simultaneously reaffirm the sovereignty and legitimacy of Chinese national interests without creating a direct threat to the U.S. homeland.
On the other hand, Russia might want to create a "nuclear stockade" around territory it doesn’t want to see turned into another Iraq or radioactive slag heap. "Why wouldn't Russia consider basing missiles in Iran by invitation to deter rivals or prevent Iran from becoming a chaotic cauldron of death and destruction like Iraq? Or a nuclear slag-heap like some neocons are predicting?”, Grant F. Smith wonders in his article. By deploying short and intermediate-range missiles in Iran, Moscow could send a strong message that it won’t tolerate another mayhem created in its back yard by the United States. Moreover, such a deployment would buttress a standoff with Israel's nuclear missiles, many of which are believed to target Russian cities. And of course, basing missiles in Iran could ensure Russia’s future access to the Iranian market for engineering services and large scale construction projects as well as the protection of military exports. A Russian "sphere of influence" in Iran would counter and balance the expected permanent U.S. military presence in Iraq.
Russian or Chinese missiles deployment in Iran would lead to a global standoff over Iran’s nuclear program. Such a move would also undermine the Bush Administration's plans for a “New World Order" and undercut its global interests on an unprecedented scale. A Sino or Russian military alliance with the Islamic Republic would be a logical response to the disastrous regional policies of neoconservative ideologues. But would it be the final failure of the aggressive, but naïve, policies of an administration that has been constantly surprised by its own actions?
jinn & juice
04-11-2006, 08:59 PM
Russia and Chinas' missles can hit anywhere on the globe where they are. They don't need to be moved. Besides, Iran will have their own, soon. I wish they would team up. Then they would 'slit each others throats'. They would NEVER trust each other. :hiding:Reply
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2020 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.