09-08-2004, 03:35 AM
1) TSP and Saudi are assets for the US and the US is willing to pay some price to keep these assets.
2) Why are these costly assets maintained- obviously they help in curbing India, Russia, and Iran and establishing secret liasons with China. People may protest that the cold war is over. It may be, but the US realizes that these countries are serious competitors for the Anglospheric dominance and India defeating Britain ultimately is not forgotten. So down-sizing the real rivals with real armies and institutions is definitely a high priority. Terrorists are not a real threat for the US. They continue to use Russia as a safety valve to redirect the steam of Islamic violence.
3) Why does the US go after irrelevant targets in the guise of fighting terrorism? The answer to this lies in where the loyalties of the arch neo-conservatives are.
4)Majority of Americans wanted a war in Iraq, so it was their democratic bipartisan opinion and now they have to shoulder the responsibilities arising from it. Though most likely they are going to work on making the masses forget the whole thing and declare victory (they may remove the bulk of the forces and leave a smaller garrison to keep the puppet govts in place).
5) It is clear, as Putin admitted, that Russia is weak now. They are unlikely to be able to do anything spectacular. It is likely that Russia continues to decline for sometime in the near future.
Everyone will need to fight their own battles against Islam. Even at the peak of the war between the Osman Turks and the Christians of Europe, England and France covertly aided the Turks against fellow Christians of central Europe during the reign of Suleiman-i-kanooni. They saw a benefit in keeping their fellow European competitors tied down. Sweden, Russia and the Osman turks- same kind game.
The way I see it the European and Hindu response against Islam was sort of similar. Some strong bulwarks but a lot of uncoordinated and even traitorous responses. The most crucial point was that the tide in Europe started turning against the Moslem before the same thing started happening in India. So they go a head-start while we were still to regroup.
Russia had also demolished Islam entirely on it own, but the Western Europeans, who were traditional rivals of the Russians, reconstructed Islamism to claw into the soft under-belly of the Russian empire. The communism interesting damaged Russian nationalism (through allegience to Marx and unbelievable State lies, like who invented the aeroplane) rather than furthering it.
Let us not forget that the same Osama was a creation of the CIA meant for use against Russia.
2) Why are these costly assets maintained- obviously they help in curbing India, Russia, and Iran and establishing secret liasons with China. People may protest that the cold war is over. It may be, but the US realizes that these countries are serious competitors for the Anglospheric dominance and India defeating Britain ultimately is not forgotten. So down-sizing the real rivals with real armies and institutions is definitely a high priority. Terrorists are not a real threat for the US. They continue to use Russia as a safety valve to redirect the steam of Islamic violence.
3) Why does the US go after irrelevant targets in the guise of fighting terrorism? The answer to this lies in where the loyalties of the arch neo-conservatives are.
4)Majority of Americans wanted a war in Iraq, so it was their democratic bipartisan opinion and now they have to shoulder the responsibilities arising from it. Though most likely they are going to work on making the masses forget the whole thing and declare victory (they may remove the bulk of the forces and leave a smaller garrison to keep the puppet govts in place).
5) It is clear, as Putin admitted, that Russia is weak now. They are unlikely to be able to do anything spectacular. It is likely that Russia continues to decline for sometime in the near future.
Everyone will need to fight their own battles against Islam. Even at the peak of the war between the Osman Turks and the Christians of Europe, England and France covertly aided the Turks against fellow Christians of central Europe during the reign of Suleiman-i-kanooni. They saw a benefit in keeping their fellow European competitors tied down. Sweden, Russia and the Osman turks- same kind game.
The way I see it the European and Hindu response against Islam was sort of similar. Some strong bulwarks but a lot of uncoordinated and even traitorous responses. The most crucial point was that the tide in Europe started turning against the Moslem before the same thing started happening in India. So they go a head-start while we were still to regroup.
Russia had also demolished Islam entirely on it own, but the Western Europeans, who were traditional rivals of the Russians, reconstructed Islamism to claw into the soft under-belly of the Russian empire. The communism interesting damaged Russian nationalism (through allegience to Marx and unbelievable State lies, like who invented the aeroplane) rather than furthering it.
Let us not forget that the same Osama was a creation of the CIA meant for use against Russia.