Strange things are afoot at the Kremlin

[LiberalFINGER]

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/11/17/russia.putin/index.html

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=518&ncid=716&e=5&u=/ap/20041118/ap_on_re_eu/russia_nuclear_weapons

 

[heyjoeo]

Putin might as well be a dictator. It is really getting ridiculous over there again.

 

[Schweddy]

The Bush administration said the developments in Russia's nuclear program are consistent with the Moscow Treaty, signed between President Bush and Putin in May 2002. "We are confident that Russia's plans are not threatening and are consistent with its obligations, and I think are indicative of a new strategic relationship between the United States and Russia that is focused on reducing threats and increasing confidence," deputy State Department spokesman Adam Ereli told reporters.

Did you actually read the article? (looking for the jelly bellys)

 

[heyjoeo]

Yes personally I like reducing threats by obliterating them. Great word usage.

 

[Schweddy]

Another article - totally differnt language. Nor does it point to an agreement that was made in 2002.

White House Reacts With Caution to Russia

WASHINGTON - The White House reacted cautiously Wednesday to Russian President Vladimir Putin's statement that his country is developing a nuclear missile "of the kind that other nuclear powers do not and will not have."

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said it wasn't news to the Bush administration, that President Bush and Putin had discussed the issue previously. He emphasized U.S.-Russia agreements in place to reduce the two countries' nuclear arsenals and Washington's view of Moscow as a crucial partner in the anti-terror battle. [size=-1]

"This is not something that we look at as new," he said. "We are very well aware of their long-standing modernization efforts for their military. ... We are allies now in the global war on terrorism."

[/size]

[size=-1]Interesting how the same subject written with a different header, can cause a totally different response.

[/size]

 

[heyjoeo]

Yes I read that also. I still don't think the process of making nuclear weapons will help the war on terror. If anything it would make it worse.

 

[LiberalFINGER]

I saw it as a friendly reminder that Russia may not be the bad-ass it once was, but it's still very much a player in the nuclear club.

Anyone who continues to develop nuclear weapons needs to be watched as a potential threat. I'm sure other countries are looking at us the same way.

 

[heyjoeo]

Not only that, but Bush having control over those and the ability to use them at any time probably scares them more.

 

[Pacridge]

There's so many "Loose Nukes" floating around the former Soviet Union- I for one sure wish we'd get busy securing them.

 

[robin]

When one sees a course being taken, then one needs to consider what the forces are steering it.
Putin probably needs to keep certain people gainfully employed, lest they turn on him.
The same applies to Bush. The Republicans are sponsored in part by arms manufacturers such as Northrop Grumman who donate $millions then lobby enthusiastically in the Pentagon for futile wars like Iraq to be fought as a kick back in the form of $billions recouped in profits from arms sales.
http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?list=type&type=11

 

[t125eagle]

i thought the US and Russia had signed a non nuclear building program treaty or something close to that? so, why are the Russians building another one!!