Quote:
Originally posted by Say_hello_for_me
1.) So does this mean we all do sorta agree that states should be able to decide this an all similar issues?
2.) Completely unrelated. Not so long ago, 2 Russians were arrested for killing a rebel Chechen leader in Dubai or something. This leads to a couple of questions. a.) Do we support Russia threatening Dubai (even though they are our ally) and b.) do we support Russia adopting our doctrine and threatening anyone who supports terrorists who threaten Russia?
The thing on 2b is, I'm generally in support of any nation being able to attack threatening terrorists in another nation. However, some of the harboring nations are our allies (as has been discussed ad nauseum here before) when they harbor our own enemies. I'm thinking this is a great way for Putin to solidly align Russia with the U.S., while also allowing us to exert even more pressure on our allies to deal with the jackasses they harbor. Of course, I'm looking forward to Britain threatening us over the IRA, but that's another story. All in all, I think this Russia thingy could be good for us, but I hope the WH is paying attention and trying to figure out how to do the right thing while still leveraging this to our benefit (and not necessarily to Russia's detriment).
Hello
|
1. Dubai is not our ally; we need Dubai's oil.
2. I say let Russia kill terrorists anywhere it finds them. The same goes for the Mossad, the CIA, whoever. A dead terrorist is the best kind.
3. I don't think that anybody should be threatening sovereign governments
per se.
4. As for Britain threatening us over the IRA: (i) see my point immediately above; and (ii) the threat really should be credible before it becomes worrisome.
Threaded Mode