Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russia - USA Relations

    Share

    Austin

    Posts : 6845
    Points : 7234
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  Austin on Fri Jul 26, 2013 9:07 am

    Well not too recently US invaded Iraq and far more people died due to direct intervention and the effects are still being felt with many more people dying every day then they used to do under Saddams rule.

    http://english.ruvr.ru/2013_04_08/10th-anniversary-of-US-invasion-to-Iraq-cost-of-war-tremendous-violence-remains-206/

    10th anniversary of US invasion to Iraq: cost of war tremendous, violence remains


    189,000 people were killed during the conflict, including soldiers, militants, police, contractors, journalists, humanitarian workers and Iraqi civilians, according to the report “The Cost of War” drawn up by a team of 30 economists, anthropologists, political scientists, legal experts and physicians and released in March 2013.

    Austin

    Posts : 6845
    Points : 7234
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  Austin on Fri Jul 26, 2013 9:13 am

    IF US Applies Economic Sanction then the two way trade value in 2012 at $40 billion will be impacted

    http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c4621.html

    Firebird

    Posts : 987
    Points : 1011
    Join date : 2011-10-14

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  Firebird on Fri Jul 26, 2013 9:29 am

    Austin wrote:Well not too recently US invaded Iraq and far more people died due to direct intervention and the effects are still being felt with many more people dying every day then they used to do under Saddams rule.

    http://english.ruvr.ru/2013_04_08/10th-anniversary-of-US-invasion-to-Iraq-cost-of-war-tremendous-violence-remains-206/

    10th anniversary of US invasion to Iraq: cost of war tremendous, violence remains


    189,000 people were killed during the conflict, including soldiers, militants, police, contractors, journalists, humanitarian workers and Iraqi civilians, according to the report “The Cost of War” drawn up by a team of 30 economists, anthropologists, political scientists, legal experts and physicians and released in March 2013.

    Plus the ones killed v Afghanistan. It really is a genocide. Europe's electorate wouldn't have a problem passing sanctions against Uncle Scam. And these American monsters have the neck to lecture Russia and ban Russia's processors...

    Austin

    Posts : 6845
    Points : 7234
    Join date : 2010-05-08
    Location : India

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  Austin on Sun Jul 28, 2013 11:47 am

    Justice Ministry explains why Russia cannot "return" Snowden to U.S.
    http://www.interfax.com/newsinf.asp?pg=2&id=433281

    MOSCOW. July 27 (Interfax) - Russia cannot turn in former CIA employee Edward Snowden because the term 'forced return' does not exist in international law, the Justice Ministry said in a statement on Saturday.

    "As a rule, the term 'return' in Russian law and practice is applied to voluntary entry of individuals from abroad into the country whose citizens they are," the ministry said in reply to an inquiry from Interfax.

    This term is not used in international law in the context of forced repatriation of individuals to the country of their citizenship, it said.

    U.S. Ambassador to Russia Michael McFaul said earlier the U.S. was not seeking Snowden's extradition but was asking for his return. "The U.S. is not asking for 'extradition', but simply the return of Mr. Snowden. We have sent many people back to Russia," McFaul said on Twitter on Wednesday.
    va
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18885
    Points : 19441
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  GarryB on Mon Jul 29, 2013 12:09 pm

    We have sent many people back to Russia," McFaul said on Twitter on Wednesday.

    Like Bout? Like all those thieves in the UK that live well on stolen Russian money? Like all those Chechen "freedom fighters". No you didn't.

    They only sent back people who broke US laws... by being spies mostly... and usually in trade for their own spies.
    avatar
    Palestinian

    Posts : 30
    Points : 57
    Join date : 2012-08-06

    U.S. Puts Sanctions On Russia

    Post  Palestinian on Sat Mar 22, 2014 1:30 am

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-20/obama-orders-new-sanctions-on-russian-officials-to-press-putin.html
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18885
    Points : 19441
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  GarryB on Sat Mar 22, 2014 9:09 am

    So the US, which has bugg@r all trade with Russia anyway is going to target specific people and a bank, while Germany will wait till Russia invades the Ukraine before considering any sanctions.

    Yep... pretty clear there.

    So the key will be to ignore Ukrainian provocations and integrate the Crimea into Russia and in a 6-12 month period it will all blow over...
    avatar
    SSDD

    Posts : 19
    Points : 27
    Join date : 2013-10-26
    Location : Bharat

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  SSDD on Mon Mar 24, 2014 10:37 am

    This sanction has been imposed because Russia captured Crimea and going to annex it.

    May be Eastern Ukraine will be next.

    Can any tell here what is the impact of this sanction on Russian economy?
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4592
    Points : 4751
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Mon Mar 24, 2014 1:33 pm

    SSDD wrote:This sanction has been imposed because Russia captured Crimea and going to annex it.

    May be Eastern Ukraine will be next.

    Can any tell here what is the impact of this sanction on Russian economy?

    Captured Crimea? More like the Crimeans left on their own free will, to escape racial persecution.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 18885
    Points : 19441
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  GarryB on Tue Mar 25, 2014 10:04 am

    They held a referendum... you know... that democratic voting thing.... sort of the complete opposite to what the current illegal regime in Kiev did, which was use violence and seized power.

    Words seem to change meaning when western media and western governments use them to spin stories...

    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 823
    Points : 1321
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Steinmeier in favor for sanctions against Russia

    Post  nemrod on Tue May 06, 2014 11:00 pm


    http://euobserver.com/foreign/123809



    Steinmeier disagrees with German business chiefs on Russia

    German politicians are divided into two broad categories: 'Russia understanders' and 'Russia critics'.

    The doveish Social-Democrats (SPD), including two former chancellors - Gerhard Schroeder and Helmut Schmidt, who voiced understanding for Putin's annexation of Crimea - are broadly considered to be 'Russia understanders'.

    But SPD foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier on Wednesday (9 April) surprised an audience of businessmen, diplomats and politicians from Russia and former Soviet countries in Berlin by disagreeing with speakers from the German business community.

    The event called "East Forum Berlin - opportunities for an economic area from Lisbon to Vladivostok" - was sponsored by Italian bank UniCredit, whose boss, Giuseppe Vita, cited Lenin in his opening speech and received scattered applause when he said no economic sanctions should be imposed on Russia.

    Eckhard Cortes, former CEO of Metro, the German retailer, now in charge of an association of German firms doing business in eastern Europe, also said the blame for the Ukraine conflict is shared by all parties - Russia, Ukraine and the EU.

    Steinmeier disagreed. "There cannot be a parallel economic world doing business as usual with Russia," he said.

    "With all self-criticism that we can accept, it was illegal for Russia to redraw borders seven decades after the end of World War II. This not something we can accept and the vote in the UN Security Council proved that Russia alienated many friends," he added.

    He said he could understand the business community's desire not to impose economic sanctions on Russia, but said the German government was determined to take that path if Russia continued to stir up trouble in eastern Ukraine.

    "The news from eastern Ukraine indicate that the situation is about to escalate, there are massive Russian troops on the border. Risk of open violence is very high," Steinmeier said.

    He pointed to the "superhuman task" of stabilising Ukraine's political and economic systems, given the years of corruption and mismanagement.

    "There are no economic or political reasons for Russia to want the collapse of Ukraine," he noted.

    German efforts are now focusing on the creation of a contact group so that Ukraine and Russia can find a diplomatic solution.

    "This is not about Germany being there in the room - it makes no difference who is the third party. The most important thing is to get this contact group, we are not there yet," Steinmeier said.

    Meanwhile, Moldovan Prime Minister Iurie Leanca noted that he was grateful to the EU commission and Romania for having started work on a multi-million euro interconnector which will allow Romania to export gas to Moldova. Currently, Moldova is 100 percent dependent on Russian gas imports.

    In another positive development, Moldovans will be able to travel visa-free to Europe just three weeks' time.

    "Few thought this would be possible so quickly, but it is Moldova's reward for implementing all the requirements," Leanca said.

    He said Moldova's EU integration "is a modernisation project, not something directed against someone," even though the country has no EU membership perspective at the moment.

    The eastern Moldovan region of Transniestria, where Russia still has at least 10,000 soldiers, has submitted a request to be annexed by Russia. But Moscow has not yet replied.


    avatar
    Airbornewolf

    Posts : 362
    Points : 422
    Join date : 2014-02-05

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  Airbornewolf on Wed May 21, 2014 8:16 pm

    Steinmeier should shut up and go home, he's starting to sound like the Nazi party in the 30 -40's.

    http://rt.com/news/160428-steinmeier-loses-temper-video/

    ...or propably this group of protestors just gave him some more of the shit he deserves after Steinmeier received harsh critisicm of the German Business Sector that publicly stated "these sanctions against russia are going to cost Germany thousands of jobs".



    another one of those politicians that clearly is as misguided as the EU officials concerning Ukraine.
    avatar
    nemrod

    Posts : 823
    Points : 1321
    Join date : 2012-09-11

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  nemrod on Wed May 21, 2014 10:35 pm

    Airbornewolf wrote:...these sanctions against russia are going to cost Germany thousands of jobs....
    Indeed, Germany has much to loose. In fact the problem is more complex than we believe, and than media try to show us. In fact, Germany is really reluctant to implement some sanctions against Russia. Russia is reluctant to give up Germany and Europe, and to turn towards China. You have a superpower that is in bankrurpcy, and is still occupying Germany in 2014. Do not forget this parameter, Germany is still an invaded country-as Japan-.
    Nevertheless, noone could escape the reality and german's economy needs China and Russia's market more than anyone. America is fed up with that, and try to pull Germany, and with them all Europ into stalemate, America does not want to sink itself, they need all their western partners.
    But the solution could come from Germany, because german capitalism does not agree with the sanctions ideas. In Germany, you have politicians that follow US and israelis interrests, and in other hand, you have german policians who stand on germans, and Germany's interrests.

    As East Germany triggered the collapse of the USSR, Germany reluctance to follow US could trigger the collapse of this monster as NATO, and finally USA.
    Let's repeat again, noone among us hate US people, on contrary, however, we love America, and amercans without Goldman Sachs, as we love France and frencheese people without Rothschild Banksters.

    Behrooz

    Posts : 26
    Points : 28
    Join date : 2014-06-14

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  Behrooz on Fri Jun 20, 2014 11:03 pm

    You have to read between the lines. What he really means. "Put sanctions on Russia because Jews are not in control of it".
    avatar
    Hannibal Barca

    Posts : 1279
    Points : 1293
    Join date : 2013-12-13

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  Hannibal Barca on Sat Aug 23, 2014 12:27 am

    The recent events in Ferguson made me wonder. Where the fck was Lavrov giving pancakes ?
    avatar
    Sujoy

    Posts : 890
    Points : 1048
    Join date : 2012-04-02
    Location : India

    Russia's strategic view of US.

    Post  Sujoy on Wed Oct 22, 2014 3:15 pm

    Russia's strategic view of US.

    Interview with Nikolay Patrushev, secretary of the Russian Security Council

    https://www.facebook.com/sharmine.narwani/posts/741370525911333

    Rossiyskaya Gazeta, October 15, 2014
    Cold War II: Interview with Nikolay Patrushev
    by Ivan Yegorov
    “The sobering up of the Ukrainians will be harsh and painful”
    In an interview for Rossiyskaya Gazeta the secretary of the Russian Security Council explained how Russian analysts were predicting the development of the situation in Ukraine a year ago. And he also gave an assessment of the role of the United States and NATO in the events in eastern Ukraine, explained why these events are a continuation of Zbigniew Brzezinski's plan for the disintegration of the USSR and Russia, and assessed prospects for the development of the multipolar world and the possibility of a future struggle for hydrocarbon resources.

    [Yegorov] Nikolay Platonovich, the realities of recent months are a coup d'etat in Ukraine, military operations by the Ukrainian authorities against the inhabitants of Donetsk and Luhansk regions, and a frenzied anti-Russian course by Kiev. Would it have been possible to predict this turn of events only a year ago?

    [Patrushev] Our specialists were warning of the high probability of an escalation of the situation in Ukraine in the context of political and economic instability, particularly under external influence. At the same time it should be acknowledged that the probability of an imminent instant seizure of power in Kiev with the support of militant groups of open Nazis was not considered at that time. Let me remind you that prior to the coup you mentioned, Moscow was implementing in full all its partnership commitments to Kiev.

    We were constantly providing material and financial aid, without which Ukraine was in no condition to cope with economic difficulties that had become chronic in nature. To support our neighbours, material and financial resources amounting to tens of billions of dollars were mobilized. Unfortunately for many people in Ukraine this aid became, in time, so customary that its importance for the country's survival was simply forgotten.

    As for longer-term predictions, the Ukraine crisis was an entirely expected outcome of systematic activity by the United States and its closest allies.

    For the past quarter of a century this activity has been directed towards completely separating Ukraine and the other republics of the former USSR from Russia and totally reformatting the post-Soviet space to suit American interests. The conditions and pretexts were created for colour revolutions, supported by generous state funding.

    Thus, Victoria Nuland, US assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, has repeatedly stated that during the period 1991 through 2013 Washington spent 5bn dollars on "supporting the desire of the people of Ukraine for stronger, more democratic government". According to figures from open sources alone, for instance US Congress documents, the total amount of state funding for various American programmes of "aid" to Ukraine in the period 2001 through 2012 came to at least 2.4bn dollars. That is comparable with the annual budget of some small countries. The US Agency for International Development spent about 1.5bn dollars, the State Department nearly half a billion, and the Pentagon more than 370m dollars.

    According to congressional records, organizations such as the Millennium Challenge Corporation, the Peace Corps, and the Open World Centre took part in Ukrainian aid programmes, in addition to the well-known USAID and other departments. It is not hard to guess for whom and why American volunteers and staffers of diplomatic missions have been "opening the world" throughout the 23 years since the breakup of the Soviet Union.

    [Yegorov] Maybe this money went to a good cause and helped to build a real "democratic" society in Ukraine, as the Americans understand it?

    [Patrushev] I do not know what kind of a good cause that could be, if as a result of this activity in Ukraine an entire generation was raised that is completely poisoned with hatred of Russia and with the mythology of "European values". It has not yet realized that these values, even in the positive sense of the term, are not actually designed for Ukrainians. Nobody intends to set about boosting living standards in Ukraine or establishing these young people in Europe, which is itself having great difficulty coping with extremely serious challenges and threats.

    I think the "sobering up" of the Ukrainians will be harsh and painful. It remains to be hoped that this will happen relatively quickly, and a whole string of objective factors could promote that. I would like to note another factor that is of fundamental significance. Irrespective of the subsequent development of events, the significance of the one for the other - Russia and Ukraine - will persist. Ukraine will simply not be able to develop successfully without Russia, whether anyone likes it or not.

    Such is the objective interdependence of economic, logistical, and other links that has developed over the centuries. But whereas for Russia the total severance of these links would be a painful blow, for Ukraine it would be disastrous. It is no accident that current President Petro Poroshenko was obliged, in the wake of his ousted predecessor, to raise the question of postponing the implementation of economic section of the already signed association agreement between Ukraine and the EU. It is to be expected that the victory euphoria of other Kiev rulers will also give way to a more sober assessment of the real state of affairs.

    [Yegorov] Some experts think the Ukraine crisis was only a pretext for a new deterioration in the West's relations with Russia. Is that so?
    [Patrushev] It is true that if the catastrophe in Ukraine had not happened some other grounds would have been found to step up the policy of "containment" of our country. This course has been pursued unswervingly for many decades; only the forms and tactics of its implementation change.

    As you know, after World War II the confrontation between the USSR and the West headed by the United States took the form of a "cold war". The military-political component of this standoff was entrusted to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), formed on the initiative of the United States on 4 April 1949. An analysis of NATO's practical activity indicates that in creating the alliance the United States was pursuing two main objectives.

    First, a military bloc directed against the USSR was formed under American leadership.
    Second, Washington forestalled the emergence in Western Europe of an autonomous grouping of states that could have competed with the United States. It should be recalled that the territory of the United States itself, which essentially established unilateral military control over the allies, is not included in NATO's zone of responsibility.
    After the breakup of the USSR and the termination of the Warsaw Pact, which united Europe's socialist countries and which by definition represented the main danger to NATO, not only was the bloc not disbanded, it began to expand even more in quantitative and military terms.

    [Yegorov] But surely NATO was not the only factor that influenced the breakup of the Soviet Union?
    [Patrushev] In the cold war period a whole string of ideological doctrines emerged in the West that served as justification for an anti-Soviet political course. One of the authors of this kind of research was Zbigniew Brzezinski, an American political scientist and statesman of Polish extraction. He established the so-called strategy of "vulnerabilities" in relation to the USSR, and under President Reagan this became the basis of American policy towards our country. The implementation of the strategy was guided by the National Security Council headed by the president of the United States. The identification and definition of "vulnerabilities" and the task of organizing ways of converting them into substantial problems for the USSR were entrusted to the US Central Intelligence Agency.

    It is noteworthy that the then CIA Director William Casey decided to enlist prominent scholars in this work, first and foremost economists but also experts from the business world who had real experience of business wars with competitors. As a result of large-scale analytical work, the USSR's "vulnerabilities" in the political, economic, ideological, and other spheres were defined and systematically studied.
    Our country's main "vulnerability," as defined by the CIA, was its economy. After detailed modelling, the American experts identified its "weakest link", namely the USSR budget's extremely high dependence on the export of energy resources. A strategy of provoking the financial and economic bankruptcy of the Soviet state was formulated, envisaging two interconnected objectives: the bringing about of a sharp reduction in revenue to the USSR's budget from foreign trade, combined with a substantial increase in expenditure on resolving problems created from outside.

    A reduction in world oil prices was envisaged as the main measure for reducing the income side of the budget. This was successfully achieved by the mid-1980s when, as a result of US collusion with the rulers of a number of oil extracting countries, an artificial surplus of crude was created on the market and oil prices fell almost by a factor of four.

    A growth in the Soviet Union's expenditure was provoked in several areas: the transition from the strategy of American opposition to the USSR in Afghanistan to the strategy of dragging it deeply into the Afghan war; the incitement of antigovernment demonstrations in Poland and other states in the socialist camp with a view to provoking Moscow into additional expenditures on stabilizing the situation in Eastern Europe; the whipping up of the arms race, among other things by introducing the SDI [Strategic Defence Initiative] bluff, and so forth.
    It should be said that at that time the Americans succeeded in achieving their objectives. The outcome of their activity was a substantial excess in the USSR's expenditure over income, which ultimately provoked a profound economic crisis that extended into the political and ideological spheres. Shortsighted attempts by the Soviet leadership to alleviate the situation through foreign financial aid gave Washington additional levers of influence over Moscow. The "recovery" measures proposed by the West and implemented through the IMF and the World Bank to liberalize foreign trade without a smooth transition from the previous monopoly system led to the final collapse of the economy.

    In the assessment of American experts, it was the strategy of "vulnerabilities", which demonstrated the colossal effectiveness of economic variety of cold war compared with "hot" war, that was decisive in promoting the elimination of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact.
    [Yegorov] After the breakup of the USSR, could Russia still somehow have opposed the new redivision of the world, or was the surrender of its positions and its former allies, such as Yugoslavia, already predetermined?

    [Patrushev] By the end of the 20th century a kind of sociopolitical "fault line" had formed in this region, standing out most clearly in the disintegration of the multiethnic and multifaith Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The leaders of the United States and the leading NATO countries exploited a military-political situation that was developing favourably for them in order to realize their long-term aims in Southeast Europe.

    In the 1990s the Russian Federation, for well-known reasons of an internal and external nature, lost the dominant influence in the Balkans that the Soviet Union had enjoyed and embarked on the path of conciliation with the West. It was in the Balkans that the unilateral and totally uncompensated surrender by Russia of its positions in the international arena was manifested most distinctly. In 1991-1996 the bodies that shaped our country's foreign policy did not officially even have any such concept as "national interest". They nurtured groundless expectations of gratitude for obedience from the Western partners and some kind of special benefit for our country from close and unconditional cooperation with the United States. In practice our American partners almost immediately stopped taking us seriously and only gave us a condescending "slap on the shoulder", so to speak, from time to time.

    The NATO bloc, under cover of peacekeeping and without encountering serious objections from our side, operated increasingly confidently outside its own zone of responsibility, sought the rights to lease strategic infrastructure facilities for lengthy periods, and effectively brought the organs of military command and control of a number of Balkan countries under its own control by various means. The Alliance's subunits became firmly established in the region. Other states taking part in peacekeeping missions, including Russia, set themselves no such objectives, having reconciled themselves to the role of junior partners and preferring not to see the self-evident fact: The war in the Balkans could perfectly well be regarded as a rehearsal and a prologue to larger-scale steps to redivide the world.
    [Yegorov] Is it likely that it was these steps that led to the clash of interests between Western countries and Russia in the entire post-Soviet space?

    [Patrushev] The United States has been behaving particularly assertively and shamelessly over the past 20 years in and around this space. Encouraged by the weakening and subsequent elimination of the USSR, American ruling circles did everything possible to ensure dominance over the major sources of raw materials resources in our country and in Central Asia, as well as the transit routes for their export. Washington planned to extend its sphere of direct influence to the regions of the Black Sea, the Caucasus, and the Caspian.
    All these territories were named a US zone of strategic national interests. The only remaining obstacle to the realization of the Americans' plans to take complete control of the corresponding deposits and transport corridors was Russia, which preserved its military potential to inflict unacceptable damage on the United States.

    American strategists saw the solution to this difficulty in the final collapse of the system of state power and the subsequent dismemberment of our country. The first region that was supposed to leave Russia was the North Caucasus.
    Particular importance was attached to Chechnya, which declared its independence and was temporarily under the effective control of the West. Extremists and their supporters in Russia were offered support by the special services of Britain, the United States, and allies in Europe and the Islamic world.

    In these conditions the Russian leadership adopted a firm, principled stance of defending the unity of the state. Ultimately, as a result of the firm political will displayed by Russian President Vladimir Putin and at the cost of enormous efforts, it proved possible to stop attempts to detach Chechnya from Russia and then to consolidate the Republic's place within the Federation.

    After 11 September 2001 the world community recognized the terrorist threat as the main threat and a global threat, reaching the understanding that countering this threat requires common efforts. As a result there was, in particular, a slight weakening of the West's attacks on Russia because of its campaign against international terrorists in the Caucasus, while we did not object to the operation by the Americans and their allies in Afghanistan. The announcement of the formation of a broad antiterrorist coalition followed.
    At that time Washington displayed a certain readiness to collaborate, although in actual fact it did not intend to abandon the policy of "containment" with regard to Russia. More and more new NATO facilities moved up to our borders. International law was supplanted by the law of force (let us recall the aforementioned dismemberment of Yugoslavia, followed by Serbia, the occupation of Iraq, and the invasion of Afghanistan by the so-called coalition forces).

    After 7-8 August 2008, when the Georgian leadership, with US support, attempted to annihilate South Ossetia, the world once again changed substantially. For the first time in many decades Washington provided direct support to a foreign state that had perpetrated an attack on Russian citizens and peacekeepers.
    Everything was staked on surprise. The Georgian dictator believed that a military incursion on the opening day of the international Olympic Games would put Russia in a difficult position, and the Georgians, taking advantage of this, would carry out their "blitzkrieg". However, the Russian leadership reacted promptly to the sharp deterioration in the situation and the necessary measures were adopted to halt the aggression.

    [Yegorov] It was at that time that people started talking about the shaping of a new geopolitical reality - the multipolarity of the modern world. How did the United States react to this?

    [Patrushev] After the August events in the Caucasus, Washington was clearly alarmed by Russia's obvious intention to take its place among the world powers of the 21st century and uphold the principle of equal opportunities and full autonomy in global politics. And also to convert the state's financial income from the exploitation of natural resources into real economic and defence potential and human capital.
    The American leadership clearly also disliked the prospects of Russia's collaboration with China and India, the introduction of the practice of summits in the BRICS format, the successful activity of other organizations in which Russia occupies leading positions (the CSTO [Collective Security Treaty Organization], the SCO [Shanghai Cooperation Organization], and the EAEC [Eurasian Economic Community]), and the formation of the Customs Union.

    In the context of the growing world financial and economic crisis, major new players in the international arena such as the PRC, India, Brazil, and Iran as well as the growing economies of Southeast Asia and South Korea became increasingly significant factors for the United States. Hence, incidentally, the emergence of new conceptual principles such as the American-Chinese special partnership, the strategic collaboration between the United States and India, the establishment of direct dialogue between Washington and Iran, and so forth.
    Indications of the need to resume the beneficial dialogue with Russia on a whole range of issues began to emerge from the new administration of President Barack Obama. This positive inclination on the part of the American authorities could only be welcomed.
    However, it soon became clear that Washington is not inclined towards real cooperation. It confined itself to mere statements of friendliness and the devising of certain negotiation tracks from which the benefit to Russia, in the end, proved almost zero. After a while even totally nonbinding positive dialogues of this kind came to an end and the US attitude towards our country began once again to be reminiscent of cold war times.

    [Yegorov] And the logical culmination of this policy was the Ukraine crisis?
    [Patrushev] The coup d'etat in Kiev, accomplished with clear US support, followed the classical pattern tried and tested in Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East. But never before has such a scheme affected Russian interests so profoundly.
    Analysis shows that by provoking Russia into retaliatory steps the Americans are pursuing the very same objectives as in the 1980s with regard to the USSR. Just like back then, they are trying to identify our country's "vulnerabilities". At the same time, incidentally, they are pursuing the objective of neutralizing European economic competitors who have, in Washington's opinion, grown excessively close to Moscow.

    I would like to remind you that Washington has always sought to have levers of pressure on Russia. Thus, in 1974 the famous Jackson-Vanik Amendment was adopted, restricting trade relations with our country. It appeared to have completely lost its relevance immediately after the breakup of the USSR, but it was still in force right up to 2012, when the so-called "Magnitsky List" was promptly adopted in its place.

    The current sanctions are in the same category. The US Administration's activity in the Ukrainian sphere is taking place within the framework of an updated White House foreign policy course aimed at holding on to American leadership in the world by means of the strategic containment of the growing influence of the Russian Federation and other centres of power. In this context Washington is actively making use, on its own terms, of NATO's potential, seeking to use political and economic pressure to prevent any vacillations on the part of its allies and partners.
    [Yegorov] Why is the American elite clinging so stubbornly to the right to control other people's natural resources at a time when the Western expert community is declaring the importance of the development of alternative energy sources that are supposedly capable of taking the place of oil and gas in the near future?

    [Patrushev] In actual fact, specialists are certain that no real substitute for hydrocarbons as the basis of power generation will emerge in the next few decades. Furthermore the understanding prevails in the West that the total capacity of nuclear, hydro, wind, solar, and other power stations will meet no more than one-fifth of world demand.
    Nor should another important aspect be forgotten. In the modern world we can observe a steady growth in the shortage of food and drinking water for the growing population of the planet. The absence of the most elementary means of existence pushes desperate people into manifestations of extremism and involvement in terrorism, piracy, and crime. This is one reason for the acute conflicts between countries and regions and also for mass migration.

    The shortage of water and irrigated land is not infrequently the cause of friction, for instance, between the Central Asian republics. The problem of water resources is acute in a number of other countries in Asia and particularly in Africa.
    Many American experts, in particular former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, assert that there are vast territories "under Moscow's power" that it is incapable of exploiting and which therefore "do not serve the interests of all humanity". Assertions continue to be heard about the "unfair" distribution of natural resources and the need to ensure so-called "free access" to them for other states.
    The Americans are convinced that people must be thinking in similar terms in many other states, particularly those neighbouring on Russia, and that in the future they will, as is nowadays the custom, form "coalitions" to support the corresponding claims on our country. As in the case of Ukraine, it is proposed to resolve problems at Russia's expense but without taking its interests into account.
    Even during periods of a relative thaw in relations between Russia (the USSR) and the United States, our American partners have always remained true to such notions.

    Therefore irrespective of the nuances in the behaviour of the Americans and their allies the Russian leadership still faces this task as a constant: To guarantee the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the Motherland, to defend and multiply its riches, and to manage them correctly in the interests of the multiethnic people of the Russian Federation.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 12360
    Points : 12839
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  George1 on Tue Jan 27, 2015 8:33 am

    Russian Embassy in US Examining Info on Charges Against Alleged Spies

    The Embassy of the Russian Federation in Washington DC is currently studying the case of three Russians who face criminal charges in the United States for their alleged involvement in an intelligence-gathering.

    WASHINGTON, January 27 (Sputnik) – The Embassy of the Russian Federation in Washington DC is studying information on three Russians who face criminal charges in the United States for their alleged involvement in an intelligence-gathering scheme, an embassy representative has told RIA Novosti.

    "The information appeared recently. We are studying it. So, it is too early to give any comments," Nikolay Lyashchenko said Monday.

    Federal prosecutors in New York levelled criminal charges against Evgeny Buryakov, Igor Sporyshev and Victor Podobnyy earlier in the day, accusing them of gathering intelligence and recruiting covert agents in the United States for Russia's foreign intelligence service.

    According to US attorneys and the FBI, the alleged spies' scheme ran from 2012 to the present time.
    Federal Bureau of Investigation(FBI) inside the J. Edgar Hoover FBI Building in Washington, DC.

    The US Department of Justice said in a statement Monday that during the period of the alleged plot, Buryakov posed as an employee of a Russian bank, Sporyshev was a Russian trade representative, and Podobnyy was an attaché to Moscow's mission to the United Nations.

    The prosecutor's office for the Southern District of New York announced in a statement Monday that the three men could get up to 15 years in prison.

    Buryakov was placed under arrest on Monday in Bronx, New York. Sporyshev and Podobnyy no longer reside in the United States – they had left the country before criminal charges were brought against them.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 12360
    Points : 12839
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  George1 on Tue Jan 27, 2015 8:34 am

    Russian Telecoms Watchdog to Meet With CNN Tuesday

    CNN stopped cable broadcasting in Russia on December 31, 2014, due to the changes in Russian media legislation. The broadcaster hopes to return to the Russian market.

    MOSCOW, January 27 (Sputnik) – The Russian telecoms watchdog Roskomnadzor will meet with representatives from CNN International that stopped broadcasting in Russia at the end of last year, on Tuesday.

    "The meeting is scheduled for January 27. Its contents are not being revealed by mutual agreement between the two sides," the Roskomnadzor press service informed RIA Novosti Monday.

    Earlier in the day, a representative from Turner Broadcasting System, Inc., a division of Time Warner Company, which owns CNN, told Sputnik that CNN hopes to resume its broadcasting in Russia as soon as possible.

    CNN stopped cable broadcasting in Russia on December 31, 2014, due to the recent changes in Russian media legislation. The Turner Broadcasting then stated that they hoped to return to the Russian market as soon as the distribution options are assessed.

    Founded in 1980, CNN opened its Russian division in 1983. Currently, CNN news reaches over 200 million households across 212 countries and territories.
    avatar
    George1

    Posts : 12360
    Points : 12839
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  George1 on Fri Jan 30, 2015 1:48 pm

    Russian analyst warns against stepping over red line in Russia-US relations
    avatar
    kvs

    Posts : 3753
    Points : 3852
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  kvs on Sat Jan 31, 2015 12:31 am

    George1 wrote:Russian analyst warns against stepping over red line in Russia-US relations

    The only ones stepping over any lines are the Americans. The self-anointed global empire and actual police state.
    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 668
    Points : 838
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Putin Threatens to Release Satellite Evidence of 9/11

    Post  ahmedfire on Mon Feb 16, 2015 7:30 pm

    Putin Threatens to Release Satellite Evidence of 9/11

    Moscow (Pravda):  American experts believe that despite the fact that relations between the US and Russia reached the worst point since the Cold War, Putin delivered until Obama only minor troubles. Analysts believe that this is the “calm before the storm.” Putin is going to hit once, but he’s going to hit hard. Russia is preparing the release of evidence of the involvement of the US government and intelligence services in the September 11 attacks.

    The list of evidence includes satellite images.

    Published material can prove the US government complicity in the 9/11 attacks and the successful manipulation of public opinion. The attack was planned by the US government, but exercised using  her proxy, so that an attack on America and the people of the United States looked like an act of aggression by international terrorist organizations.

    The motive for deception and murder its own citizens served  US oil interests and the Middle East state corporations.

    The evidence will be so convincing that it utterly debunks the official 9/11 cover story supported by the US government.

    Russia proves that America is no stranger to using false flag terrorism against its citizens in order to achieve a pretext for military intervention in a foreign country. In the case of “the September 11 attacks,” the evidence will be conclusive satellite imagery.

    If successful, the consequences of Putin’s tactics would expose the US government’s secret terrorist policies. The government’s credibility will be undermined and should bring about mass protests in the cities leading to an uprising, according to American analysts..

    And as the United States will look on the world political arena? The validity of America’s position as a leader in the fight against international terrorism will be totally undermined  giving immediately advantage to rogue states and Islamic terrorists.

    The actual development of the situation could be much worse, experts warn.

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/02/10/pravda-putin-threatens-to-release-satellite-evidence-of-911/
    avatar
    magnumcromagnon

    Posts : 4592
    Points : 4751
    Join date : 2013-12-05
    Location : Pindos ave., Pindosville, Pindosylvania, Pindostan

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  magnumcromagnon on Mon Feb 16, 2015 8:01 pm

    ahmedfire wrote: Putin Threatens to Release Satellite Evidence of 9/11

    Moscow (Pravda):  American experts believe that despite the fact that relations between the US and Russia reached the worst point since the Cold War, Putin delivered until Obama only minor troubles. Analysts believe that this is the “calm before the storm.” Putin is going to hit once, but he’s going to hit hard. Russia is preparing the release of evidence of the involvement of the US government and intelligence services in the September 11 attacks.

    The list of evidence includes satellite images.

    Published material can prove the US government complicity in the 9/11 attacks and the successful manipulation of public opinion. The attack was planned by the US government, but exercised using  her proxy, so that an attack on America and the people of the United States looked like an act of aggression by international terrorist organizations.

    The motive for deception and murder its own citizens served  US oil interests and the Middle East state corporations.

    The evidence will be so convincing that it utterly debunks the official 9/11 cover story supported by the US government.

    Russia proves that America is no stranger to using false flag terrorism against its citizens in order to achieve a pretext for military intervention in a foreign country. In the case of “the September 11 attacks,” the evidence will be conclusive satellite imagery.

    If successful, the consequences of Putin’s tactics would expose the US government’s secret terrorist policies. The government’s credibility will be undermined and should bring about mass protests in the cities leading to an uprising, according to American analysts..

    And as the United States will look on the world political arena? The validity of America’s position as a leader in the fight against international terrorism will be totally undermined  giving immediately advantage to rogue states and Islamic terrorists.

    The actual development of the situation could be much worse, experts warn.

    http://www.veteranstoday.com/2015/02/10/pravda-putin-threatens-to-release-satellite-evidence-of-911/

    Veteranstoday is not a reliable website just saying...
    avatar
    ahmedfire

    Posts : 668
    Points : 838
    Join date : 2010-11-11
    Location : egypt

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  ahmedfire on Tue Feb 17, 2015 12:10 am

    Sorry .
    avatar
    Kyo

    Posts : 498
    Points : 545
    Join date : 2014-11-03
    Age : 69
    Location : Brasilia

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  Kyo on Tue Feb 24, 2015 7:34 pm

    Washington Has Resurrected The Threat Of Nuclear War

    Paul Craig Roberts

    Foreign Affairs is the publication of the elitist Council on Foreign Relations, a collection of former and current government officials, academics, and corporate and financial executives who regard themselves as the custodian and formulator of US foreign policy. The publication of the council carries the heavy weight of authority. One doesn’t expect to find humor in it, but I found myself roaring with laughter while reading an article in the February 5 online issue by Alexander J. Motyl, “Goodbye, Putin: Why the President’s Days Are Numbered.”

    I assumed I was reading a clever parody of Washington’s anti-Putin propaganda. Absurd statement followed absurd statement. It was better than Colbert. I couldn’t stop laughing.

    To my dismay I discovered that the absolute gibberish wasn’t a parody of Washington’s propaganda. Motyl, an ardent Ukrainian nationalist, is a professor at Rugers University and was not joking when he wrote that Putin had stolen $45 billion, that Putin was resurrecting the Soviet Empire, that Putin had troops and tanks in Ukraine and had started the war in Ukraine, that Putin is an authoritarian whose regime is “exceedingly brittle” and subject to being overthrown at any time by the people Putin has bought off with revenues from the former high oil price, or by “an Orange Revolution in Moscow” in which Putin is overthrown by Washington orchestrated demonstrations by US financed NGOs as in Ukraine, or by a coup d’etat by Putin’s Praetorial guards. And if none of this sends Putin goodbye, the North Caucasus, Chechnya, Ingushetia, Dagestan, and the Crimean Tarters are spinning out of control and will do Washington’s will by unseating Putin. Only the West’s friendly relationship with Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakstan can shield “the rest of the world from Putin’s disastrous legacy of ruin.”

    When confronted with this level of ignorant nonsense in what is alleged to be a respectable publication, we experience the degradation of the Western political and media elite. To argue with nonsense is pointless.

    What we see here with Motyl is the purest expression of the blatant propagandistic lies that flow continually from the likes of Fox “News,” Sean Hannity, the neocon warmongers, the White House, and executive branch and congressional personnel beholden to the military/security complex.

    The lies are too much even for Henry Kissinger.

    As Stephen Lendman, who documents the ever growing anti-Russian propaganda, honestly states: “America’s war on the world rages. Humanity’s greatest challenge is stopping this monster before it destroys everyone.”

    The absurdity of it all! Even a moron knows that if Russia is going to put tanks and troops into Ukraine, Russia will put in enough to do the job. The war would be over in a few days if not in a few hours. As Putin himself said some months ago, if the Russian military enters Ukraine, the news will not be the fate of Donetsk or Mauriupol, but the fall of Kiev and Lviv.

    Former US Ambassador to the Soviet Union (1987-91) Jack Matlock cautioned against the crazed propagandistic attack against Russia in his speech at the National Press Club on February 11. Matlock is astonished by the dismissal of Russia as merely “a regional power” of little consequence to the powerful US military. No country, Matlock says, armed with numerous, accurate, and mobile ICBMs is limited to regional power. This is the kind of hubristic miscalculation that ends in world destruction.

    Matlock also notes that the entirely of Ukraine, like Crimea, has been part of Russia for centuries and that Washington and NATO have no business being in Ukraine.

    He also points out the violations of promises made to Russia not to expand NATO eastward and how this and other acts of US aggression toward Russia have recreated the lack of trust between the two powers that Reagan worked successfully to overcome.

    Reagan’s politeness toward the Soviet leadership and refusal to personalize differences created an era of cooperation that the morons who are Reagan’s successors have thrown away, thus renewing the threat of nuclear war that Reagan and Gorbachev had ended.

    Washington’s foreign policy, Matlock says, is autistic, which he defines as impaired social interaction, failed communication, and restricted and repetitive behavior.

    Read Matlock: http://www.larouchepub.com/eiw/public/2015/2015_1-9/2015-08/pdf/10-14_4208.pdf

    Don’t bother with the utter fool Motyl: http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/142840/alexander-j-motyl/goodbye-putin

    iamstevefaith

    Posts : 1
    Points : 3
    Join date : 2015-03-09

    Entity's said U S President in trouble for war mongering stance at Russian Federation

    Post  iamstevefaith on Mon Mar 09, 2015 8:36 am

    Entity's on map Africa cited U S President Barack Obama policy decision on Ukraine and NATO Expansion. The Entity's that have recent times eluded capture from U S secret services, fbi, cia Huntington Beach Police Orange County Sheriff department uses telepathic interference and technical means of persuasion when police come to accost subjects and he mysteriously re-treated.


    8 March 2015

    The subjects of glasnost perestroika will continue to be the subject even though "cartoon phenomena" on map topography of Africa don't see eye to eye. The entity's just so happen to made clearer than ever before the Ukraine was just recent, as filed a fictitious names aka steven v. schofer inter alias steve arroyo there-s, an conception of Russia to our consensus.

    Celestial and desirable Judge's seek to offer resolution: enter desbic or desbic treaty in google search as rules won't allow a link for now-s to the contemporaneous stand off in the Ukraine republic. The details of a Treaty and a said potential solution to the ironies we forgot to situated are certainly a favorite to see.

    In further discussions to seat, we here at star based internal command and communication decision to pry, fit a pulley to just so happen to phone officers of a copy cat desires to lied in areas of talks with NATO leader aimed at cessation of military involvement in all former Soviet satellite escrow?  Will continue to press issues baring in mind-s the great overtures received by Russia 1990 on ways.

    So contended:

    Debate, analyze, research, discuss, shape policy, have a say in the matter now describing?

    Sponsored content

    Re: Russia - USA Relations

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Dec 11, 2018 11:28 am