One of this blog's most longstanding and consistently interesting commenters blogs from Iraq under the name AnotherBeliever. She's serving in the US military there (she really is; we've had some e-mail contact, and recently one of our other distinguished commenters, Franklin Evans, had contact with her too). AB posted a long comment to another thread here tonight, explaining why she, as a soldier, won't be voting for McCain.
The reason: Russia. AB gives us all something important to think about. Please read her words to the end. These are the words of a soldier:
The convention, what I saw of it on five minute breaks from work, was inspiring and emotional. This sort of thing bothers me when it reaches near-hysteria, and I tend to tune it out. It was no different with Obama, of course. Being in the military for the past six years has made me less emotionally invested in politics. Those of us who wear a uniform, or who are in Federal service generally, learn that we serve the people of the United States. If the people elect someone we don't agree with, it really doesn't matter. We go to work everyday and give it our best, because it's what the people wanted. If they elect someone we agree with, naturally, we're happy, but we don't get too tied up in it all. My point is, if McCain is duly elected, then he is the people's choice, and that is the end of the story. He has plenty of great character traits, and I would appreciate having a veteran in the highest office for a change. Palin is really quite inspiring, even if I would never be so heavily involved in a career if I had young children. I don't presume my choices are the only right ones. But as far as my vote goes, I cannot in good conscience help elect someone who might pull out of what few remaining treaties we have left with a country with 3,500 ready nuclear warheads, and God knows how many which could be re-commissioned relatively quickly. We have systematically and unilaterally withdrawn from treaty after treaty, leaving Russia with no honorable choice from its perspective but to draw the line somewhere. We would not have been so patient, were our roles reversed. But Russia has been biding its time, and building up its economy, investing in its military. We have ourselves heavily over-extended in two separate hotspots. Many conservatives have been worried about China's rise to power. While it has been swift, they have been blind to Russia, which has been there all along, weakened some after the fall of communism, but still there. I don't think this will come to nuclear armageddon. But what 3,500 nuclear warheads get you is a certain level of immunity and impunity in a global strategy game. Because of the nukes and most of our troops on rotation to Iraq or Afghanistan, we are unwilling to ramp up to military confrontation. Russia knows this. Because of Russia's supply of natural gas and other petroleum to Europe, blockades and economic sanctions won't stick, either. All the cards are on Russia's side.
Here are a few winners that could go into play if she doesn't get her way: Russia can play havoc with any UN resolutions regarding Iran. It would not be too difficult to pare away even European nations given the threat of withholding natural gas. Russia can give Iran the latest air defenses and other military supplies, making any Israeli venture against Iran difficult. This might even up the brinksmanship between those two nations, and I can't see either country coming out ahead of that conflict. Russia can "go Georgia" on any number of its former satellite states. The only country we will actually defend militarily, I think, is Poland. For all our talk, the others are not worth reverting to the draft in order to muster up enough troops to even spend American blood over. Russia can, as previously mentioned, put a dent in Europe's natural gas supply. She needn't cut them off entirely, not all at once. Any pressure would be enough to destabilize their economies and send the futures markets into a tizzy.
Russia can side with China, economically and strategically. This needn't be a military alliance at all. With China's vast population and growing markets all over the developing world, Russia could effectively economically blockade us, in a complex series of maneuvers we'd not figure out until it was all said and done. Russia can be subtle. This may already have occurred, now that I think of it. And I repeat, all we have are economic sanctions and the dubious recourse to military power. The sanctions won't work. There is no way to tell how far military power would escalate, and we don't have the strategic reserves to find out.
Russia's drawn a line in the sand. We need to go back to the drawing board, and figure out what our REAL non-negotiables are, instead of pretending like Georgia and the antiballistic missile system and NATO expansion are actually fundamental to our national security, or even our national interest. We needn't kow-tow to Russia, but certain strategic and diplomatic moves could make it so that Russia does not cross the very line in the sand it has drawn, and re-establish vital cooperation in the realm of securing nuclear weapons and materials, standing against transnational terrorist groups, and continuing global disarmament of nuclear weapons. All of which WOULD be in our national interest, and would bolster our national security.
I don't know for sure that Obama would make the right choices. But McCain has made abundantly clear his attitude towards the problem. I only hope that if he is elected, the magnitude of the possible consequences to our actions will give him pause. I have nothing against playing hardball with Russia, so long as our course of action and the consequences are clearly thought out.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
Russia could be a key to many of our Mid East issues, if we can get past the communist thing. Give up the good vs. evil thing. Russia is an authoritarian state that never wants face a decimation like WWII again.
Its army is clearly improving. If you follow the writings of the military, consensus seems to be that 10-15 years ago the Russian military was pretty awful and would have had problems with Georgia. It still has problems, but the oil money has allowed it to invest $200 billion and vastly improve its forces. Still, numbers and finances make it very unlikely it would even attempt an invasion into Poland or the Ukraine.
The real problem, as AB has pointed out are the nukes. In theory these are for deterrence only. The risk for us lies with how many are not well secured. We have declared war on Islamic militants, when we really need more of a general police action. Invading Iraq, where there were no real terrorists, has not helped us much. We took out a dictator/thug, who had no real ideological commitments. We will probably end up with a weakened country and another strongman. The group of terrorists willing to attack us is actually pretty small. They are no existential threat. UNLESS, they can get their hands on a nuke. Russia is a risk to us in that regard. Russia is already selling antiaircraft systems to Iran. If we continue to push NATO at Russia, they may decide to push back and help Iran even more, or maybe Syria.
Russia does not hold all the cards. They have Muslim issues also. Europe needs Russia's oil and gas, but Russia needs some to buy their goods. Engaged, aggressive diplomacy that does not insult Russians is our best shot at security in the Middle East, and hence, at home. I believe McCain remains locked into a good vs evil view of the world. One where the U.S. is the only superpower and gets to call the shots. His advisers reflect this adversarial approach to foreign policy. His advisers are the ones who think we should invade and democratize Middle Eastern countries until they all are pro-Western democratic allies.
Finally, McCain's economic plan consistently ends up increasing our debt more than Obama's. Rising national debt makes us less secure when facing external threats.
Steve
Forgot. Here is a link to a good paper on dealing with Iran, and peripherally Russia, from the Center for a New American Security (John Nagl's new home). These guys have some of the better ideas coming out now IMO. Over 100 pages.
http://www.cnas.org/en/cms/?2296
Steve
Quote: "One of this blog's most longstanding and consistently interesting commenters blogs from Iraq under the name AnotherBeliever. She's serving in the US military there (she really is; we've had some e-mail contact, and recently one of our other distinguished commenters, Franklin Evans, had contact with her too). AB posted a long comment to another thread here tonight, explaining why she, as a soldier, won't be voting for McCain."
I would like to make the point that ABORTION is one of the sins that crys out to heaven for vengence and in the spiritual realm, is a direct cause of war...also, I'll remind you what Mother Teresa once said,
"But I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child - a direct killing of the innocent child - murder by the mother herself. And if we accept that a mother can kill even her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?"
Obama has the most atrocious record on a abortion that anyone has ever seen. I personally think, the best moral option in this election is quite clear.
I am soldier who served in Iraq and trouble areas in S America. I understand peoples point of view on foreign policy but I cannot stand to hear about another politician or celeb who speaks concerning Iraq and our war as if they know. Even some of the soldiers who were ther didnt really fight. We all served, but not all fought. I for one had many Iraqis thanking me for being there but you dont see that on the news. If Obama is voted in, and people continue to disgrace the sacrifices my brethren in arms made, I will forever be bitter towards the Democrats and I will choose not to continue serving.
Use your time properly, take the help of submit article service or article submission criteria and submit your good facts about this good topic faster.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.