Venkat, Atheist's post is obviously angry and irrational, but what part of that diatribe you wrote makes *you* sane? Granted, the US under Bush has followed a pretty loony foreign policy, but they certainly haven't invaded anyone who didn't have it coming. I'm always baffled when eastern europeans get angry about the US invading Iraq - do you feel some sort of kinship with a brutal despot whose domestic killing sprees rivaled the Khmer Rouge, if not Stalin himself?
Besides, your A-bomb comment is hitting below the belt, and furthermore shows an unfortunate ignorance of history. The US didn't use the bomb on Germany (its original target) because they had already been knocked out of the war by the conventional forces of the US, USSR, and Great Britan when the weapon became operational. They then chose to use it on the Japanese, not from any sense of hatred or racism (the word "Japs" is considered an unacceptable ethnic slur in the US, by the way) but because Harry Truman and his advisors calculated that shocking the fanatical Japanese with a horrifying new weapon would save both US and Japanese lives, when compared to the cost of a bloody invasion. The 103,000 casualties at Hiroshima and Nagasaki were far, far lower than the estimated death toll of 8 million (Japanese, US, and other Allied forces) expected during an invasion of the Japanese home islands. Even with the bomb operational, US diplomats first tried to convince Japanese government officials to surrender in the face of a "new and terrible weapon". The Japanese were unimpressed. Certainly WWII, and it's conclusion, represent one of humanities darkest hours, but it's unfair to blame the nation that ended the war for the casualties inflicted against one of the nations that began it.
It's also worth noting that the United States paid the modern equivalent of about 500 billion dollars to rebuild the economies of its former enemies after the war, and while the Germans have consistently made a habit of hand-biting since their reunification, the Japanese maintain very close ties with the American government and people. If they're not bitter about it, why should you be?
Oh, and as for developing countries, if you live in Eastern Europe, then it's a good bet that a substantial portion of the infrastructure your nation has built since the fall of the USSR was paid for by US foreign aid. The US gives out several times more development aid to more nations on earth than any other country, western democracy or not. So please, take a deep breath, realize the US was shocked by the events of 9/11 and is only now beginning to recover her balance, and look at the long picture. America does a lot more good than harm. And someone from the part of the world where you live should understand that better than anyone.

Atheist, Islamic nations are second only to USA in being a rogue state. Who the hell are you punks to tell who should arm and who shouldn't. A nation with 'pedophilic' instincts, you want to sodomise every other new born country that escaped from the clutches of european imperialism so you could plant your poisonous churchian cult. Upstart 'nation state' that you are, US is the nation that has to be defanged. US is the only rogue state that used nuclear weapons but instead of using it on their country cousins Germany used it on poor Japs. US is a 'nation' that may not survive 21 st century like Pakistan.

To sane people the only rogue nations on earth today are US, Pakistan, Saudi and China

Despite the barbaric nature of Russian society, we Westerners can still learn important Russian ideas. One of the best such ideas is classic Russian techniques for dealing with Islamic animals. Visit the following web link.

http://www.rferl.org/featuresarticle/2006/08/8938ce7e-5d54-45db-bd1c-92032901db38.html

The upper right of the web page at the above link has the following useful story for American strategists.

"Russia has had direct experience in dealing with Hizballah. In 1985, extremist groups in Lebanon linked to Hizballah kidnapped four Soviet diplomats, one of which was later killed.

International media at the time reported that the kidnappers received parcels with the decapitated heads of their close relations in order to secure the diplomats' release. However, speaking to TV-Tsentr on July 8, KGB Colonel Yury Perfiliev, who at the time headed the KGB's Beirut station, said the media reports were just a KGB bluff aimed at pressuring the kidnappers.

But according to Perfiliev, he met with the then-leader of Hizballah, Sheikh Muhammad Hussein Fadallah, and told him that the Soviet Union could not tolerate such a humiliation. He said that if the kidnappers were not released then the Soviet Union could accidentally fire a nuclear missile in the direction of the Iranian city of Qom, where Ayatollah Khomeini and other top Muslim clerics lived. The three remaining prisoners were subsequently released."

The Iranian thugs have run amok with their nuclear research, which is a front for developing a nuclear bomb. The Kremlin can offer the Pentagon useful suggestions for dealing effectively with these Islamic animals.

Russia should be taken seriously. Western Europeans have no idea how it felt to be "liberated'' by the Red Army, and thus have a rather different perception than Central and Eastern Europeans.

Russia is using a "divide et impera" energy strategy. Look at the side deals it made with Germany, and the pipe deal it is negociating with Hungary. Look at the rather dramatic differences in what it charges to different countries for gas (Poland and Romania are charged well above the averge rate a Western European country pays. The BBC site regularly posts these rates and it is shocking.)

A few weeks ago, Russia stated that concerning EU energy problems it wants a layered policy, on the top layer France, Germany and UK, and on the bottom layer, the former Soviet satellites. Orwellian, isn't it?

Look at the recent events in Latvia. Did you know, that after Irak, Russia is the most dangerous work place for a journalist? Did you read of the new youth group called ``Ours'' (Nash') encouraged by Kremlin? The similarities with ``Hitlerjugend'' are striking.

The world needs to pay attention to the new, more assertive, and more agressive Russia

The G-7 is an organization of the major, prosperous democracies committed to Western values. When we Westerners admitted Russia into the G-7, creating the G-8, we expected that Russia would modernize along Western lines.

We were wrong.

Instead of strengthening Western society, the Russians have assaulted it. The Russian police routinely and savagely beat participants in peaceful human-rights demonstrations. The Kremlin has systematically taken control of independent television stations and ordered them to broadcast pro-Kremlin "news". The Russian government has also conspired to assassinate journalists. Read about Russian brutality at the following link.

Speak truth to power
--------------------
http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9257663

Now, Vladimir Putin has threatened to aim Russian nuclear missiles at Europe. Prior to Russia's entry into the G-8, no member of the G-7 has ever threatened nuclear annihilation against another prosperous, Western democracy. Read the shocking story at the following link.

Vlad and MAD
------------
www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=9304071&CFID=8373994&CFTOKEN=18041815

Threatening nuclear annihilation against Europe is serious business. We Westerners must respond.

We should expel Russia from the G-8.

If Russia had been willing to sacrifice some sovereignty like Germany and some other European countries by allowing US troops to setup bases, I believe Russia would have got some "good" economic advice from the States.

And if Russia were willing to accept some dirty outsourced jobs, such as making AK47s for Iraqi army, and setting up secret prisons for US, her economy would do as well as Poland, Romania, etc etc.

one thing for sure, some of the comments on these post global sites makes the writers of the main articles look like they are illiterate (hope i spelled that right) about world history and events. some of the articles make points of profound nothingness.

Dear Mr. Vamos,

I learned to love Russian literature from, among others, an Hungarian who had once faced Russian tanks "with a rifle in his hand," as he used to say, hardly believing it himself. I was learning Slovak the year of Socialism with a Human Face, which ended with Soviet tanks entering Prague. It wasn't just American bases in Europe then, you'll remember. Hard as it is to believe, many Russians seem to consider those the good old days. Some - according to fora I hang out at - are still promising themselves that they're going to clean out the "resident presidents" in the surrounding countries who apparently, unlike British colonies, have no desire for further association with the former metropolitan power.

Russians may blame the US for the "bad economic advice" it provided in the 1990s, but we provided the same advice to the countries of East Europe, and they have had pretty good results with it (I'm back from 3 years in Prague - no comparison to the city I visited in the 70s.) Putin wants a country of 140 million to be treated as the equal of the combined US and EU because of its nuclear arsenal? I suggest an "asymmetrical response" - reduce the world's dependence on oil and gas and let Russia concentrate on its internal development.

TSW:

A superpower is one who can make the Spaceship Earth uninhabitable on a whim. there are two of them in the world: USA AND RUSSIA.

There are minor powers who can cause great damage to Speceship earth: Uk, france, Israel, Pakistan, India and China.

There are great national economics in the world not necessarily included in G8.

You state that Russia is not an economic superpower for its economy is 10% of USA. This statement based on World Bank PPP clearly indicates the absurdity of PPP, for it shows that that Russia's economy is the same size as that of Canada with Canada's approx 1/5 of the population and about 2/3 of the area compared to Russia. You can also contemplate that the USA's foreign debt is approaching 80% of the USA GDP, while Russia can live well on her savings - does not need to buy foreign oil, foreign raw materials etc all imported to USA]

Another way you could measure Russia's economic might is through a thought experiment:

Russia cuts off gas/oil delivery to EUROPE in the WINTER [can live on her 300-400 billion dollar foreign reserve for quite awhile] and see what happpens in Europe and the world [guess price of oil $200 per barrel? about the same if the USA/Israel idiots attack Iran].

Mr. Vamos, it is a mistake to say "Western World" or "Westeners" or "the West". There is continental Europe and the Anglosphere, the lands of the British degenerates such as the United States. We Europeans don't share their values. They torture and murder us. With the creation of the European Defence Force including Russia, the Americans and British will be expelled from Europe.

This article makes very little sense. One the one hand, Russia deserves to be treated as a superpower because of its "economic potential." On the other hand, we should send "some economic assistance to the Russian people." Why would they need assistance if they have such great economic power? The fact is Russia's economy is a joke. Its GDP is less than one tenth of the U.S. or E.U. If Russia's economy merits superpower status, then what about Spain and Brazil, both of which have larger economies? According to the IMF, Russia's per capita GDP is lower than places like Libya and Botswana. Are they superpowers?

The Russian people eventually will step up to Western style Democracy - or universal Democracy that has yet to be realized in many parts of the globe, but is still realized by various non western nations.

Remember Japan, a country with it's own religious and cultural traditions is a Democracy, as is India. Of course both were colonized. But did they revert back to their previous forms of governance post colonization? No. Why? My guess is that because the people wouldn't have it.

Freedom of the individual, while a characterization of Western Democracies is an ideal that can be embraced and indeed has been, and will be by many non-Western nations.

No one doubts the hypocrisy of American Foreign Policy or that of any other nation - well at least I don't. That tends to happen in an anarchic world. But the US wanting to construct this is not a bad idea considering the world we live in.

For those who believe Putin's argument that Russia needs to see it's own form of Democracy - is a joke. Yes not all countries that are Democratic are similar. However the basics are there and Russia is devolving back to an authoritarian time. This time we see not communism, but a more fascist style. Russia now is far from Moussolini's Italy or Hitler's Germany, but Putin nonetheless is not concocting his own form of Democracy, and if one believes that, that's quite alarming, especially for the people in Russia who simply want to speak their minds. Just ask Litvenko, or the poisened Ukrainian PM. Does Russia get a free pass on those events as well?

While US foreign policy can be hypocrytical, similar to any others

ABM system are aimed at rogue states and terrorists, not significant powers like Russia and China. Significant missile defense is only feasible against limited missle events, not the all out assault that the big powers such as Russia and China can launch. The Russians strategic worry is not the effect of the missle system itself, but the integration of previously Soviet satelite states into Western sphere's of influence.

As for they thinly veiled "who lost Russia" comments, the reality is that the West didn't lose Russia, the Russian people simply did not step up to Western style democracy like many dreamed they would. The West could have tripled the Marshall plan in political capital and resources after the fall of the Soviet Union and the engagement would not have solved the fundamental statist drives of Russian politics.

No, no, anonymous. You completely misunderstand what's going on.

Putin is calling the US bluff. Bush says the missiles aren't directed against Russia but against Iran, etc. Azerbaijan is the perfect location for a system to stop an Iranian missile but is useless for stopping Russian ones.

So if Bush were telling the truth about the system not being directed at Russia, he would have no problem with an Azerbaijan-based system.

Of course, he wasn't telling the truth. So now he's caught in his own web of lies.

The Americans are already making it clear they have no intention of accepting an Azerbaijan system. They aren't REALLY interested in Iranian missiles. Iran doesn't even have any long-range missiles.

The whole point of Putin's suggestion was to force the Americans and their thoroughly bad intentions into the open.

"If the Russians are or become dangerous it is in part due to the way we perceive and treat them."

Bingo, and the same goes for Iran, as seen in the previous comment about "crazy mullahs seeking nukes." How many times has the US been involved in military actions outside its borders since 1979, as compared to how many times Iran has? Iraq invaded Iran, by the way.

The US just wants to encircle the globe with military bases and missle defense shields which do nothing but provoke others and cause new arms races. The hypocrisy, vanity and stupidity of US foreign policy seems completely lost on the majority of the American people, even 4 years into the cataclysmic Iraq war.

Dear Mr. Vamos,

Your comments about Russia are poignant. The West seems to ignore Russia except as you say the supposed threat they pose to us. No one can doubt the oppression the Russian people have felt at the hands of their own governments. But for some reason the West can't accept the debts that the West is owed by the former Soviet states. We seem to forget that without them most of Europe might have remained under the heal of the Nazis. And can we blame the somewhat paranoid approach to foreign policy the Soviets and now the Russians currently have given their history? They have been invaded numerous times both from the West and East and after liberating themselves from the Czars they are vilified and propagandized by the West for nearly fifty years. Then after the fall of communism, they are again left to be exploited by an oligarchaic form of capitalism which has caused a substantial portion of the population to emigrate. If the Russians are or become dangerous it is in part due to the way we perceive and treat them.

Serious superpowers have already realized their economic potential. If this applied to all nations with economic potential, then China, India and many others would be treated as superpowers. Superpowers have realized their power potentail already, Post Soviet Russia has not.

I agree that Russia is not the most serious threat facing the Western World. However when someone is assasinated for speaking out against the Kremlin, as was clearly the case with the London poisoning, concerns should be raised.

Also, when Putin counteracts US plans for a missile defense system with an offensive move, such as pointing missiles to Europe, there are other reasons to worry.

Lastly, while I am not a huge supporter of President Bush, he is correct in his assumption that people do yearn for personal liberty and freedom. And Putin is able to suppress these desires partly because the Russians have little experience with either ideal as a result of their history.

Putin is more intent on consolidating his grip on power at the people's expense so that he can go in the opposite direction of European and American Democratic instituitions. The Russian people however will get the taste of true liberty eventually, and Putin's vainglorious dreams of an quasi-dictatorial Russia, will vanish.

Mr. Vamos you wrote: The news of the day is that Putin suddenly suggested to President Bush that a common (Russia-U.S., that is) missile defensive shield should be constructed. Pretty good. Against whom, for God’s Sake? Well, probably against China, I guess, having no better idea.

You are wondering who the missile defence is targetted at ?

Do you recall Putin suggested placing the missile defence in Azerbijan ?

Do you know which country is directly South of Azerbijan ? hint... It has crazy mullahs seeking nukes.