Russia is still a threat but...

The US is not the only country with corruption nor is it the only country that has performed false flag attacks. Russia has done false flag attacks as well. Russia has corruption too. The only difference is that in a democratic system we hear about the corruption and are allowed to talk about it. http://finiansworld.blogspot.com/2008/09/faked-military-attacks-russia.html

People aren’t allowed to talk about government corruption in China. Look at their passion to win public opinion during the Beijing Olympics. They even faked the fireworks and opening song just so they would look good. Now it’s all about PR and fooling the masses. Thus the term, the first casualty of war is the truth. http://finiansworld.blogspot.com/2008/08/mao-beijing.html

As soon as Obama is elected, Russia moves missiles into position. Is this a Cuba deja vu or is it simply recording their dissent over NATO missiles in the Ukraine. Let’s face it, the US were rightfully concerned about Russia putting missiles in Cuba. Likewise Russia has a right to be concerned if NATO puts missiles in the Ukraine. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article5090077.ece

.

What are they thinking? Are they trying to instigate conflict or avoid it? It would also depend on what kind of missiles they wanted to put there, offensive or defensive. Missiles that can shoot down missiles are better than missiles that simply do damage. However, I don’t see how it would be possible to put defense missiles in place and not be able to use those missiles for offensive strikes. http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,2144,3788942,00.html

.

The purpose of the "Defense Shield" is not to protect North America but to protect countries in Europe. If Israel wants defense missiles give them defense missiles but to place "Defense" missiles in all those former soviet countries is clearly an antagonistic act. http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/04/03/nato.members/

.

What if NATO puts all those missiles in place and those countries revert? Could not those missiles then be used against us? Who other than the arms dealers and the CIA benefit from selling arms and promoting conflict? http://bx.businessweek.com/defense-industry/pentagon-seeks-7b-missile-sale-to-uae/15218489874394099870-c72ac764c466698314c6e53d602c30bb/

.

Russia leasing nuclear subs to India is a bit of a concern. Nuclear subs are a double edge sword. If you have a nuclear sub in your waters and you blow it up, then you have to deal with the radiation. Yet letting a nuclear sub roam around your waters with nuclear missiles in somewhat problematic. http://www.ptinews.com/pti/ptisite.nsf/0/2ABD5BE21A585450652574FE004DB660?OpenDocument

The EU mandated to build armies without protection of human rights is somewhat of a concern as well. Nevertheless, we do have to take the board out of our own eye before we take the speck out of our neighbour’s eye. Bush was a big board but the CIA is clearly the root of the problem, which remains and continues to cause serious problems.