What better way to stop Russian expansion than to bring them into the club and guarantee their security? Then all effort could have gone into integrating their economy with Europe too. Maybe wouldn’t have worked if Putin really wasn’t sincere, but I can’t see that trying would have led to disaster. Seems like a sadly missed opportunity that may never happen again.

I was always very suspicious of Putin’s offer to join NATO, and consider it completely disingenuous. For a start, it was originally set up as a counter-balance to the potential for future Russian expansionism and so Russia being a member would have been pointless. Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, for example, often say that they consider their membership the only thing that keeps them safe from Russia taking them over. None of the NATO members except the US took their membership that seriously – they all considered the existence of the organisation enough to stop Russia. There’s a membership requirement, foe example, to spend a certain amount of GDP on the military; except the US, all were spending less than half the requirement. It’s only recently that they’re started spending a bit more, and it’s in direct response to Russia intervening in Ukraine. There was a NATO meeting last year that the president of Ukraine was invited to. On the way to it, the US representative stopped off in Lithuania. Both were obviously signals. It was at that meeting that the NATO ready reaction forces were created.

I agree that Washington withdrawing that offer was wrong, and doing that both undermined Rice et al and made them untrustworthy as negotiating partners. This could have made a difference.

I agree about Medvedev too. I’ve always liked him a lot, and Russia would be much more respected on the world stage if he was still in charge. The thing is, when Putin first came to power, even though there were already some questionable things in his background, he did do some good stuff for Russia, and so their alliance was probably fairly genuine. Now, I think Medvedev is doing what he can from the inside while trying to survive. Maybe he’ll be back. Unless Putin changes the constitution again, he’s going to have to leave office eventually. Still, his corruption has made him one of the world’s richest men, so he’ll always have power now.

Heather, I’ve watched the DVD on Putin. It is really interesting and I recommend it to others. And by the way, it is 90 minutes, not 45, though it even says 45 on the cover.

I found three things particularly interesting. One was that Putin asked to join NATO very early on in his presidency and was rebuffed. Second was that he offered joint development of missile defences to keep the US from establishing new bases in Poland (and somewhere else, can’t remember), which the US claimed it needed to defend against long range Iranian missiles. The video didn’t say whether these actually existed; Russia thought not, but the Bush administration was adamant they did. The offer was taken seriously and negotiations were extensive, but the US still wanted to build the new bases. Rice and Gates offered Putin a permanent presence at the bases as assurance they were not targeting Russia, but Washington withdrew that offer and the deal fell through.

One has to wonder how things would be different today had either of these overtures been accepted. The video implies that Putin became much more wary of US intentions after this, particularly in the light of NATO expansion.

The third interesting thing was just how different Medvedev was; both an internal reformer and also built a positive relationship with Obama. Too bad he wasn’t able to stay president, but it seems he had a deal with Putin that no one quite understood was for real.

Cheers Ken. I’ve just recommended you hijab post in the comments of WEIT: https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2015/12/23/jesus-n-mo-n-the-reformers/

May Isaac Newtons Birthday being joy to all 🙂 you have a good one enjoyed reading your blog, thank you for reading mine.

Blogidarity my friend.

In NZ you can buy lamb burgers with mint sauce. I’d love to see this as a poster in the places that sell them! 🙂

(Been too busy lately to keep up with comments on other threads but will do so soon.)

http://thegurglingcod.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c387d53ef0133ee681e35970b-pi

I don’t go to Dawkins for theology. I do find much of his critical analysis of religion useful. He points out many of the inaccuracies in the Bible but nevertheless says people should read it because of its contribution to the English language. I agree with him on that.

This is an atheist website though. Theists are as welcome here as anyone else, but they’re not going to find much sympathy for the thesis that there’s a divine creator. Most of us used to be theists and have abandoned that idea after much thought. It’s not a lack of thoughtfulness on our part, it’s that we went through that process some time ago and came to the conclusion that atheism was what made the most sense.

Thanks for sharing that. It’s cool that your family is accepting of your’s and your brother’s decisions. One of my maxims for those in a religion is, “If your religion makes you choose it over your family, you’re in the wrong religion.”

If you think Dawkins is a “no-nothing blowhard” then I must pronounce you the “King of Projecting”. Congratulations.