Should Russia be our adversary, whether geopolitical or otherwise?

LTC Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Dec 2015 13:09:13 -0500

Many view Russia as an adversary. Maybe not a full blown enemy, but they recognize they don't play on the same team. Some take this a step further and do consider them an enemy.

After watching the recent political debates, I have been amazed by some of the responses to how to deal with Russia. These ranged from shooting down their aircraft in a no fly zone option (a great prelude to WWIII) to just not talking to them.

I completely understand that Russia and U.S. interests don't align. I understand they are doing a lot to undermine some of the things we have done and what we want. They want to protect Asad. Our administration wants him gone. I'm not going to get into that argument and am keeping my views on that topic to myself.

Bottom line is that we have taken a Cold War approach to Russia (and China). We already fought one cold war. My father picked up that fight serving from '67-'90. I personally would rather not be apart of another. Or for that matter an actual conflict (which I doubt is likely). Especially at a time when Russia is beefing up their military and Navy and we are hollowing out.

So to better phrase my question... do we really have to consider Russia an adversary and to lesser extent an enemy? Maybe and adversary. I understand that. You can have adversaries that are allies. And that's my point.

We are in the same fight with Russia and the rest of the world. The fight against radical Islam isn't going anywhere. We are stronger together than apart.

I just feel like over the past decade relations with Russia have deteriorated to the point of no return. There was a mutual respect between our countries post 9/11 that has eroded rapidly since 2010ish.

For me personally, I would prefer open dialogue than a cold shoulder.

Maybe with Putin this isn't possible. I understand who he was, is and what he wants. He's ex-KGB and wants to return Russia to its former glory. But sometimes you get more bees with honey and I rather be at war with ISIS fighting with Russia, than at war with ISIS and Russia. And with our air assets working in such close proximity, accidents are just one mishap away.

Or maybe I am just hoping for too much.

Just something that has been, for lack of a better word, bugging me lately.

Thoughts?

Response by SN Greg Wright made Dec 31 at 2015 1:14 PM

SN Greg Wright — Thu, 31 Dec 2015 13:14:11 -0500

LTC Private RallyPoint Member Where you're going to run into a wall, at least for now, is that leadership in both countries are from the Cold War generations, and are therefore irreparably biased towards those views. I don't think that will change until the younger generation (like, perhaps you?) comes online in those leadership positions. It's good to make the evaluation you're asking for, but I don't think anything will come of it until the Cold Warriors are out of power.

Response by SPC(P) Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 31 at 2015 2:04 PM

SPC(P) Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Dec 2015 14:04:34 -0500

The way I see it, Putin is a rational schemer. I don't think he's necessarily out to play the devil's advocate to the United States, but he certainly knows when the United States is trying to dupe him into doing what we want from him. Putin does what's (in his mind) in the best interest of Russia, he can't be played, and won't be. I think there is a lot of room to make Russia an ally in this current fight, and horrendous Foreign Policy, and attempts to dupe him or make him the bad guy have destroyed years of relationship building.

The way I see it, we all share a common enemy which is ISIS and radical Islam in the Middle East. Quite frankly, if the only hold-up is that Putin wants to back Assad in destroying ISIS, that should be on the table. Yes, I know, he's a Class A douche of a dictator, who murdered hundreds of thousands of people. He's also not a threat to the United States, ISIS and their influence is. Looking at the situation objectively, the people that we deemed innocent because they were unhappy with the oppression they were living under, were in his mind traitors to his administration and the country and were rebelling against the government. Russia sees our intervention as the United States violating the sovereignty of other nations and picking and choosing winners and losers. If they allow us to intervene in Syria and topple Assad, what's to stop Russia from being next.

Lay the cards on the table, and stop trying to BS Putin. Offer something in regards to allowing Assad to be returned to power with the stipulation that the country will transition to the people. You have to negotiate a peace settlement between the Syrian Free Army and Assad. Based on what I have seen, the policy has been to come to the table unwilling to negotiate, and trying to scheme Putin into giving up on what he wants, and doing what we want instead. That's not going to get anywhere.

Just my two cents.

Response by CW4 Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 31 at 2015 2:27 PM

CW4 Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Dec 2015 14:27:54 -0500

It is a fact, not a matter of a question. Russia has always been our adversary, even when we supplied Soviets with American equipment to help in fight against Hitler or worked with Russian paratroopers in Tuzla, Bosnia. By definition, we have always had adversarial relationship because of the divergent geopolitical goals or conflicting national interests.
Russian intervention in Georgia in 2008 ended the brief détente after the collapse of Soviet Union. It was a shot across the bow for anyone delusional enough to believe in a myth that after the cold war we were “friends.”
There should always be an effort to deescalate our adversarial relationship but the question is where do you draw the line? Do you let Russia keep Crimea to form alliance to fight ISIS? Perhaps Eastern Ukraine as well since it is not essential to our national interest? What do you do and what should be our response if Russia takes over Baltics in 72 hours? Would the peace with Russia still be worth this price or should our soldiers start dying for Riga or Tallinn. When do you tell the Russian bear “Nyet!” no more honey?
I am with you in that I would prefer normalizing the relationship with Russia. However, it is impossible with Putin’s clique in power. Although he is now actively trying to force our hand as in “get over the Ukraine and Crimea so we can fight common enemy,” it would be a mistake to think it is anything more than just a sly of hand in political poker.

Response by Capt Seid Waddell made Dec 31 at 2015 2:32 PM

Capt Seid Waddell — Thu, 31 Dec 2015 14:32:30 -0500

Russia is what it is, whether we recognize it or not. Look at the nations that Russia supports and you will see that they are reliably on the side of the terrorist nations of the world, supporting the spread of terrorism.

I think Reagan had it right:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=do0x-Egc6oA

President Ronald Reagan - "Evil Empire" Speech

View the full speech here: http://millercenter.org/scripps/archive/speeches/detail/3409 Address to the National Association of Evangelicals in Orlando, Flori...

Response by COL Jon Thompson made Dec 31 at 2015 2:55 PM

COL Jon Thompson — Thu, 31 Dec 2015 14:55:30 -0500

There is no doubt that Russia is an adversary regardless of what we hope to happen. I believe that is the nature of geo-politics. Even if some of our interests are the same, there are plenty of others that come into conflict. I think the question will be how much cooperation and how much conflict will we have with them. I do believe that Putin senses that Obama is weak so he is pushing his interests including what is going on in the Ukraine and Syria. It will be interesting to see if anything changes with the next President, especially with the Putin-Trump bromance.

Response by SGM Steve Wettstein made Dec 31 at 2015 5:02 PM

SGM Steve Wettstein — Thu, 31 Dec 2015 17:02:51 -0500

Response by LTC John Shaw made Dec 31 at 2015 5:23 PM

LTC John Shaw — Thu, 31 Dec 2015 17:23:00 -0500

LTC Private RallyPoint Member You raise a good point that we should leverage the global fight on Islamic extremist and work with the Russians.
Bottom line: Russia is an adversary, where are interests don't align, and a friend, when our interests align. We need to continue to push Russia to remain engaged with us peacefully and we should do military exchanges for training purposes to help develop long term trust.
I started in the service when USSR was leading the Warsaw Pact and we could expect a East European communist horde to cross the wall and invade the West. I don't think we can trust the Russians in Ukraine or Georgia or Central Asian former Soviet republics but we can agree to disagree and carve out areas we will allow the Russians to deal with.
We really abandoned the Ukrainian and Georgian people with our lack of action when the Russians invaded. This bothers me the most where our countries have mutual interests. If the US signs a treaty we need to be worthy of our word.

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Dec 31 at 2015 5:46 PM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Thu, 31 Dec 2015 17:46:53 -0500

Two Big Dogs on the Block. We are always going to be competitors to see who is the Biggest Dog. Sometimes our interest align but more often than not we are competitors and I just don't see that changing but I am with you, In that we can accomplish more with Diplomacy than with Posturing.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Dec 31 at 2015 5:47 PM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Thu, 31 Dec 2015 17:47:55 -0500

Russian people are generally not our enemy. A certain percentage of the top political and military leaders are way beyond doubt: they definitely want to return to the days of the USSR. BUT, this you can take to the bank: Vladimir Putin is the most dangerous man in that country, if not the whole planet. Thanks to O'Bummer, Putin has grown bolder and far more threatening these last seven years.

Response by COL Ted Mc made Jan 2 at 2016 1:45 PM

COL Ted Mc — Sat, 02 Jan 2016 13:45:09 -0500

LTC Private RallyPoint Member - Captain;

[1] "We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual" - Lord Palmerston

[2] "America has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests." - Henry Kissinger

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Jan 3 at 2016 1:07 PM

MAJ Ken Landgren — Sun, 03 Jan 2016 13:07:24 -0500

China and Russia have substantial imperial powers. That alone is a threat to world peace.

Response by PO3 Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2016 8:25 AM

PO3 Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 08:25:29 -0500

"should" ?? you sound like we have a choice ... yes, we do have a choice ... either we become their underling or we become adversary. now PICK.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jan 4 at 2016 1:57 PM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Mon, 04 Jan 2016 13:57:37 -0500

It's important to remember that the other side always gets a vote.

Response by PO3 Sherry Thornburg made Jan 6 at 2016 1:49 AM

PO3 Sherry Thornburg — Wed, 06 Jan 2016 01:49:29 -0500

Adversary and perhaps rival would be a better term. They aspire to building back up to the global clout they had during the cold war. therefore they are competing with us for influence. Their other aspirations are debatable and I'm no expert on foreign affairs. The fact that most of our government is made up of WW11 and cold war era people don't help the issue as they will always look at Russian actions with suspicion, warranted or not.