[britain] standing up to russia or to the quislings?

Tu160-57 - not a bad piece of weaponry

May I make the position of this blog clear from the outset?

Though the blame for wars and conflict can be laid at the feet of the financial cabals who run them [and everyone from Teddy Roosevelt to Dwight Eisenhower recognized that], that's no reason to emasculate a nation's defences and only an idiot or a person with ulterior motives would suggest it.

Yet that is precisely what Gordon Brown and Tony Blair have done, kowtowing to the European Bloc. Man in a Shed gives an example of the nobbling of Britain:

I have said before that the Saxa Vord radar station should be brought out of mothballs (closed by the Labour government - thanks Gordon Brown).

Tony Sharp made the same point about a week ago - at the time I felt that other concerns were more important, like the Falklands, but now I'm not so sure. There is a definite ratcheting up of pressure from Putin.

MinaS's assessment of this was then necessarily astray, not being privy to the Russian mind. Essentially, the people in power over here are pragmatists who expand to fill a vacuum or else they mark time, recognizing current realities. This is part of the thinking behind the relatively old new Prime Minister.

Russia is part of the world economy and actually has been externally since Lenin and Trotsky's deals with the cabals which the former admitted and which forever damns them. Now the world economy has come into the fabric of Russian society and is expressing itself through massive building projects and credit for the masses.

The measured paying out in full of the Club of Paris and other loans by Russia not long ago was far more significant in the long term than Yeltsin's 1998 "we're not paying so that's that". And yet Yeltsin was far more the old Russia and Putin the new. Therefore an economist is the PM. Therefore Russia is committed to massive dealings with the EBRD and similar groups, in which I have a miniscule part.

Britain should rightly look askance at the Tu160 moves but should understand them for what they are. There's an election coming up and already one can feel the jockeying for position, not so much through party politics - Yedinaya Rossia is the only viable party - but through the candidates who get the nod. That's what this thing is all about. Who is the most patriotic and capable of restoring Russia's prestige?

Russia, in fact, has done what Tony and MinaS are calling for for Britain - Putin has responded to this massive loss of prestige following the disbanding of the Soviet state and the Red Army and he's giving the people something to cheer for in the middle of worrying and changing times over here. Fly a few long range planes towards Britain and everyone knows it's sabre-rattling - is Russia really going to pass up its contracts?

More than this, there are so many western conglomerates in here now and they, for a start, have only agreed to invest on the basis of sound economic management. This fear of Russia, militarily, is a non-starter.

On the other hand, Russian firms are springing up, copying and improving [in their eyes] on the western products and these days, that is not a laughable idea. Russians are capable of this, if not of learning from other mistakes.

All of this is not arguing that Britain should be left defenceless, as Tony says and as Blair and Brown have achieved. And to be fair, from a British point of view, a country which once had an Empire and even some pride during the Maggie era is not going to take kindly to Russian bully tactics.

Man in a Shed says:

If you intend to stand up to a bully you need to signal it early on. Lets be clear Tu160 "Blackjack" bombers patrolling in dash distance of Uk cities etc is not the act of a friendly country. A TU160 is nobody's Teddy Bear. A very serious piece of kit to deliver nuclear devastation with super sonic dash capability.

He adds, at Tony's place:

Surreptitious evil - I suspect Trident can't be used with US approval. There may even be technical reasons for this [this is certainly rumoured]. We really need a mid range capability, which doesn't require the use of strategic nuclear weapons, which are just politically unusable - and hence no deterrent to anything less than all out nuclear war.

When you ask why Russia can get away with this today but would never have tried it on in Maggie's day, the answer's clear - Blair/Brown have nobbled education, health, social services and the judiciary … and of course defence.

Just read Tom's post about the obscenity of Brown.

If you need some proofs of the progressive nobbling of defence, try James Cleverley's site.

If you need proof of how these despicable Bilderbergers have broken faith with their people, read this, from the Morningstar:

The Military Covenant is a mutual bond between the Nation and its Armed Forces. The Legion believes that the Nation has failed to live up to its commitments under the Covenant, with the consequence that some people have been left to struggle alone once they leave the Services.

You can't blame Russia for flexing its muscles before a vital election. You can blame the government of the Scottish Isles who have removed the capacity of a once great nation to respond and who refuse to look after the people they're supposed to represent.

B-1B in a tight banking manouevre [H/T Morningstar]