Following meetings with Russian officials, John Bolton confirmed that the US has refused Russian calls to remain in the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, saying that the American position remains that Russia is “in violation.”
The US announced intentions to withdraw from INF over the weekend, claiming a long-standing believe that Russia is in violation. Russia has maintained that they are not, and has warned that the collapse of the deal threatens a new arms race.
Which may well be the idea, as President Trump has been talking up the creation of new nuclear weapons since the announcement, focused on intermediate forces that the US didn’t have under the treaty.
Bolton’s argument is that so long as Russia doesn’t think they’re in violation, there is no way for the US to ask them to stop being in violation, so there is no way to resolve the impasse.
Despite withdrawing from the treaty, the US has demanded that both Russia and China comply with all INF restrictions. Russia, of course, says they already were complying, and China was never a party to the deal in the first place.
Once again a headline is misleading. It is not Bolton but Trump who rejects Russian call to stay in nuclear treaty.
If Bolton did not discuss with Trump the range of answers he could give the Russians hat is to say had total freedom to act then there is something very wrong with our government.
When the “Deep State” gets off their canard about Trump colluding with the Russians, he will return to the “Wouldn’t it be better to get along with the Russians” policies, if WWIII doesn’t break out before that.
As he sells more lethal weapons to Ukraine.
All weapons are lethal.
My point was selling weapons to Ukraine is hardly a way to “get along” with the Russians. I get your point about all weapons being lethal but there are degrees in how lethal they are and Trump is trumping the big O in that department.
Russia will strike back at an aggressor under any circumstance where the future of Russia is at stake. It was his assurance that in doing so 1) it would be just and righteous “dying like martyrs” and 2) so swift and brutal the aggressors would “die like dogs” bereft of the chance to ask for salvation.
It is really no different than the attitude of Secretary of State James Mattis who said, “I come in peace. I didn’t bring artillery. But I’m pleading with you, with tears in my eyes: If you f$*k with me, I’ll kill you all.”
Men like this are not to be tested too hard. And Putin’s response to the shooting down of the IL-20 plane and its crew was to cross a bunch of diplomatic lines by handing out S-300s to Syria and erecting a de facto no-fly zone over Western Syria and the Eastern Mediterranean.
Notice how there have been no attacks or even harsh language coming out of Israel or the U.S. in the past few weeks. The failure of the British/French/Israeli operation to sucker Trump into an invasion of Syria is now complete
—-from an article from LewRockwell.com two days ago.
I’m glad to hear that, Schmizer. Indeed, Russia will strike back at an aggressor under any circumstance where Russia’s future’s at stake. It was Putin’s assurance in doing so, it would be just and righteous “dying like martyrs”, and so swift and brutal the aggressors would “die like dogs”, bereft of the chance to plead for salvation. As you said, “It is really no different than the attitude of Secretary of Defense James Mattis who said, ‘I come in peace. I didn’t bring artillery, But I’m pleading with you, with tears in my eyes. If you f**k with me, I’ll kill you all,’
You’re right; men like this are not to be tested too hard; and Putin’s response to the shoot-down of the IL-20 plane and its crew of 15 was to cross a lot of diplomatic lines by handing out advanced S-300’s to Syria and instituting a de facto no-fly zone over Western Syria and the Eastern Mediterranean.
Note how there haven’t been any attacks or even harsh language coming out of Israel or the US in the past few weeks. The failure of the British/French/Israeli operation to sucker Trump into an invasion of Syria is now complete. Thank God for that.
Race to the top…..race to the bottom…. This is a race to the nut house.
A VERY large number of DC politicians and cronies need to put somewhere where they cannot do any harm.
I agree wholeheartedly. A huge number of DC politicians and cronies sorely need to be incarcerated where they can’t do any harm; namely, a remote insane asylum; this includes Bonkers Bolton, he’s the worst lunatic of the bunch.
Pence is now competing with Bolton for the top crazy position.
I think Pompeo is worthy of mention as well as Haley until she’s officially gone. And of course The Don himself.
Yes. It is a crowded field as to who is the #1 nutcase.
China was never a party to the deal in the first place.
That could be a reason that the US is pulling out of the treaty with Russia.
news report: China’s missile buildup — a threat to U.S. bases in Japan — likely a key factor in Trump plan to exit INF . . here
Which might have legitimacy
if it were true
Withdrawing is not the way to solve a disagreement. The US as usual pretends it is the only “good guy” while its missiles in Poland and Romania are targeted at Russia. Talks, trust and a new start, verified if needed, would be much more useful, but how would Bolton know? Has he ever done one good thing in his life?