Frustrated with foreign interference in our elections? So are the people of Latin America.
In a column of February 18, Friedman was in familiar form. Which is to say flat earth mode. Once more, his judgments were sweeping and apodictic. He declared a “code red” on the state of American democracy. “President Trump is either totally compromised by the Russians or is a towering fool, or both, but either way he has shown himself unwilling or unable to defend America against a Russian campaign to divide and undermine our democracy.”
I was the first to write about Russia’s infamous high-tech military strategy. One small problem: it doesn’t exist.
…a weak dollar and rising debt servicing costs seems inevitable: thus, the roles seem set for a reversal from the Reagan era. Then it was Russia that overreached, trying to catch up with the US. Now, it may be the vice versa.
Americans should be very concerned about Russian President Vladimir Putin’s announcement on Russia’s breakthroughs in weapons technology – not necessarily because they pose a threat, but because it will mean vast fortunes spent in the U.S. on an arms race, Jonathan Marshall argues.
According to McGovern, the U.S.-Russia relations are as frayed and combustible as they have been at any point since the Cuban Missile Crisis.
The New Yorker’s Masha Gessen and Adrian Chen have covered Russia extensively. They tell NPR’s David Greene why they think the impact of Russian election interference efforts is largely overblown.
President Vladimir Putin’s speech on the first of March revealed a whole panoply of new nuclear capabilities, from cruise missiles with nearly unlimited range to unmanned undersea vehicles also operating with extraordinary range, together with unprecedented speed and depth capabilities.
Vladimir Putin is the monster of the moment. He is the center of the strange frenzy that grips contemporary Washington – and the chief current reason why peace has become passé.
With a new Cold War developing with Russia, and perhaps another one with China, it would once again behoove U.S. policymakers to acquaint themselves with some of the doctrine dating from the earlier Cold War that stemmed from long study by political scientists and strategists.