December 5, 2021

Mr. Obama – Putin Called, He Wants His Cold War Back!

In that famous debate in the 2012 Presidential race on Foreign Policy, Obama famously quipped in a severely condescending tone to Romney: “the 80′s are calling, they want their foreign policy back.”

What Romney should have responded with is: Mr. Obama, Putin called, and he wants his Cold War back.” The proof is in historical documents, like a cable recently leaked by Wikileaks described below that this administration should have known all about.

Despite Obama’s famous duel in that debate with Mitt Romney, it was a full four years after what should have been the very first lesson learned by Obama and Clinton in 2008:

Putin aspires to restore Russia’s global power and influence and to bring the now-independent states that were once part of the Soviet Union back into Moscow’s orbit.”

When you are appointed as the top diplomat for the United States of America, Secretary of State, the very voice and face of the President of the United States of America, you take an oath of office and your primary job on day one is to avail yourself of all important world issues and to appoint and assign State Department Officials to handle them with you.

That means learning history, and understanding your enemies, therefore they knew and chose to ignore the lessons.

Initially, as Secretary of State, in this case Hillary Rodham Clinton, you are briefed on all the hot spots across any region affecting US interests, our national security, and that of our allies. That is a very large and time consuming process, but for the sake of this discussion, let’s focus on one of the hottest issues of the day, Ukraine, primarily Crimea and Ukraine’s eastern Oblasts and why NATO was created.

Putin’s long-standing goals always included any other nations bordering on Russia like Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, and so on. They apparently missed ‘lesson one’ and much more, just like all those “Presidential Daily Briefings” he so famously misses on a regular basis. History unobserved and misread, or ignored again.ObamaManhattanNukeSpeech

Did Obama or Clinton learn anything in five years prior to today, other than using the wrong Russian word on that famous reset button? They had to have known, the intelligence proved the events, but again, they chose to ignore, completely misreading Putin.

We now see that argument is in full bloom again as Obama, his supporters, surrogates, sycophants and current Secretary of State, John Kerry, deny that Romney and Sarah Palin were correct, Putin’s Russia was and is one of our worst global threats.

Hillary Clinton was provided evidence about all the intricacies of that region the day she was sworn in; – we are certain she did know. After all, it was a hot subject for years; since the 1990′s when Ukraine gained its independence. Now John Kerry should be just as conversant about the subject, and is, but no, like Clinton and Obama, they are just calling it a regional issue where Obama said in a speech yesterday that he considers Russia to be nothing more than just a regional power.

He said he was more concerned with a rogue group setting off a nuke in New York’s Manhattan. Now that is certainly a zinger of a throw away line; feeling any safer now?

His exhortations are completely illogical because as Obama plans on the massive reduction of our military, Putin is unleashing an additional 40 war ships this year. Again Mr. Obama, why?

Of course, our Navy is diminishing, and it is fast approaching or may already be smaller than it was pre-WWI. (Politifact tried to call Romney’s assertions untrue, but you be the judge.)

President Barack Obama dismissed the idea of Russia as a threat — and said his bigger fear is a nuclear weapon in Manhattan. Obama made the remarks while speaking at the Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague.

‘Russia’s actions are a problem,’ he said. ‘They don’t pose the No. 1 national security threat to the United States. I continue to be much more concerned when it comes to our security with the prospect of a nuclear weapon going off in Manhattan.’ (Read the rest here.)

PutinObamaWhether or not our navy fleet and air force are dwindling as Romney claimed in 2012, the fact is, we are downsizing as Putin rebuilds. What is certain is that our clout and reputation globally is a laughing stock to our enemies, including Russia. The Russians released this:

“According to plans of fleet development, warships and submarines equipped with high-precision assault and anti-submarine weapons, airborne and self-defence devices will come into service of Russian Navy,” he said. “These are Yasen nuclear submarines of new generation, modern multipurpose surface warships of such types as corvette, frigate, a small missile-carrying warship and Lider head destroyer of new project,” Borisov said.

He noted that more than 40 warships, submarines and support vessels of different classes will be put on combat duty in Russian naval forces this year. “In 2014 project 11356 coast guard ships, project 21631 small missile-carrying warships, project 21980 anti-sabotage cutters, modern rescue ship Igor Belousov will be commissioned in 2014, several support vessels, such as project 21180 icebreaker, project 02690 self-propelled floating crane and others will be laid down,” the deputy defence minister noted. “In all, Russian Navy plans to put into military service more than 40 warships, submarines and support vessels of different classes in 2014,” he added. (Read the rest here.)ChessBingoObamaPutin


It is now a ‘fait accompli’ in Crimea, this we all know, and even Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan, once a country at war with the old Soviet Union, already recognized Russia’s annexation of Crimea following closely behind Syria and Venezuela, two other extremely volatile nations. How ironic indeed.

Afghanistan this weekend joined Syria and Venezuela and became the newest member of a select club of nations: those that have publicly backed the Russian annexation of Crimea.

Citing “the free will of the Crimean people,” the office of President Hamid Karzai said, “we respect the decision the people of Crimea took through a recent referendum that considers Crimea as part of the Russian Federation.” (Read the rest at the New York Times.)

Putin History 101

The problem with the outcome of this course of events is that it was foretold long ago, by former Ambassador Kurt Volker, the 19th United States Permanent Representative to NATO, in 2008. They must have known this. How do we know this? Simple, it is spelled out below in a ‘Wikileak’ document dated August 8, 2008 and designated as “08USNATO290” as seen below:


In the body of this once secret cable are some startling ‘understandings’ that he conveys about exactly how Vladimir Putin, in his first stint as Russia’s President, clearly understood the activities of the European Union and the United States when it came to Georgia and Ukraine’s efforts to be included in NATO in the 2008 time frame.

Let’s examine certain items in this cable:


At the ‘Bucharest Summit‘ in 2008, Putin challenged Ukraine’s territorial integrity rhetorically. Volker recognized the need then “to reaffirm the Bucharest decision that Ukraine and Georgia will become members of NATO, and begin to shape Allied thinking on a decision about Membership Action Plan [MAP] this December.”

He then asserted:

“The German-led Allies argue that the Bucharest decision on eventual membership provoked the Russian aggression, while most others (including the new members and Canada) see it as we do: that Russia interpreted the denial of MAP as a green light for action against Georgia.”

He was affirming why Putin felt Georgia was ripe, and off Putin went – sound familiar? Putin saw a “green-light” as he did now in 2014 over Crimea, but read on:



Volker then pointed out what Putin was thinking, again, in his first term, before he finagled a way to be the Russian “Tsar” he now demonstrates he is so clearly, and why his neighbors are so nervous:

“Putin further questioned old borders and the worthiness of political leadership in neighboring countries during his August 9 [2008] Vladikavkahz speech. These Russian challenges to the territorial integrity of neighboring states are inconsistent with the NATO-Russia Founding Act…”

The last paragraph, listed above says it all – be very worried. The crux of the matter is, the Obama administration knew all of this and chose a ‘reset’ strategy instead – yet another “green light” as far as Putin is concerned – and now look. Beware on all borders with Putin’s Russia, and be very weary that Hillary wants to be Obama’s successor.

Many others knew of the dangers, especially when it was discussed that Ukraine should remain a nuclear power, or to re-acquire them, back in 1993:U.S. Secretary of State Clinton pounds her fists while testifying on the Benghazi attacks during Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing in Washington

Ukrainian nuclear weapons will promote peace and stability in a region that might otherwise be prone to conflict; and second, nuclear weapons will enhance Ukrainian security, providing an ultimate security guarantee for a state fearful that its sovereignty might otherwise be jeopardized by its enormous and potentially menacing neighbor to the east-Russia.

Further, the Ukrainians were indeed in possession of an arsenal, but they were beginning to sell the technology to Iran:

Once, Ukraine boasted the world’s third-largest nuclear arsenal. In the aftermath of the collapse of the USSR in 1991, authorities in newly independent Kiev found themselves in possession of 176 intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) launchers and 1,240 nuclear warheads, along with more than 3,000 tactical nuclear weapons.

Fearful of Russian intentions, Ukrainians were in no hurry to surrender their weapons of mass destruction. The West, equally fearful that the nukes could get into the wrong hands after the Ukrainians began selling ballistic-missile technology to Iran in 1992, raced to disarm the fledgling post-Soviet republics.

Clinton, Kerry, and Obama must be challenged on why they chose to finesse these events, to what end? They did know, and chose otherwise. But then again, Russia was and is just a “regional threat.” Then, as Michelle Malkin refers to Harry Reid, “Assclown,” Reid had the nerve to say the following, it’s all the Republican’s fault to cover for his team:

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said Monday that Republicans may have helped Russia annex Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula in a surprisingly sharp attack ahead of a test vote on a bill authorizing more U.S. sanctions on Russia and $1 billion in loan guarantees to Ukraine.

Outlining the Senate’s agenda after a one-week recess, the Nevada Democrat said the first item would be the Ukraine bill that Republicans blocked just before lawmakers went on break. He urged Republicans to consider “how their obstruction affects United States’ national security as well as the people of Ukraine” and said their delay of any congressional action “sent a dangerous message to Russian leaders.”

“Since a few Republicans blocked these important sanctions last work period, Russian lawmakers voted to annex Crimea and Russian forces have taken over Ukrainian military bases,” Reid said. “It’s impossible to know whether events would have unfolded differently if the United States had responded to Russian aggression with a strong, unified voice.”

Paging Harry Reid, former Secretary of State Clinton, current Secretary of State Kerry, and President Obama – your history professor called, they want you all in the Principal’s Office, you have much explaining to do on how you passed that history exam.

Does any clear thinking American really think Hillary Clinton is Presidential timber knowing how the ‘reset button’ trumped actual history and Putin’s known intentions? If you believe in revisionist history, then Hillary is your candidate, think Benghazi, “At this point, what difference does it make?”

The difference is that we are now in Putin’s “Cold War.” and he wants Russia’s global power and influence back to 1986 levels.

Watch that now famous segment of the 2012 debate again, and especially watch Obama’s demeanor:


Editor’s Note – Scott W. Winchell and Denise Simon, SUA Editors contributed to this article through research, analysis, and editing. The first in a series on the subject of why this new ‘Cold War’ is far more dangerous than the last.


The author, Paul E. Vallely is a retired Major General in the US Army and is the CEO of Stand Up America US