I think we might be. Russia is getting more and more aggressive and more and more anti-West. They're bidding to get back influence in the former Soviet states now by cutting off gas to the Ukraine and ending special deals to pro-Western countries. Some poeple think it won't work:

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/82fc171e-7b...0779e2340.html

"But if Moscow hopes to cow Kiev into submission it may be disappointed. Crucial parliamentary elections are due soon: the dispute will probably benefit Mr Yushchenko's supporters and almost certainly damage Russia-oriented parties. The crisis will also accelerate Ukraine's efforts to cut its dependence on Russian gas by securing alternative supplies. The same will be true in the Baltic states, central and western Europe."

But I think controlling the oil is a big deal - that's huge, and it gives them key influence over other countries that would let them rebuild control. Is this something provoked by hostility to Bush? Hatred of U.S. policies? I think we ought to back off and think about what our actions say to other countries abroad - and it makes it harder for us to criticize aggressive foreign policy actions by bad regimes like Putin's.

I don't think so. Russia isn't going to start another cold war, they just don't have the money to do that. They want regional influence, and mainly they're concerned about keeping their own country from falling apart. They want to mess with Ukraine to send a message to rebellious provinces like Chechnya that if they're independent, Russia can crush them economically.

I think indeed the United States is on the eve of a new Cold War. The only difference this time is that Washington may not find its erstwhile allies,as keen.
If a new Cold War commences the responsibilty must lie solely with Washington.Firstly by engaging in regime change or attempted regime change in former republics of the Soviet Union. While it is very attractive,and a typical American past- time to brand regimes as good or bad,reality lies elsewhere
On the issue of Ukraine,the West has been goading it to adopt a bellicose and provocative attitude towards Russia. This goes back to the bitter dispute over division of the Black Sea fleet. As for the gas dispute and energy supplies to Ukraine, Russian policy is perfectly justified. If you are on bad terms with someone you do not extend him courtesies. The article in the link provided by someone earlier, views the issue of energy supplies in isolation without taking into account the gamut/background of relations between these two countries, that is the Ukraine and Russia. Nations are not like businessmen.
The latest example of this pro-active approach is the building up of Georgias Sakhashvili to adopt an aggressive and menacing attitude by making unfounded charges against Russian personnel serving in that country.
It is also a misnomer to state that Russia lacks money. They are awash with cash from the increased price of oil. They are also in a competitive position to buy up European firms. The EAPDS controversy is indicative of the deep distrust and fear which a resurgent Russia inspires in some corners.

I think we may be on the eve of a multi-polar regionalization where each region looks out for their own interests.

Do you personally feel it should be that way?

Sometimes I do somtimes I don't. I see the benefits but can also see the potential backlash, especially for the U.S., or at least our policy over the last 30 years. Economically its great but politically it could be disasterous, especially once commodities such as steel, rubber, and oil start running short. This is why I think Russia and China are tying to push influence in the ME, they need to secure oil for their future.

Ronald Reagon had his moments of glory and some policies that were ineffective and harmful. Overall he was a decent President.

In an interview on King with Ron Jr. he did say somethng of note about his father. He said his father always said "Talk to your enemies, figure them out. you will either solve a problem or gain backing from the world for your efforts."

This is a sons memory of his father but yet if you look at Reagons foreign policy I think that is what he did. We could use his wisdom now.

I am in no way a Republican (nor Democrat for that matter) but Ronald Regan was more diplomatic than George W. even the Senior Bush was more diplomatic........I think republicans have a better grasp of foreing policy than Democrats, except unfortunatly for this current administration

Yes ken. I agree. I feel like we are on a collision course at the the moment.

p.s. are you okham?(just kidding)

Thats no suprise, after all Putin is exKGB, fortunately the country is controlled by the Russian Marfia, and they just wanna make money.