Russia Threatens NATO With "Nuclear Force"

[Webster]

...well, can we go ahead and blame Obama for Russia's recent run of aggression or what?

(Washington Free Beacon) The Obama administration’s decision to seek a “reset” of relations with Russia was, in the words of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, a “brilliant stroke” that “worked.” And she’s obviously right. This explains why Russian is threatening to use “nuclear force” if NATO takes steps to prevent Russian aggression in the Baltic states (from The Independent): Russia has threatened to use “nuclear force” to defend its annexation of Crimea and warned that the “same conditions” that prompted it to take military action in Ukraine exist in the three Baltic states, all members of Nato.

According to notes made by an American at a meeting between Russian generals and US officials—and seen by The Times newspaper—Moscow threatened a “spectrum of responses from nuclear to non-military” if Nato moved more forces into Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia.

The Russians told the meeting, which took place in Germany last month, that an attempt to return Crimea to Ukraine would be met “forcefully including through the use of nuclear force”.

Russia’s annexation of Crimea is another example of how the Obama administration’s “reset” policy has been successful. Meanwhile, national political reporters are anxiously awaiting Hillary Clinton’s forthcoming tweet on whether she thinks the Iranian nuclear negotiations have been successful.

Thoughts?