Cold War II. Obama in Tallinn.

Containment, continued.

Obama: Vision of peaceful Europe threatened by "Russia's aggression"

Obama does not quite say NATO will fight for the Baltic States, but he comes pretty close.

Meanwhile, he urges the NATO states to increase defense spending to at least 2% of GDP and NATO in Cardiff is planning significant additional deployments of forces to Eastern Europe.

O has already sent additional naval and air forces.

Barack Obama: U.S. Will Not Tolerate 'Brazen Assault' on Ukraine

NBC's report shows O talking much tougher and more explicit about fighting Russia, head to head, for the Baltic States.

And is that back on the table for Ukraine?

The president also reiterated his commitment to Washington's NATO allies. 

"The door to NATO membership will remain open," he said, in a nod to non-members, including Ukraine. 

"Article 5 is crystal clear — an attack on one is an attack on all," he added, talking about member states' treaty obligations of mutual protection. 

"If in such a moment you ever come to ask again, 'Who will come to help?' You'll know the answer: The NATO alliance including the armed forces of the United States."

"We will be here for Estonia, we will be here for Latvia, we will be here for Lithuania," he told his audience. "You lost your independence once before. You’ll never lose it again." 

Some facts to bear in mind.

• About dominoes and forward defense.

There is no trail of dominoes leading from the Ukraine, the Baltics, or anywhere in Europe to Boston or New York.

Defense of Ukraine, Estonia, Poland, or any European state is not a forward defense of the United States.

The US spends above 4% of GDP on the military while all other NATO members spend less and some spend less than the 2% required by the terms of the treaty.

Now as throughout the 19^th and the 20^th Centuries, wars in Europe need not and will not involve us unless we volunteer to join in.

For the US, NATO is and always was a one-sided alliance committing us to defend the states of Western and Central Europe against Eastern Europe.

No Estonian, no Ukrainian, no Pole, no German, and no Brit will ever have to die to defend the United States from anybody.

• About nuclear deterrence.

Apart from Stalin having no particular reason to want to invade Western Europe, there was no NATO vs Warsaw Pact war because the threat was always there of uncontrollable escalation to global thermonuclear war.

Indeed, the threat of mutual assured destruction was universally acknowledged as what kept the peace.

The idea that the Soviets could mount a purely conventional war against any part of NATO without taking a prohibitively big chance of the Soviet Union - and the US and much of the rest of the world - being turned into a filthy ashtray was not credible.

But today?

What is in Putin’s head?

What is in Obama’s, or Merkel’s, or Hollande’s, or Cameron’s?

Who today believes those European leaders really are, could possibly be, ready for Armageddon for Tallinn or Kiev?

And that leaves the true strategic situation in the sort of dangerous uncertainty that could lead to vast horror, as the time of secret alliances and like uncertainties led to The Great War.

The liberal blogosphere is almost completely silent on these developments.

Why?

They are obsessing with domestic trivia and inside baseball.

Meanwhile, Morning Joe and most of the rest of cable news is screaming that the world is on fire and America has to put it out.

At Think Progress, the newest post on their World tab is dated August 18th.

How much of Ukraine will Putin try to re-conquer for the Russian Empire?

Will he move on the Baltic States, in part encouraged by what he may take to be revelations of NATO's lack of credibility?

And then what?

Will this over-the-top Russian imperialist create a conflict the US cannot or will not stay out of?

The Baltic States, by the way, have a combined total population of about six million people.