Enjoy.
Seriously.
You post a political diatribe (as debate material) about a country under attacked and we’re suppose to enjoy what exactly? That you can’t debate or that you didn’t read the punch line?
If you read it all the way through you’d see that the author inserted a summary at the bottom to absolve himself from being an insensitive jackass:
Either way, I agree with Leon Aron about precisely one thing: Putinism – as he defines it – IS a dangerous and destabilizing ideology. But he needn’t go all the way to Moscow to find it.
Too bad he wasn’t alive in 1932, he would have been a laugh riot.
Why do you think that Georgia wanted to join NATO so badly, huh? I wasn’t because they wanted to be in the club. They wanted to get in, and then crack down on South Osetia. It’s simply a question of that. They KNEW that putting the screws to this region was a risky proposal, and they lost their game of chicken.
Comparing Georgia to Poland is ridiculous. Had we not been propping up any old anti-Russian regime just to piss of Russia, then maybe we wouldn’t be in this situation? Russia was acting in the interests of who it feels to be part of it’s people. You don’t go oppressing and bombing Russians in a breakaway republic without thinking there’s going to be consequences.
Again, it’s just another example of the piss-poor diplomacy of this administration. And secondly, putting up missile defense in Poland is going to do fuck-all for anyone. It doesn’t even work. The people working at State have done nothing but orchestrate one colossal failure after the next.
So yes I am a bit bitter… The Bush administration is so full of shit and has completely ruined any kind of moral argument we could have made.
So any posturing by the Bush administration can at best be laughed of as pathetic, and any real actions will be scary as shit, because it’s not like Russia just decided to start invading countries. I can completely understand Russia’s paranoia. We’re essentially encircling them with NATO allegiances. How would you feel if Mexico and Canada were to join in a Russian-aligned alliance? That’d piss us off something fierce. America is the out-of-control power of this century, buddy. We’ve invaded two different countries and are talking shit about attacking a third (Iran). We say this is in the name of democracy, when it’s really just because these nations thumb our noses at us.
Take Bush out of the equation and nothing changes. Albright (Clinton Administration) called for Georgia to join NATO just as a number of European leaders have.
-
German Chancellor Angela Merkel is offering strong support for Georgia, saying the country is on track to become a member of NATO.
-
UK Foreign Minister David Miliband: Foreign secretary says keeping alliance’s pledge to grant Georgia membership is ‘important signal’
-
Umberto Ranier, Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee of Chamber of Deputies of Italy: “Let me assure you, the Parliament of Italy fully supports Georgia’s integration into NATO. Georgia is an intricate member of the European family and this is the reason why we will actively advocate its enrollment into the EU
Looks like EuroClintonDemocrat doctrine to me.
Maybe we should all chip in and buy a free meal for Putin at the Pine Bar in the Millennium Hotel
Try reading that line sitting in front of the While House. Meaning should become much clearer…
Your welcome.
So far, I don’t see Georgia being slaughtered as a country. And I am not aware of any Georgian demonstrations for South Ossetian self-determination. It seems as though the Georgian public wants democracy for themselves, but not others.
More substantively:
Er, no:
-
We are overextended: our satellites were tied up over Iraq, so we missed much of the Russian troop movements. Furthermore, we couldn’t spare 2000 US troops to cool things down in Georgia this Spring, again because of the Iraqi problem.
-
As for Albright calling for NATO enlargement into Georgia, that’s gamesmanship. Ditto for Bush. Admitting Georgia into NATO now would be folly.
-
Like many Republican administrations, (eg. Nixon and Reagan), Bush II started with aggression, only to have reality cool him down in the 2nd term. The difference lies in the sheer magnitude of cock-ups during Round I. I would expect that McCain would also start off his term with enhanced aggression: for these guys it’s always Munich in 1938 until reality sets in.
Still more seriously, I see that Russia has decided to install and protect an “Administrative Border” inside Georgia proper. Oh, and they lie a lot. What’s their game?
The Moscow Times argues that Georgian Crisis is a Trap for US Leadership. Modern conservatives shouldn’t bother with the article, since it will lead to spluttering, followed by brain lock. Mature followers of Sun Tzu might give it a look though. Here’s the argument:
- After the fall of the Soviet Union, “The United States was transformed into a truly international superpower, sincerely convinced of its own global responsibility as a guarantor of peace and democracy.”
2a. But after 9/11 came over-reach: all the world rested within its sphere of interest. The strategy of democracy advancement proved unrealistic:
2b. And after 9/11, normal processes of international consultation were deemed irrelevant, by the US.
Translation: The Russian border is a core interest for Russian and a peripheral interest for the US. Russia is merely asserting itself as a regional power during a period of US hyperextension and weakness. Current American rhetoric has about as much sincerity and relevancy as chatter about Russian troop withdrawals. This is power politics in action: Russia wants the US to defer to it in certain spheres and geostrategic reality is flowing away from American hegemony.
Oddly, this realpolitik perspective is closer to, say, mswas’s POV than it is to Oy!'s.
My take is that neither Russia nor anyone else can become a sustainable great power on the basis of either fossil fuel extraction or military adventure. Nations ignore economic fundamentals at their peril.
OH EMM GEE.
If Albright says something its gamesmanship but if Bush says it it’s stupid? what about the rest of the world? Are they gamely stupid?
Then you talk about the Russians lying (a lot) and proceed to quote the Moscow Times as if its is some kind of independent thought. The Russians managed to screw themselves in the ass with a Poland missile shield and Ukraine might kick them out of their old naval base. Somehow that translates into a trap for the US?
Thanks for the world history lesson. I’ll just stick with the rest of Europe and NATO and we’ll call it even.
Well you are taking too long a view on it. The entire point of petrochemical foreign policy at this stage in the game is to be in a dominant position when it runs out. To be able to profit off of the remaining supplies while they last and milk them for all they are worth while they are incredibly valuable. I don’t think anyone expects them to last forever, but the need to solidify hegemony is being born on the back of oil. In some respects it’s the ends, but in others it’s the means. As far as I am concerned the US is in the absolute best position of any power in the world to take advantage of this scenario. We have the knowledge and manpower to implement new methods as they become available and are already doing so. Other nations are still 50 years behind us in many respects. Europe has some of the same advantages but doesn’t have our dominant positioning in regards to acquiring oil. The US is still a major producer, and has the global reach to be dominant in many spheres of influence. Of course, Russia is now back in the game and our sense of certainty has been robbed from us.
Russia’s return is probably great for China who can play the great mediator in some respects.
We need to not develop an antagonistic cycle with Russia, we require their cooperation for stability in the middle-east. We do not need another 50 years of cold war where destabilizing the middle-east is the name of the game. Fortunately though, there is no iron curtain today, and it doesn’t seem like Putin has any desire to erect a veil to mimic it.
The War on Terror was getting a little dull, geopolitics is interesting again. 
You misunderstand. It’s gamemanship for both Albright and Bush II. Bush has fired Bolton, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld. Cheney’s influence has declined, if not disappeared. The realist and Kissinger disciple Condeliza Rice now runs the show. Unfortunately, the administration and country must remain constrained by the boneheaded decisions of the first term.
Once again. Admitting Georgia into NATO this year would be moronic. Not going to happen. Talking about doing this is an entirely different matter: there’s no reason to dispense with that particular bargaining chip, especially since we’re playing a weak hand anyway.
Serious analysts seek to understand their enemy’s thought processes.
From my POV, even if we put the best possible strategic spin on Russia’s behavior, their victory will be Pyhrric. So they crushed the army of a tiny bordering state. Big freaking deal.
You know, I didn’t think so a few days back, but now… I gotta agree. 
Just to repeat though, the true wealth of a nation lies in its peoples’ hands and minds. In theory, it would be possible to transform the oil wealth in the ground into something more permanent, and not piss it away on a consumption binge or a military adventure. But in practice, only Norway has pulled this trick off. Great Britain used North Sea oil for greater consumption. Alaska has the Permanent Fund, which is to its credit, but nobody thinks that a great civilization will arise in the Way Up North. And the Saudis/Iran/Iraq are just pathetic.
No, the future belongs to China and God will continue to smile on fools, drunks and the United States of America.
As for Europe, Japan and the Asian tigers, they will do just fine.
The Olympics doesn’t have a Fevered Hyperbole Event but if it did my money is on you. Georgia isn’t be slaughtered as a country as either you well know or you are too uninformed of events to express an opinion with any vehemence.
Neither is anything happening to its people it hasn’t rolled up its sleeves to do unto others. If i recall you don’t like them being referred to as savages but both sides committed atrocities and now the south ossetian and chechen barbarians are getting in on the act. That’s what that part of the world is like and if Russia had not intervened that is what the Georgian variant of barbarian would still be up to.
As it is Russia is systematically divesting the aggressor of all its toys, telling Georgia that the former autonomous provinces (defined by their maps not Georgia’s) are forever gone and slowly getting around to abiding by the peace agreement as they interpret it. The six principles of that plan said nothing about Georgian territorial integrity so it’s no use the West bleating on about it. Any more than it is worth Russia and Serbia whining on about Kosovan independence.
The autonomous provinces are gone. Fact. Kosovo is independent. Another Fact.
In its own sweet time, being the winners and holding all the cards the Russians will minimally comply with agreements, which include allowing them a security zone in Georgia. They will no doubt push this to the hilt and to me looks like the only area there is room for negotiation. They are not going to leave the autonomous provinces undefended so it’s no use the West demanding them to do so any more than we would leave Kosovo unprotected.
Georgia lost. The West lost its little proxy gamble. All we can do now is diplomatically make the best of a bad situation. There are penalties for losing. Losers don’t get to decide how wars end and it is laughable to try and say, ‘let’s call it quits and go back to the status quo like nothing happened’.
We’d have laughed so much we’d need both hands to grab our collective asses if Serbia had tried that shit after - and here is that operative word again - LOSING the war.
Until Georgia, the Ukraine etc grow the frack up regarding ethnic minorities - and that seems pretty unlikely then they should not be admitted to NATO. I’d be wiling to look again once they sincerely renounced their totally specious and morally unsupportable claims. Say in a generation or so of peace.
But Georgia won’t - they want it both ways - mainly with Big Brother NATO standing by with a rifle to keep the Big Bad Bear at bay while they do their stuff.
Screw that.
Note how in the Ukraine the President and Prime Minister are at ethnic odds. That too is an unstable state, unworthy of NATO membership.
Just to remind ourselves of the facts .
Some of the very participants in this thread have jumped down the throats of anyone who suggested that maybe, flattening large tracts of Iraqi cities to get insurgents or shooting up wedding parties or people driving near convoys in ways you don’t like are ‘disproportionate’. Yet now feel it’s okay to rag on the Russians for the doing much less.
You can’t have it both ways.
It’s not an ‘It’s Alright if Americans Do It’ world. You don’t get to make up specious ‘rules’ as you go along just to define yourself in the right.
Ok, I think I got it now.
It’s in the Russian national interest to have:
a. Bordering countries that are not experiencing civil war
and
b. Bordering countries that are not part of NATO.
So the best of all worlds for Russia would have a Georgia that is stable, but has unresolved border problems. Russian troops will keep the peace. And the Administrative Border, inside Georgia proper, can put a halt to the West’s willingness to sign a mutual defense pact with Georgia.
Russia still wants cordial relations with the West though. But that could follow after the Georgian army and irregulars on both sides stand down. Barring that, Russia could always invoke some sort of UN plan.
Basically.
It has somehow got the bizarre idea into its head that it can play by the same new rules the West has decided to play.
But stopping short of basing missiles in Cuba, Mexico and Venezuela or invading Brazil.
Probably no UN plan is possible because the West want to act like Georgia won and Russia, shockingly, wants to act like they won.
It’s not over - keep your eyes on the Ukraine, which is also comprised of different nationalities administratively lumped together by the Soviets. The autonomous republic of Crimea within Ukraine is ethnically diverse but with a substantial Russian ethnic presence. Then there are the added complications of the return of the deported by Stalin native Tartars.
Plenty of scope there for ethnic mischief-making or straight up clashes of interests there. It would be wise to not admit them into NATO at this point.