August 12, 2008
Some things never change: Russian edition
I think George Will does a pretty good job of quickly explaining the story behind the story, as Russia invades and subjugates a Western democracy.
Now, into America's trivializing presidential campaign, a pesky event has intruded -- a European war. Russian tanks, heavy artillery, strategic bombers, ballistic missiles and a naval blockade batter a European nation. We are not past such things after all. The end of history will be postponed, again.
Russia supports two provinces determined to secede from Georgia. Russia, with aspiring nations within its borders, generally opposes secessionists, as it did when America, which sometimes opposes secession (e.g., 1861-65), improvidently supported Kosovo's secession from Russia's ally Serbia. But Russia's aggression is really about the subordination of Georgia, a democratic, market-oriented U.S. ally. This is the recrudescence of Russia's dominance in what it calls the "near abroad." Ukraine, another nation guilty of being provocatively democratic near Russia, should tremble because there is not much America can do. It is a bystander at the bullying of an ally that might be about to undergo regime change.
Vladimir Putin, into whose soul President George W. Bush once peered and liked what he saw, has conspicuously conferred with Russia's military, thereby making his poodle, "President" Dmitry Medvedev, yet more risible. But big events reveal smallness, such as that of New Mexico's Gov. Bill Richardson.
On ABC's "This Week," Richardson, auditioning to be Barack Obama's running mate, disqualified himself. Clinging to the Obama campaign's talking points like a drunk to a lamppost, Richardson said this crisis proves the wisdom of Obama's zest for diplomacy, and that America should get the U.N. Security Council "to pass a strong resolution getting the Russians to show some restraint." Apparently Richardson was ambassador to the U.N. for 19 months without noticing that Russia has a Security Council veto.
This crisis illustrates, redundantly, the paralysis of the U.N. regarding major powers, hence regarding major events, and the fictitiousness of the European Union regarding foreign policy. Does this disturb Obama's serenity about the efficacy of diplomacy? Obama's second statement about the crisis, in which he tardily acknowledged Russia's invasion, underscored the folly of his first, which echoed the Bush administration's initial evenhandedness. "Now," said Obama, "is the time for Georgia and Russia to show restraint."
John McCain, the "life is real, life is earnest" candidate, says he has looked into Putin's eyes and seen "a K, a G and a B." But McCain owes the thug thanks, as does America's electorate. Putin has abruptly pulled the presidential campaign up from preoccupation with plumbing the shallows of John Edwards and wondering what "catharsis" is "owed" to disappointed Clintonites.
McCain, who has called upon Russia "to immediately and unconditionally ... withdraw all forces from sovereign Georgian territory," favors expelling Russia from the G-8, and organizing a league of democracies to act where the U.N. is impotent, which is whenever the subject is important. But Georgia, whose desire for NATO membership had U.S. support, is not in NATO because some prospective members of McCain's league of democracies, e.g. Germany, thought that starting membership talks with Georgia would complicate the project of propitiating Russia. NATO is scheduled to review the question of Georgia's membership in December. Where now do Obama and McCain stand?
If Georgia were in NATO, would NATO now be at war with Russia? More likely, Russia would not be in Georgia. Only once in NATO's 59 years has the territory of a member been invaded -- the British Falklands, by Argentina, in 1982.
It's rather late in the day for Georgia; the bear's tasted blood for the first time since '79, and unlike those tough, scrawny Afghans, Georgians make for good eating.
If the thought of a resurgent, aggressive Russia, with its million-man army and nuclear weapons, doesn't give you a moment's pause, how about considering who's got the stones to confront him?
Obama was a "community organizer" -- whatever the hell that is, before he was a member of the Illinois legislature, where he accomplished nothing. Then he gained experience bloviating in the Senate and running for president.
Putin rose through the ranks of the KGB, eventually gaining control of Russia -- and remaining firmly in control today, notwithstanding his hand-picked puppet occupying the president's chair.
Putin will eat Obama's soul.
Dangerous times.
Posted by Mike Lief at August 12, 2008 12:22 AM
| TrackBack
Comments
Obama is about fresh ideas. Look what the experienced Bush team brought us - a bogus war in Iraq. Republicans have no business lecturing us Democrats about experience and the right to lead. George Bush and the Republican party have alienated the world. They have launched an illegal and false war based on lies. Don't tell us Democrats about who has the right to lead and who would be the better man in a pinch.
Posted by: John Martin at August 12, 2008 11:18 PM
Obama is about fresh ideas.
Like what? I've yet to hear any from the man. Just a lot of vague, trite speechifying, kumbayaing and tax hiking.
Look what the experienced Bush team brought us - a bogus war in Iraq.
Bogus war? Looks pretty authentic to me. Lots of dead jihadis (a good thing, yes?). How exactly is it counterfeit?
George Bush and the Republican party have alienated the world.
The United States will never make the world happy. Much of the world hates us for what we have, and others hate us for who we are. So forgive me if I don't give a tinker's damn that we may have "alienated" the foreigners.
an illegal and false war based on lies.
Honestly, do you ever stop to read aloud what you've written? Given that Congress authorized the use of force, it's hard to make a cogent -- much less, sane -- argument that the war is illegal.
And what lies are you talking about? If you're about to start barking about "No weapons of mass destruction!", take a look here, where I listed 20 reasons given by the Bush Administration for war (other than WMD).
Don't tell us Democrats about who has the right to lead and who would be the better man in a pinch.
John, there's an election campaign happening. Now, I know that you'd like to do away with the inconvenience of allowing conservatives to talk about the election -- much less participate in the voting -- but you're stuck with us.
I'm sorry you seem to feel so threatened by me pointing out how completely inadequate and unqualified your candidate seems to be.
Posted by: Mike Lief at August 12, 2008 11:40 PM
Lies! Lies! Lies! The American people were lied to by the Bush administration. Powell-the-lying-Republican-fool told nothing but lies to the UNITED NATIONS. Just travel abroad as I have and see what the world thinks of our once great country.
George Bush is a dolt. The man's IQ rates lower than an ape in your local zoo.
There were no terrorists in Iraq before Bush invaded. Bush created a vacuum in Iraq by removing Sadaam Hussein and the terrorists moved in. This has turned the Muslim world against us. We are hated by Muslims and looked at as liars by non-Muslims the world over.
Mr. Lief you are just unable to see truth when its right in front of you. You are thick headed.
Obama was not my first choice. I voted for Clinton. I liked both Obama and Edwards. Obama is very smart, however. Having a man in office who is smart enough to consider information from his advisors and make intelligent decisions is very important. Obama will then convey his decisions to the American people and the world like a statesman. I'm looking forward to the election. To quote the brilliant George Bush, BRING IT ON Mr. Lief.
Posted by: John Martin at August 13, 2008 08:31 AM
First of all...lets start with your overall premise that Obama is smart enough to listen to his advisors and then react....isn't that what Bush did? He didn't lie to the public. He listened to advisors (one of whom is about to endorse Obama if news reports are to be believed....and oh by the way is also going to speak at the democratic convention) and then reacted.
Obama has never led ANYTHING. His senate record is abysmal. He is nothing more than a professional mouthpiece. No substance.
To quote my favorite bumpersticker ... F---k it McCain then
Posted by: RW at August 13, 2008 09:15 PM