When this happens, historically, the US loses.
A decade ago, this occured with Serbia/Bosnia. A European issue, we didn't fix the issue (Europe), we fixed the symptom (strife). Bombed Serbia to the stone ages after it became a domestic issue.
Now, the symptom returns (Georgian strife), and Europe stands still. But here we have Russian hegemony being reestablished and America can't bomb anything back to the stone ages.
We have Obama making cheerleading political trips to Europe. We have McCain who talks a tough game but who knows. And we have Bush who, like Clinton before him, has a ZERO of a State Department.
The US is about to blow all the advantages handed to it by Russia's implosion begun 2 decades ago. If NATO and Europe doesn't take immediate action, of economic or military nature, repeat - immediately, there won't be a Central or Eastern European Country, or Western Asian, who will willingly embrace the West for some time to come. This includes some of the most promising energy countries of the future.
Maybe that last sentence will wake Alpha, the energy consumer, up. It is time to stop the incessant need to subsume our foreign policy into domestic "kill the ball carrier" politics. This ridiculous activity by our politicians, who destroy long term policy for childish short term gamesmanship, has severe long term negatives for America.
Alpha, yes, I can think using a wealth of international experience. I don't need Friedman to fill a vacuum, and I don't need to wait days and weeks for him to do it as you do.
As for how you were educated and where you travelled, I don't comment. It is readily apparent. I don't appreciate it when you presuppose that others don't have experience or exposure to issues and hold up a "Friedman" to speak for you. It's childish. As for your comments:
>>>Now you have concluded that it is European problem. <<<
I've done so from the beginning. Well before you started reading such in the newspapers.
>>>So now that non-military force you expect from Bush is to be applied to the Europeans. <<<
I've done so from the beginning. Well before you started reading such in the newspapers.
>>>You couldnt heap enough praise upon him early in his political assension, but now are having problems b/c he isnt doing something. <<<
You have no basis for saying this. None.
>>>Your distaste for Miterand is noted, but you still havent explained what 'force' you are advocating. <<<
Many posts on this. I'm sorry you refuse to read or understand them. Instead, you prefer to toss names and labels. Childish.
>>>Challenging Russia and Putin head on and in the press, rather than behind the scenes and diplomaticly is most likely going to further muddy the situation. Russia's stock market is already reeling and its economy is at risk. <<<
You know little about the Russian economy if you think Western press causes this. Too much headline reading, me thinks.
Canoodle.. Your assumptive ignorance never ceases to amaze me.
Yes I didnt bother subscribing to the NYT whatever they called it, not b/c it wasnt worth the cost, but b/c I always had access to the newspaper itself at the office. DUH!
I have always posted articles or links of items of interest as well as my own views. Award winning columnists like Friedman are far more worthy of respect and consideration than lowly flames like you or me. He is not only so much better educated and travelled than you or I, he has incredible access to the best minds and often politicos in the regions and subjects that he writes about.
Dont worry too much if you dont recognize how militaristic your postings are. Its consistent with your inability to see so much. Ill try and point it out in future posts, but imagine you will continue your trip down the river Nile.
Now you have concluded that it is European problem. So now that non-military force you expect from Bush is to be applied to the Europeans. And what happened to your love of Sarkozy. You couldnt heap enough praise upon him early in his political assension, but now are having problems b/c he isnt doing something. Of course its hard to understand what that somehting is given your failure to be clear. Your distaste for Miterand is noted, but you still havent explained what 'force' you are advocating. Come on faux One, be clear and specific. Perhaps you have a TASR weapon in mind that you want Sarkozy and EU to brandish.
Challenging Russia and Putin head on and in the press, rather than behind the scenes and diplomaticly is most likely going to further muddy the situation. Russia's stock market is already reeling and its economy is at risk. Again it is that pressure along with diplomacy that can make Russia/Putin understand that occupation of Georgia is not in thier or anyone else's interst.
Alpha, you have very little respect for Friedman. When the NY Times asked you to pay a pittance to view his articles, you didn't. It was a welcome reprieve for this board - we stopped getting Friedman headline editorials from you!
Why is it that you have so little respect for your own views? It seems you need talking heads to speak for you. Sad. But let's get into Friedman's article you now post.
It is so awfully USA centric. It's putrid nonsense.
This is a European problem that dates back to the 1980s, maybe even the '20s. The problem is not Georgia, it is Europe's inability to take responsibility for itself.
Under Clinton, this elevated to the magnitude that we had to bomb Serbia to the stone ages in order to clean up the mess Europe created by not addressing Serbia/Bosnia. That was the fundamental mistake of America - we did not hold the EC responsible.
At least today we have laid it on Europe's doorstep. It's not about Georgia, NATO, Russia, etc. It's all about Europe. Let's hope Bush will continue to hold the EC responsible. The last thing we need is Sarkozy (who flew to Georgia for a speech) to emulate Mitterand (who did likewise in Tblisi). Speeches are wonderful - but those of Eastern Europe know what they are worth... as much as you were willing to pay for Friedman's articles: $0
militarist? Alpha, post my militarist postings. You won't find a single one. They are all balanced. In fact, go back to Iraq and your postings to go in and why. Try to find mine. You see, you just go about calling people names and assigning them labels without appreciating their opinions, expertise and rights. Your activities and style are a clear signal on what is wrong with America today.
Canoodle.. While I appreciate your attempt at psychology, you apparently are not more deft in that dept than you are in foreign policy. You spouted your criticism of Bush & Co respecting Georgia as insufficiently forceful. Than when called out as to what military force you were suggesting, you reprised your criticism claiming you werent suggesting military force. I know Dog as well as I saw right through you.
Now you deny that you are a militarist though you have been suggesting just such a foreign policy at all times in the middle east. Guess you need to do some reading and travelling to discover what a militarist is so you can better understand yourself.
In the meantime, read some sane and sober thoughts from the award winning columnist of the New York Times, Thomas Friedman. Even your cheer leader and bossom buddy, Bear respects Friedman:
Alpha, re. your claim of "Your ethnocentrist militarism":
lol! I haven't presented on a single issue over the years such a position. You won't find it to paste on this board. Yet you continually spout that nonsense of yours. Always blaming others for being Neos and militarists when they have sensible policy positions that make a mockery of yours. Is it because you turned tail after wanting "in" with a military brute force solution in Iraq? This clearly looks like a psychological fault in you that requires you to paint others with your defect. You appear as a petrified dog barking and snarling up a storm - all a show to influence others with your charade - not a very good leadership quality.
You've got to stop fooling yourself. This was always a European issue first. And it takes time to coordinate the actions of some seven independent countries even when their interests are common. YOur ethnocentrist militarism seems to have you believing that only the US understands and wants Russia out of Georgia. We arent. Diplomacy as I told you was the answer. The effort needs coordination. And such effort happens mostly behind the scenes. Whatever you meant to say was premature at best but more likely either foolish or naive.
Of course this will take time. So be patient. We, meaning EU, US & Japan will have to figure out Russia's objective(s). Somehow I dont think it is so simple as the return to Soviet hegemony over Eastern Europe. I sense once we figure that out, we will have a better idea what 'pressure(s)' to exert.
In the meantime, you might like to sell Russian stocks short.
Not at all, Alpha. Read my posts. While you blabber about with virginal nonsense, the US has put Europe on the spot as I said should be done (and in stark difference to what we did re. Serbia/Bosnia). It is only Europe that can put true long lasting economic pressure on Russia as I originally requested and you later joined in. It is only Europe that can push the West's agenda here for long term results. And if we don't keep pushing Europe to carry their weight, it all collapses just as happened with Serbia/bosnia, a short term fix, to a terrible plight, but with nasty long term humanitarian policy consequences.
Do you believe your own lies and nonsense. You were the one criticizing as lacking force exactly what is happening. Guess the question is why you shot your mouth so soon or why it took you a week longer to see what was occurring. But go ahead Canoodle. Keep blustering your militarist nonsense. At least most of the American people have become leary of such bluster and want leaders that see longer term and wont hastily lead the US into bottom-less pits that do not serve our interests.