Kenn,

Historically, South Ossetia was part of the kingdom of Gruzia (what you all call Georgia), a country annexed by th Russian in the 1800's. I suspect that North Ossetia might have been as well, but this I do not know.

Even in the wording of your article, your faulty reasoning shows through.

Georgia started this conflict by invading its breakaway republic South Ossetia. Russia's main justification for getting involved militarily was the killing of 10 Russian peacekeepers as a result of Georgian aggression. Additionally, many Russian citizens live in South Ossetia and the Russia military intervened to protect their lives and property....

The Russian "peacekeepers" were sent to South Ossetia and to Abkahzia to assert Russian control and prevent Gruzian forces from crushing a rebellion on their own territory. Russian "citizenship" was extended by an imperialist Russian regime to effectively annex the territory by annexing the people living in it.

And overwhelming force has been used against Gruzians just as it was used against the Baltic Republics and Finland in 1939-40. What you have trouble with is the fact that whatever entangling alliances the Americans may have, that does not change the fact that until it is decided otherwise, Abkhazia and South Ossetia are the sovereign territory of the Republic of Gruzia.

The Russian Federal Republic is using force to decide otherwise. So, whatever the rights or wrongs of the United States or other foreign powers in the Caucasus, the Russians are guilty of aggression against a smaller neighbor. This is nothing new for the Russian government, whatever form it has taken. It has followed this policy whenever it could from the days of the early 1600's.

Just because you want the United States to unentangle itself from foreign alliances is no reason to misread real threats from real armies. This blindness will cost you dearly.

Kenn,

Having taken to heart the wise advice against seeing things in black and white, and taking into consideration the position that the alliance between Georgia and the United States is "not worth preserving," I must wonder which, if any, alliances are worth preserving. It is difficult to envision a meaningful alliance which is not to some extent "entangling," and therefore perhaps we should abandon them all. However, so to proclaim would involve seeing things simplistically, in black and white, which is not a good thing.

As I recall, Britain's entangling alliance with Poland became the catalyst which eventually brought Britain into what became WWII, which ultimately terminated the territorial ambitions of Germany and Japan. Toward the end of WWII, the USSR managed to absorb Poland in contravention of her agreements with her co-belligerents, mainly Britain and the United States. The USSR continued its policy of absorption for quite a long time, bringing previously undreamed of freedom and prosperity to the absorbed countries. Even viewing history in full Technicolor, I find that difficult to understand as a good thing.

Perhaps resumption of a similarly benign process is not what Russia now contemplates. Besides, even if it is, Georgia is just a small country, far away and rather insignificant. To make diplomatic protests against any such renewed policy of absorption may, as the article suggests, be delusional, inflexible, archaic, and downright stupid. Suffering from the great handicap of partial color blindness, I can't quite seem to grasp that point.

Dan

As Ruvy says, South Ossetia is the land of Georgia, which was responding to attacks from separatists in South Ossetia.

I agree that Georgia should not have got themselves into this mess but do not fool yourself, Russia is only there de-stabalise the area and take back as much of Georgia as it can get away with.

Russia has Nukes, therefore, the U.S. will nothing, and Europe will do nothing. That's the true bottom-line on Georgia, that's the reason Israel's cutting off their support to Georgia, and that's the REAL reason that even the condemnation will be mild, politely worded, and weaksauce.

Making excuses about "Entangling Alliances" or trying to justify an invasion that needed months to set up (the Russians had to have months to move those brigades into position, folks. Their logistics aren't that good) and pretending that it's the fault of the victim doesn't make the real reason nothing will be done not-so. The Russians have nukes, and long-range delivery systems, so the U.S. will do nothing.

Cannonship,

Does this mean that Russia gets a free pass regardless of what she does? We avoided a nuclear exchange throughout the last cold war. We should probably be able to do something now, to prevent its apparent resumption from escalating to the point that such an exchange becomes probable. I certainly hope so.

Dan

Kenn, how very Randian this article is. You cry again and again "give me all the freedom I deserve" but you'll never stand up and protect the rights of others to be just as free.

This is where the post-Randian liberty movement of the contemporary era has gone wrong. They've forgotten the basic tenet of classical liberalism that your individual freedom is diminished by the enslavement of others and that those who stand passively by contribute to that oppressionm by their innaction.

Dave

Well, Dan, I'm not saying it's RIGHT, but yeah. Russia gets a free pass because our government (esp. congress) and a huge chunk of the "Intelligensia" in the U.S. are essentially spineless-they'll fight the Bosnian Serbs (or, rather, send someone else to fight the Bosnian Serbs) to insure the sovereignty of a breakaway country under very similar conditions-because Yugoslavia/Serbia doesn't have nukes. Russia has nukes, therefore, nothing will be done, because the established pattern is one of doing nothing if the aggressor has nukes.

I'm afraid, guys, that on the micro issue of Gruzia against the Russian bear, barring other events, it will be the Russian bear that wins. The excuse that will be snatched up by the bottom feeders at Foggy's Bottom is that Gruzia is kind of like Russia's version of Cuba. That is probably how the American regime views the place - somewhere just south of Russia that they can play uncomfortable games to bait the Russky bear.

But that is the micro issue. At my article you can see the macro issue, if you dare....

I agree with Chris in post #3.

"As Ruvy says, South Ossetia is the land of Georgia, which was responding to attacks from separatists in South Ossetia.

Russia is only there de-stabalise the area to take back as much of Georgia as it can get away with."

Not only is this in truer context then this opinion piece but it de-couples one the basic primes in its assertion.

The only exception to Chris's comment I would make when stated

"I agree that Georgia should not have got themselves into this mess"

What choice did they have.

There was a unique opportunity - a lost opportunity - to mobilize NATO years ago by all its members to include Georgia. Georgia wanted in to NATO with all its heart. That is quite a transition for a once communist block state to be transformed into a democracy, hold free elections (something the mother ship Russia itself could not do) and they called to the West for inclusion into the families of democracy.

I mean that is the time you embrace such a newly free state. Had all fo NATO whole heatedly throughn itself behind Georgia, their would be not war today and not threat of war on the horzien.

The US offered Georgia its full support for joining NATO and did all it could to rally EU to do the same. But the EU blinked from the Russia authoritarian shadow and backed off. A move Putin needed to pull off at all costs or he would forever have to be seen as not a power greater then all of free Europe. He gambled and won and the EU sold out and left Georgia to defend itself all alone. The US still went ahead and backed up its position by supplying Georgia with military equipment and training its forces in hope this action or just talk would give Europe the back bone is lacked.

But Europe's cave and appease leaving Georgia to the wolves and this assured a lone time coming attack by Russia. In fact it was an invetation. The fact that it occurred on the same day as the opening of the Olympics ceremonies in China, who is the major Russian military ally, I some how do not see as a coincidence. Are Russia and Chine talking to the world right now?

Georgia has the courage the greater EU lacks and with no one to fight with them, they went it alone to defend their freedom from the authoritarian oppressor. I guess their taking hte pharse give me liberty or give me death pretty seriously over there. I'd give 1000 Europeans for 1 Gerogiainin right now.

Through European "cave and appease" they are allowing history to repeat itself right before our eyes as we all watch the spear tip of the new European toleration suppor power inserting into the throat of a free state.

This European sacrificial lamb is now being slaughtered as Europe looks on in hopes that their throwing it to this new aggressor will keep if from their doors. Russia likes the way the good EU'ers have fallen in to Kremlin line.

Seeing this is in Europe's back yard and they look to be doing nothing to challenge it makes it almost impossible for the US to act alone.

Another measure Russia was counting on.

But they can not escape the fact that the outbreak of war is on their soil at their hands now and its shadow is dark, cold and long. A shadow they once had opportunity of prevent.

If there was ever a time in history for a missle defence system in Europe it would be now.

Watch the European cave and appease on that too!!!!!

Wow, just wow!
I am amazed how quickly you guys forget things. Just few months ago we have had our government support and basically initiate the Independence for Albanian Muslims living in neighboring Serbian province of Kosovo despite all the warnings from Russia that it will create the snowball effect. Serbia was sovereign country as well until we decided to break it apart; international laws simply didn't apply to us back then.
How dare we call the use of Russian force "disproportional" when we, with our allies, bombed the living guts out of Serbia for 90 days back in 1999? 1 billion people with all the modern war instruments against a 7 million people poor country. We dare to speak out??? We shall shut up forever and ask the God for forgiveness for all the evil we have caused around the world, for all the Iraqis that have died (1 million of them) since our occupation of their country, for all the African people dying from AIDS, virus we have developed and we have the cure for, for all the Japanese newborns that are coming to this world retarded because we didn't respect the rules of the war and dropped the Atomic Bombs.
It's time that we all stand up for future of the humanity and let our government know that: WE THE PEOPLE will not put up with their..... any longer!

Um, George...

We don't have a "Cure" for AIDS. we have a treatment for the symptoms, and a bunch of research that might, after a decade or so of testing, provide some kind of treatment more permanent than taking lots of different pills every morning and hoping the disease doesn't shift to t he next step too soon.

As for the Atom Bomb-what rules? It was a strategic bombing mission like any other during the war, just with fewer airplanes and a bigger bomb. The long-term effects weren't known at the time, and likely would not have mattered had they been known, given the Japanese' treatment of subject peoples over the prior two decades (rape of Nanking, use of chinese civilians as lab-rats for chemical warfare experiments, not to mention abuse of POW's in direct violation of treaties Japan signed some years earlier-mistreatment even the damn Nazis didn't have the stomach to pull on POW's, such as the bataan death march or the abuse of Commonwealth POWs to build railroad bridges in burma, or work as slave labour in arms factories late into the war, etc. etc. etc.? and do you really need a course in how civilians in Indochina were treated by both the Japanese, and their vichy french allies?) The first side to use a dirty tactic (Germany's bombing of English cities, Japan's conduct during the taking and raping of Nanking) lowers the bar-the first guy to break the rule invalidates the rule, that's what makes war different-Hiroshima and Nagasaki were just bombing missions, neither one killed as many people as Dresden,which had NO atomic bombs used-just ordinary incendiary and HE bombs.

As for "Evils"...

Get yourself a tall glass of Lake Baikal water, and, after testing it, drink it if you dare. That lake was made that way by the 'virtuous worker's Paradise' of the Soviet Union. Ask anyone of a certain age from Romania, or (The former) Czekoslovakia, or folks from Poland, or Ukraine, or the Baltic States about how much fun it was to live under Soviet governance. (Especially folks not related to high party officials).
Ever heard of "Prague Spring" bucko? or what the Soviets did to independent farmers in the Ukraine who didn't want to be Collectivized?

Let's talk about sins. Let's talk about STARVING A PEOPLE INTO SUBMISSION. Let's talk about rolling tanks to crush people for trying to start a labour union in Poland that wasn't in bed with both government AND management.

and the fun continues with some other things, too-none of which are the things that 'progressives' like to talk about-after all, it's so much easier to claim a moral high ground by exaggerating and revising history to make the side that allows criticism look worse, than it is to address the crimes of the side that routinely shoots dissidents (and their families) then bills the next-of-kin for the bullet.

Which, looking back at seven hundered years of Russian history, is how Russia rolls.

Georgia is far from a beacon of democracy and was stupid to invade S Ossetia. Especially bone headed to attack with full force villages of civilians and then complain about Russia not playing fair. War really isn't about fairness.

Also hypocritical is the US complaining about this. The US does as it pleases and at the same time tries to moderate the international stage. Don't do as we do basically.

The only sad part I see somewhat is Georgia fully expected the West to come to their aid after their attack and saw they were basically left to defend for themselves. For all the talk the US and West gives support to Georgia, it's pretty empty. Again this will come back to haunt the US even more so now. Now the citizens of Geogia feel betrayed and will see it's not so bad having Russia as a protector.

Please let's keep in mind that my basic point was that Bush favors Georgia over Russia because in his view one is for us and one is against us in the war on terror. I don't think Russia is against us in that endeavor - could it be that Putin is wiser than Bush because he knows that to declare war on terrorists and to actively pursue them plays into the terrorists hands by helping them recruit more bloodthirsty killers? Also, unlike the unwise Tony Blair, why would Putin join the U.S. in its military adventures and increase the likelihood of attacks on Russian soil by terrorists?

I was simply saying that Bush is a hypocrit and has joined Georgia because they bowed down to him and sent troops to Iraq. What a way to conduct foreign policy. In no way am I suggesting that I support Russia. Like Ayn Rand, I support any people that want their freedom. The South Ossetian's want it and I support that. The U.S. should stay out of this situation.

From a basic strategic perspective, help coming or not, they didn't have a lot of choice in the matter-if letting S. Ossetia go WOULD have brought "Peace", well...has israel letting Gaza be Palestinian brought Peace? Did letting Germany have Czechoslovakia bring peace?

Look at a map. S. Ossetia occupies a pretty interesting chunk of land-the kind of "Interesting" where whoever holds it, can split the country of Georgia in half by cutting off THE major highway east-west, the major rail link east-west, and the pipelines. If Georgia held it exclusively, then the major choke-point north-south across the Caucasus would be under their control, making an invasion supremely difficult. (Note that they didn't. Note also that the Russians DID and DO. Without that major N/S route, the Russian brigade would be pretty much stalled-they'd have to use airmobile units or try for a beach landing if they wanted to bring the T-72's.)

As for "Shining Beacons of Democracy", those don't just appear, and they don't generally occur when you've got a civil war brewing led by folks that want the old system back. It is difficult to institute democratic institutions when you have people shelling your towns with field-artillery from a zone where supposed "Peace-Keepers" (who happen to be building up an invasion force and waiting for a pretext) aren't keeping the peace. (Think Lebanon, under the Syrians, and Hizb-Allah's artillery positions in south Beirut. Similar situation but the Russians have Nukes, so nobody's looking over their shoulder or likely to stop 'em, and Georgia's not Israel-they don't have that good a military.)