Here is an interesting summary of the state of the Russia-Georgia war.
http://www.understandingwar.org/backgrounder/situation-report-russo-georgian-conflict
Kagan is a neocon, but I guess they know war... The most interesting thing I took from this is the personal aspect vis-a-vis Saakashvili. But this makes a lot of sense if you believe that Putin is just a simple kleptocrat - which I do. So this does look like a Genovese v. Gambino mob war. Though, again, its more like the Genovese versus a street pusher encroaching on their turf.
I don't buy the "reduce military capability" reason because a) Georgia just is not a military threat to Russia and b) unless you kill soldiers, weapons are easily replaced.
This is a message...all that is missing is the horse's head.
8.13.2008
8.12.2008
Devil Went Down to Georgia
One thing I did not make clear is that I do think that if Georgia were in NATO, Russia may have been deterred. Maybe. The stakes would have been higher, but I still think the Russians would have done it. It is an easy way (and great timing) to send a message. By beating up on Georgia, other nations - Ukraine, Poland, the Baltics - get the message.
NATO is unprepared to defend itself. The Alliance is a near farce in Afghanistan with too many nations refusing to actually engage the enemy. So it comes down to the US; as it always does. We need to do something meaningful and thoughtful to show the world that while we have been caught flat footed in the situation, we will be proactive in the future. Supplying our allies with enough weapons to put a dent in a few columns of tanks would be a good start.
For over 40 years, Russia and the US avoided a direct shooting war choosing to work through smaller proxies, such as the Viet Cong (against the US) and the Afghan Muhajadeen (against the Soviets). It would seem that the Cold War is not over, but has reemerged. We can deny this or accept the reality and deal with it.
NATO is unprepared to defend itself. The Alliance is a near farce in Afghanistan with too many nations refusing to actually engage the enemy. So it comes down to the US; as it always does. We need to do something meaningful and thoughtful to show the world that while we have been caught flat footed in the situation, we will be proactive in the future. Supplying our allies with enough weapons to put a dent in a few columns of tanks would be a good start.
For over 40 years, Russia and the US avoided a direct shooting war choosing to work through smaller proxies, such as the Viet Cong (against the US) and the Afghan Muhajadeen (against the Soviets). It would seem that the Cold War is not over, but has reemerged. We can deny this or accept the reality and deal with it.
Georgia on My Mind
Obama has to be hacked. He was just trying to take a little time off and the freakin' Russians decide to remind us we live in dangerous times. Can we invade our neighbors? Yes, we can!
While McCain sounded more presidential than either Obama or President Bush, what we can actually do is limited. Reading the Responsible Side of the Blogosphere, there seems to be a few thoughts:
Glenn Reynolds is realistic in acknowledging there is nothing much we can do, but he is wrong on preventative measures.
Jerry Pournelle is relieved that Georgia was not in NATO, while John Noonan at the Weekly Standard sees NATO membership as a deterrent.
A few points: no there is nothing we can do. Strongly worded statements run the risk of making us look stupid. Whatever we say needs to communicate something to the Polands and Latvias of the world. Max Boot also suggested shipping Stingers and Javelins to the Georgians, but that, I think, just provokes Russia to reciprocate with the Iranians or Al Qaeda elements in Iraq.
That said, I think we can ship Stingers and Javelins to our allies as a deterrent. Poland, the Baltic States, Georgia (once things settle down) all could buy these from us to discourage future adventures.
As for NATO, it is useless. I am not a huge fan of entangling alliances (see Pournelle above), but I do think there is a place for a League of Free Democracies. The trouble with Georgia is that they can act more recklessly if they "know" NATO Is behind them. Not that they would, but we need a level of trust that I am not sure is or was there.
As for military alliances, I would ask the question: who would we go to war for if that country was invaded? Canada? Australia? Great Britain? Japan? Beyond that...Mexico? France? Taiwan? South Korea?
I hate to think we may be forced to chose.
While McCain sounded more presidential than either Obama or President Bush, what we can actually do is limited. Reading the Responsible Side of the Blogosphere, there seems to be a few thoughts:
Glenn Reynolds is realistic in acknowledging there is nothing much we can do, but he is wrong on preventative measures.
Jerry Pournelle is relieved that Georgia was not in NATO, while John Noonan at the Weekly Standard sees NATO membership as a deterrent.
A few points: no there is nothing we can do. Strongly worded statements run the risk of making us look stupid. Whatever we say needs to communicate something to the Polands and Latvias of the world. Max Boot also suggested shipping Stingers and Javelins to the Georgians, but that, I think, just provokes Russia to reciprocate with the Iranians or Al Qaeda elements in Iraq.
That said, I think we can ship Stingers and Javelins to our allies as a deterrent. Poland, the Baltic States, Georgia (once things settle down) all could buy these from us to discourage future adventures.
As for NATO, it is useless. I am not a huge fan of entangling alliances (see Pournelle above), but I do think there is a place for a League of Free Democracies. The trouble with Georgia is that they can act more recklessly if they "know" NATO Is behind them. Not that they would, but we need a level of trust that I am not sure is or was there.
As for military alliances, I would ask the question: who would we go to war for if that country was invaded? Canada? Australia? Great Britain? Japan? Beyond that...Mexico? France? Taiwan? South Korea?
I hate to think we may be forced to chose.
8.08.2008
Dancin'
I am sorry, but So You Think You Can Dance completely kicks Idol's ass.
The final four are actually REALLY talented and fun to watch.
AND the best dancer won. No disrespecting to the other three, but Joshua was the guy to beat...and no one could.
The final four are actually REALLY talented and fun to watch.
AND the best dancer won. No disrespecting to the other three, but Joshua was the guy to beat...and no one could.
Which Earlier Time Would You Prefer?
Obama, Obama...
From Campaign Spot: "America is …, uh, is no longer, uh … what it could be, what it once was. And I say to myself, I don’t want that future for my children."
"No longer what it once was"?
So which America would you like? The America in 1808? In 1908?
The fact remains that, for all our faults, this is the best of times to be an American. There are problems we need to face as a nation, but I am confident my childrens' future will be just fine.
From Campaign Spot: "America is …, uh, is no longer, uh … what it could be, what it once was. And I say to myself, I don’t want that future for my children."
"No longer what it once was"?
So which America would you like? The America in 1808? In 1908?
The fact remains that, for all our faults, this is the best of times to be an American. There are problems we need to face as a nation, but I am confident my childrens' future will be just fine.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)