99 Comments

1. mkunert:

Now watch how quicky Europe rediscovers its most beloved bestfriend… “America”.

Aug 16, 2008 - 5:03 pm 2. fedya:

Can’t remember exactly where, but a document cited in the previous comments discussed a dichotomy: inclusive vs exclusive. Treaties are exclusive and tied to territories which are the tripwires for terms of the treaty to be invoked. Inclusive organizations like the UN cannot possibly sustain treaties or nation states as such, but they provide soft mechanisms for [not] resolving conflict.

So NATO isn’t. That is, not a Treaty Organization, but rather yet another congerie of market forces bubbling merrily [or not].

Too bad we can’t develope an East European Treaty Organization, a Black Sea Treaty Organization and a Caspian Sea Treaty Organization. Each one functions with some degree of independence from The Bear and some degree of dependence on The USA.

Hmmm. Doesn’t sound too stable, does it?

Aug 16, 2008 - 5:05 pm 3. fedya:

Apropos my last comment, and NATO reverts to its original membership but recast as a mercantile coop, inviting The Bear to join in. Think how Brussels and Paris will puff themselves up on that. They’ll get to institutionally play us against The Bear. Quelle importance!

Meanwhile we also are pulling the Asian Tigers together with India, preparing for… what?

Aug 16, 2008 - 5:09 pm 4. JB:

Buddy, I didn’t mean 6 years before Clinton, I meant “in the 6 year period before Clinton”.

Character arc of USSR/Russia 1985-1991: Gorby, glasnost/perestroika, Berlin Wall falls, Soviet Union dissolves, Yeltsin. Trend obvious.

Now the present. We’ve gone from “I looked into his soul” to ever increasing thuggery to the present, and the atrocities can hardly be blamed on Bush, as many of them are of the domestic variety. You’ve built up a character, the story must end believably. An mass murderer doesn’t suddently reform and open a dance school. And Obambi doesn’t suddenly save the world from Armageddon.

Aug 16, 2008 - 5:09 pm 5. Konyok:

It’s difficult to really use this “market state” meme in any meaningful way. Other than the 20th century totalitarian states, I can’t think of any developed polities that haven’t had some “market state” characteristics. I suspect that any social order must eventually evolve channels to opportunity beyond simply assuring welfare because of the restlessness of human nature. (See dominance, heirarchies, pecking orders. See generational It is perhaps significant thatsuccession. See technological advance.)
Soviet Russia never followed through with NEP and failed to last even a century, despite its policies of full employment, while China has given an outlet to its people’s entrepreneurial energies and seems poised to continue for the near term.

None of this in any way gets us any closer to answering the question of which model of globalization is preferable, more moral, more efficient or more stable.
Being an American, I can’t help but believe that the Pax Americana is the best model because it is more improvisational and organic. Let people trade and the rules will evolve as needed.

Aug 16, 2008 - 5:12 pm 6. fedya:

@konyok:
Other than the 20th century totalitarian states, I can’t think of any developed polities that haven’t had some “market state” characteristics.

And the most reasonable fear of teh market state idea is that it will only exist under the umbrella of a totally inclusive and effectively anti-national collective.

New World Order nightmares, anyone? We don’t have to break out the Pre-Millenarian/ Dispensationalist textbooks to see where that baby is headed. I’m with you Konyok, the USofA is the our and the world’s best hope against tyranny both in particular and in general.

Aug 16, 2008 - 5:19 pm 7. fedya:

BUT, the trends are apparent and the market congerie idea is appealing as a way to lift The Bear out of her nasty, old-fashioned, and self-defeating ways.

Not that she wouldn’t make a bundle on locking up Central Asia alongside Iran, ya know?

Aug 16, 2008 - 5:21 pm 8. Konyok:

Brother fedya,

International and third country elites don’t like it, and our isolationist friends don’t like it, but the umbrella of American military so far has proven the most reliable and benign protection for a globalist world.

It is not insignificant that the same naval task forces cruising the world’s oceans with the capacity to bring nations to their knees also have the capacity to save hundreds of thousands in case of a natural catastrophe.

The Europeans would have us build a regulatory structure and THEN build a compliance structure. The Chinese would have us accept their terms. Al Qaeda would have us submit to Allah. And Volodya would heckle and oppose us out of spite.

Aug 16, 2008 - 5:31 pm 9. buddy larsen:

Thanks, JB — what i had meant, tho, within the conceit of the KGB sequence, was that the fix would be in. Obama not to even know of the plot, Obama just to be asked to a meeting, asked what he’d like to see, and KGB giving it to him.

No one would even need to be fooled. With Obama, no nuclear war, and no more images on tv of the Rape of Georgia, or humiliated USA politicians issuing threats and being ignored.

KGB assumption, in the conceit, is that the left wing of the Dem party, in full power in DC, will quite obliviously do their work for them. The story could even be “Obama allows terrified Russian leaders a face-saving retreat”. The point would be to get Obama’s people in control of USA.

y’know, Carter, but better, even.

–just speculatin’ –i’m not a Loch Ness UFO guy –just can’t figure out some things about this invasion. Even within its own logic, some things just don’t add up.

Aug 16, 2008 - 5:32 pm 10. buddy larsen:

JB, think of an international version of the post-Florida 2000 ”rule or ruin” faction of the Dems. The eight years of over-the-top rhetoric, conspiracy-mongering, fraudulent legal attack (Libby), active measures to lose OIF, continual filling of comms channel with demoralizing content –what is the meta-message? It’s “Let us rule, or we will ruin” –isn’t it? Well the international version would be “let them rule, or we too will ruin”. In a fiendish sort of way, it would be just power politics, pushed out to the limit.

Aug 16, 2008 - 5:44 pm 11. Konyok:

buddy,

I’ve never heard it stated so plainly. “Rule or ruin.” I salute your clarity.

I do feel that Albert Gore jr’s recount strategy innovation is the most mischievous development in recent American political history. My first blush reaction on 9/11 was that Osama was emboldened by the Florida recount crisis to strike at our moment of greatest vulnerability. I have since been mostly satisfied that the plan far preceded butterfly ballots.

Aug 16, 2008 - 5:58 pm 12. Mike Sylwester:

Russia is evolving toward a liberal democracy, but the process still is very difficult. Putin is not stopping that process, but he is correcting it. He is extremely popular in Russia because he is correcting it and because he is continuing it. He has been an effective leader.

During the Yeltsyn years, much of Russia’s natural resources become the personal possession of a small number of of individual manipulators of the market. They were not like the Rockefellers of US economic history, who had developed new resources, methods and institutions over the course of several decades. Rather, these manipulators in Russia appeared from nowhere and took over in about five years an enormous infrastructure and enormous wealth that the Soviet Union had developed during seven decades. Furthermore, these individuals who seized this enormous wealth evaded paying their due taxes to the Russian government.

Putin corrected that problem to a great extent. There still are problems and injustices, but the Russian economy has been growing strongly and steadily during the Putin era because the profitable exploitation of the country’s enormous natural resources are being taxed more effectively because of Putin’s accomplishments.

The Russians perceive that Putin has put the country on the right track in combating corruption, crime and terrorism. He has acted decisively, has gone on the offensive and has asserted control. Sure, there is much to criticize. Most importantly, however, he is a leader who is willing to tackle these problems and to accept the consequences.

Russia’s actions in Georgia follow that mode of decisive leadership. If Russia is in South Ossetia on a peacekeeping mission, then Russia will control that situation. If necessary, Russia might break some rules and might strike with overwhelming brutality, but the immediate goal is to establish law and order and the ultimate goal is to evolve toward liberal democracy.

Georgians became too impatient and confrontational with Russia in this situation. Georgia needed to cooperate with Russia by ruthlessly suppressing its own Georgian radicals who were continuing a dirty war that has been continuing for the past 15 years. That strong cooperation on the Georgian side would have been matched by the Russians on the Ossetian side. And then a peaceful resolution still would have been possible, but that process might have lasted a generation or two.

The overall historical tendencies in Russia are still positive. The issues are discussed and debated freely and then decisions are made by voting, and so in the long run the best arguments will prevail.

The USA still can and should cooperate with Russia, and so should Georgia.

Aug 16, 2008 - 6:44 pm 13. Konyok:

Mike,

Volodya just finished 8 years as president of the Russian Federation. We can see that he has successfully nationalized the energy industry, he has successfully stifled independent media, he has successfully prevented the development of independent political parties. (Can you name Putin’s party? What are its philosophical principles?) Volodya has taken the right to elect provincial governors from the people and taken it into his own hands as a “national security measure.” He has criminalized scientific and cultural exchanges between Russian institutions and their foreign counterparts. (I have personal experience of this: my Russian colleagues are more affluent now, but dramatically more taciturn and less cooperative than during Yeltsin’s time.)

Putin’s Russia has enjoyed a “sugar high” due to the high price of oil.

However, if I should decide to boycott Russian products, I have the problem that there are NO Russian products available to me that I would otherwise purchase. Nichevo. Nada. Not a one. Eighteen years after the fall of the Soviet Union and Russia’s chief exports remain oil and weapons.

Volodya has not reformed the economy. He has been the beneficiary of rising commodity prices. Russia is a banana republic and Volodya Putin is a caudillo.

Aug 16, 2008 - 6:59 pm 14. Cannoneer No. 4:

Still a Pravda stringer, eh, Mike?

Русские изобрели дезинформации

Aug 16, 2008 - 7:00 pm 15. Konyok:

Mr. Sylwester,

Let’s narrow the conversation, shall we?

Can you explain to me the benefits to the Russian people, institutions and political process of the federal president assuming the appointment of provincial governors?

Aug 16, 2008 - 7:10 pm 16. Doug:

Putin on the Ritz
—
ht – Mat

Aug 16, 2008 - 7:42 pm 17. NahnCee:

The Russians are coming, the Russians are coming.

Oh wait. They’re already here.

And they’ve taken over Belmont Club.

Aug 16, 2008 - 7:42 pm 18. lc:

Konyok – your 6:59 post – right on. Unfortunately the world seems to be running on bananas. And, I don’t think the Russians will leave Georgia unless they are pushed out.

Aug 16, 2008 - 7:51 pm 19. Ken:

Reading Buddy Larsen and Konyok: I would argue that the leftist Democrats have a reason for “ruining” even if they DO rule. Imagine a nuclear terrorist attack on the US during a Democrat administration. The Democrat president could declare a state of emergency–shielded by a “rally round the flag” political effect–and begin registering, and eventually confiscating, guns immediately. Without the possibility of a popular insurrection, he could then begin establishing a Communist dictatorship.

This is, incidentally, why I don’t buy the “realist” argument that Obama would have no choice but to follow a modified Bush Doctrine. This “realism” assumes that he’ll operate in the US’s interests, instead of knowingly against them.

Aug 16, 2008 - 7:56 pm 20. whiskey:

Wretchard — if Bobbit cannot state his ideas simply and understandably, then they are not ideas, but rather trendy observations. Bobbit to me sounds like an updated version of Faith Popcorn, and that is not a flattering statement. Or if you prefer, Thomas Friedman.

Extrapolating current trends into broad generalities.

Anyone reading through Wright’s “Looming Tower” can see how AQ builds on first and foremost, the long history of Islamic entities that were NOT part of the modern nation state. The Caliphate, historically, was NEVER part of any nation state, something Kemal Ataturk knew well, and thus abolished it so that his idea of Turkey as a nation state could live (for a while, the Islamists in Turkey now are bent on extinguishing that nation-state and resurrecting the Caliphate).

If anything, Bobbit has the constant flaw of Westerners in assuming that for non-Westerners, history began in 1945, or 1968. Indeed if you look at the writings of Islamists, their complaints date back to Ferdinand and Isabella. AQ is not a “precursor” or anything of that nature to the fantasy of the “market state” but rather a return to the only model that has ever worked for Islamic peoples — the Caliphate and Conquest. Of non-Muslims.

Moreover, the idea that the Market State would embrace opportunity rather than Welfarism is laughable and reason enough to reject his theories outright — if he gets THAT wrong, which is easily provable — he’s obviously not able to construct a model even conversant with current political and demographic reality.

EVERY Western state has moved towards greater and greater provision of Welfare. Europe has totally ceased spending on military or any other spending other than welfare spending, and that trend shows up in the US, which being wealthier can still afford a military (somewhat). But even in the US, the “progressive” forces and particularly the social and economic elites want to cease as much military spending as they can, and spend it instead on social welfare.

Bobbit fails to grasp two essential facts about Western Nations (which includes Japan and China): they are getting older, much older, and their elites hate risk.

Older people hate risk. Risk brings them little upside and much downside. Older people crave security. Physical security first and foremost, then financial security. Then ending change. Risk is a young man’s game, not an old man’s game. Older populations demand their government manage and reduce risk above all, which leads to greater and greater welfare states. Along with fewer young men to be soldiers, sailors, airmen, and the like. The greater likelihood of simply bribing enemies to leave one alone.

Next, the elites, particularly in the West, but even in China, are one-time “lucky” participants who have no appetite for any more risk. The early micro-chip, personal computer, and Dot-com billionaires might all have gotten lucky once, but you don’t see Steve Jobs, or Larry Ellison, or Jerry Yang, wanting government to create new “opportunities” instead they lobby to preserve their gains, and engage in social climbing like in a Henry James novel. Even in China, the billionaires know that there will be no more great opening of opportunities, that their way forward DEPENDS on closing down risk, so they don’t lose a great part of their wealth. Moreover, they are unwilling to share their social/political dominance. This is true of the Refrigerator Manufacturing tycoon in Shanghai, and the Screen Saver billionaire in Berkeley.

Nancy Pelosi represents Dot-Com and Silicon Valley billionaires. Do you honestly think she wants to allow her constituent billionaires to lose part of their wealth just so some other group can get rich? Or even modestly wealthy?

Please, let’s return to the realm of believable human behavior.

It is quite true that the Pelosi types seek to free-ride on the Nation-State, dismissing it when convenient, seeking it’s protection when their wealth/security is threatened. Ultimately, however, their elite status is tied to their wealth, which absent new opportunities will start to slowly erode, and pass into foundations and/or children without the ability to hold the wealth and muster political influence. Meanwhile, technology allows the AQ dream of the Caliphate to look more and more realistic, given that a single man can potentially kill millions with anthrax or something along those lines.

Aug 16, 2008 - 7:59 pm 21. cjm:

was carthage a market state?

Aug 16, 2008 - 8:09 pm 22. Rufus:

It’s the “pipeline,” Buddy. The Russkies want to nip this “pipelines through other countries nonsense” in the bud.

Aug 16, 2008 - 8:22 pm 23. Doug:

“This “realism” assumes that he’ll operate in the US’s interests…”
—
Ken,
About as likely as Putin doing what’s in our interest.

Aug 16, 2008 - 8:30 pm 24. TmjUtah:

Wow. Hey, Mike -

“Georgians became too impatient and confrontational with Russia in this situation.”

Back in the 1960’s, in our Georgia, black folks would get just the same way. Usually it was some damn petty thing or another, like wanting to vote. Or ride in the front of a bus. Or be treated like a human being. Crap like that. They were “uppity”, in the slang of the time.

And they, too, got beat on by the state, and by private terrorists enabled by the state. Dogs, firehoses, clubs, shotguns, bombs. And ropes, too. But they didn’t change. They never gave up. And today the state and most citizens look back on that time as a lesson and a stain.

You are a joke, sir. And your country, as well. Not a funny one.

Just what part of “combating crime” is covered by shooting women in their apartments? What does recreating the court of the tsars have to do with improving any Russian’s freedom? He hasn’t improved the economy. Russia doesn’t export anything but vodka, mail order brides, prostitutes, and oil… and the money in oil just recently overshadowed the profitability of the women.

Putin thinks the West won’t shut him down over this particular pissant country – Georgia. But he just had to know for sure, in the worst case situation he could imagine, so he acted now on Bush’s last watch. It’s as clear as a nugget shining in a stream at noon that if BUSH backed down, then he was home free.

But he didn’t. None of us knows what Sarkozy or Merkel said behind closed doors, but Poland signed up for the missile shield two days ago and Turkey and the ’stans haven’t made much noise one way or another about their relationship with the Soviets I mean the Russians.

200 million dead last century. We have records. We know how it starts. Maybe Putin, and the Russian people, might want to think this through a little bit more.

Aug 16, 2008 - 8:31 pm 25. Doug:

Rufus:
Did you see these?
ThreatsWatch.Org – Russia BTC Pipeline is ‘Dead’

Turkish official confirms BTC pipeline blast is a terrorist act

Aug 16, 2008 - 8:32 pm 26. RAH:

It is a conceit to say that history had ended. Life is always in flux and human life is no different. What we had was a change in societal order of nations. NO more and no less. What was surprising was how slow the contention for power in the world took. Power abhors a vacuum. When the Soviet Russia retreated from it Cold War stance and America did move into the vacuum as in imperialistic mode.

America may say it likes democracies but any democracies can change or morph into a tyranny or fascist regime like Germany did under Hitler. What we really like is stability. Most humans desire that. We want predictability that if we do this than the result will be that. That is why we have this compulsion for setting rules.

Freedom based on the individual is not stability; it implies risk both personal and societal. However people react predictably on basis of rational self-interest. Determining what the self-interest is not always easy especially with those who do not share the same rationales as society.

Nations are a collection of people with a few set above to run the nation. Those leaders if trained in duty, responsibility, and obligation are often good rulers. Putin and Bush are such rulers. Putin just protects his nations interests. His interests sometimes compete with America interest. The resentment of America is strong because we effortlessly out produce the rest of the world. Basically the greatest asset we have is our people. People who are productive and do not desire static systems can accomplish a lot with the commensurate risk.

There are a multitude of examples but Bill Gate took a risk, wrote a code for IBM and started and managed a huge company. Our capitalist and dynamic system allowed that risk taking action and it succeeded. The failures are rarely remembered.

China has a huge population and if they set up a sufficient dynamic system that awards risk and resists the impulse for a static system, they may unleash an enormous productive nation that will expand. China has an authoritarian regime, which is a chokehold on the productive capability of its people, but if with the limited freedom they have accomplished much.

Russia needed to set base rules when it threw off the Soviet mantle and they failed. They left it too vague and the natural human nature took it’s course that the oligarchs took over the assets and exploited the resources both human and materials. Putin is a strong leader and did mange to promote his successor successfully, but in Putin’s desire to regain the power, prestige and glory of Russia, he was too impatient and startled the prey. The Eastern Europe is running to the largest protector, which is the US.

Aug 16, 2008 - 8:33 pm 27. DanM:

“Let us rule, or we will ruin”

“No justice-No peace” – Maxine Waters before the L.A. riots of 1992.

Aug 16, 2008 - 8:38 pm 28. fred:

I agree with pretty much all of what RAH wrote. Nothing in history is inevitable. Human decisions influence events often far in to the future in ways that cannot be predicted. The hubris in all of this philosophy of history is the unfounded belief that humans can predict almost anything. And that’s nonsense. Professional historians, philosophers, and political scientists are always trying to decipher world events and find some overarching principle behind the way things move. It’s a fool’s errand.

And there is nothing inevitable about freedom and capitalism. It all could be lost if we don’t defend them. In life the stronger and more aggressive forces and individuals usually win, and if we do not resolve to actively defend our values and our civilization, there is no shortage of comers who will indeed snatch it all away from us.

Aug 16, 2008 - 8:52 pm 29. bobal:

Putin tried to join the KGB at age 15 and laid a wreath for Andropov. I have a hard time imagining him as leading the country to liberal democracy.

Aug 16, 2008 - 9:22 pm 30. M. Simon:

Wretchard,

More careful making assertions? It has never stopped me. It does make me look very foolish from time to time. Builds humility.

==

Re: energy

The US Navy is working on this little gem:

Fusion Report 13 June 008

The final report on current experiments is due in a month or two. If positive we may have fusion power for ships in as little as 5 years. If there are no show stoppers.

Aug 16, 2008 - 9:29 pm 31. M. Simon:

Older people crave security.

I suppose at 63 I am not old enough.

Aug 16, 2008 - 9:38 pm 32. njcommuter:

A word on Philip Bobbitt and the Market State. Bobbit is not offering a prescription: he is telling us what is happening. Whether we are trying to bring it about or trying to avoid it, this is where we are headed. This isn’t a question of rewriting our Constitution, but about how the unwritten part is interpreted. We’ve been busy reinterpreting the Constition for two hundred years. With our labor laws (and other regulations) we’ve all but shredded the “no interference in private contracts” clause and we’ve suffered penumbras all over one of the best social contracts ever written. (Its biggest flaw may be that the Houses of Congress are allowed to write their own rules of order.)

Bobbitt certainly does NOT believe that history began in the twentieth century; The Shield of Achilles begins back in the era that birthed Machiavelli. What he does is trace how we got where we are and observe where we changed how we do things. And he observes that changes are happening now.

If you are judging The Shield of Achilles and Terror and Consent by what others have written, I suggest that you read them yourself. Don’t let yourself react to hot-button phrases. Instead, refute the arguments, if you can. And be sure that you understand–really understand–the introduction to ToA before you dive into the text. Read it as many times as it takes. Miss the point of the intro, and you are likely to miss the point of the whole book.

Aug 16, 2008 - 9:40 pm 33. OldSalt:

re: Mike Sylwester comments:

“Russia is evolving toward a liberal democracy, but the process still is very difficult.”

Yep, it’s damn tough, particularly for the opposition and independent media, who have a very limited life expectancy in Putin’s fascist state.

“Is not stopping that process, but he is correcting it.”

Yep, we see. Guns, bullets, poison, killing off domestic political opponents. Oh, what’s the “liberal” part of your “democracy”? What’s “democratic” mean? I think that there’s a problem with the Russian-English translator, here.

“He is extremely popular in Russia because he is correcting it and because he is continuing it. He has been an effective leader.”

So was Stalin, and Mussolini made Italy’s trains run on time, and Hitler put German’s back to work. Hurray for Russian progress.

“During the Yeltsyn years, much of Russia’s natural resources become the personal possession of a small number of of individual manipulators of the market. They were not like the Rockefellers of US economic history, who had developed new resources, methods and institutions over the course of several decades.”

Yep, it was awful how the former USSR communist party and particularly, ex-KGB boys raped Russia economically.

“Rather, these manipulators in Russia appeared from nowhere”
Correction: “.. these manipulators in Russia appeared from the local Communist party cadres…”.

“The Russians perceive that Putin has put the country on the right track in combating corruption, crime and terrorism.”
Of course they do. They “perceive” what they are told by Putin’s state controlled media. Do you realize that you have NO CREDIBILITY (e.g. translation hint: that means “you are a liar” in English) when you describe what the “Russian people perceive”, when there is no longer an independent media or political opposition?

You see, that’s why you, “Mike Sylwester”, can no longer play in our swimming pool. Putin has eliminated the aspects of “liberal democracy” that gave you, and Russia in general, the credibility to speak like we do, i.e. with freedom expression, speech, and thought. You don’t have it, we do – different worlds.

“Russia’s actions in Georgia follow that mode of decisive leadership.”

Oh my Lord, so did Hitler’s brownshirts – they were a hell of a decisive force.

“If Russia is in South Ossetia on a peacekeeping mission, then Russia will control that situation.”

Russia’s conscripts are an unprofessional force of rapists. Do you have any idea what they are doing in Georgian cities now?? Ethnic cleaning (they are doing it, or they are providing cover for “irregulars” Putin brought in to do the same thing.

“If necessary, Russia might break some rules and might strike with overwhelming brutality..” Yep, we agree. Rape, pillage, and plunder is pretty brutal. How will you feel with Georgian “irregulars” strike in the heart of Moscow? Do you think, with the common knowledge of chemical and bio-warfare out there, that some young Georgian SPEC-OPS warrior is going to lay down and die while the Russian hoards level his cities, rape or kill his wife, sisters, daughters, and kill civilians? Russia has forgotten the lesson of WWII – Russia has chosen to war and conquer, and that decision will have far-ranging negative consequences for the Russian people.

“Georgians became too impatient and confrontational with Russia in this situation.”
Yep. They were purely pissed-off that Russian moved its thug-troopers into Georgian territory, illegally gave “Russian citizenship” to Georgian citizens in a border province, and used the “peacekeeping” label to cover a war of aggression against Georgia. I just can’t understand their impatience with that kind of shit; I mean, I’d roll over in a country and bring your boys flows and stuff (oops, I mean, our USA Democrat politicians would do that; I’d be that guy in the shadows waiting to kill the Russians).

“The USA still can and should cooperate with Russia, and so should Georgia.”

Oh we will cooperate; we will definitely bring it to you. F15’s, F22’s, subs, precision guided bombs, lots of bullets, and we’ll bring the whole party to you. Russian started this war, and we will finish it. It may take another 40 years, but you will lose, more Russians that non-Russians will die, and Russia will be the poorer for it. Like before. Like always.

Wretchard: I apologize for being so “hard core” here, in what is normally a pretty cerebral, informational, and ultimately entertaining BLOG. But I’m a pretty simple guy. War starts with a lie, then a second lie, then a bunch of them, a redefinition of the terms of language that Webster would never recognize, and then big lies. This guy is right out of the old leftist-Communie play book. “There is no truth, only what we make you believe is truth”. I can’t tolerate lies, because they ultimately lead to death, destruction, and slavery.

Words matter. What the FSB’s “Mike Sylwester” is saying is arguably as damaging as the planes, tanks, and rapists that Russian is sending into Georgia. Those vehicles exist, because of the words – the lies.

God Bless the Georgian’s. Good hunting. Freedom to the Georgian people. Courage to the other NATION-STATES now pressured by the Russian machine.

Regards.. from an OldSalt

Aug 16, 2008 - 9:45 pm 34. John Samford:

“just can’t figure out some things about this invasion. Even within its own logic, some things just don’t add up.”

Absolutely. I’m wondering how much internal pressure Putin is under. The KGB agents posting disinformation here and all across the web are saying things are just rosy, peachy keen, nothing to see here folks, just move along.
Coming from a Russian, that should lift the hair on your neck.
I could work up a theory that certain elements in the Kremlin want their empire back and they expect Puttie to deliver.
They are correct about the SDI elements going into Poland. IIRC, the Russian have about 800 ICBM’s allowed them by SALT II. I don’t think SALT II, which cut that in half was ever ratified.
Soviet weapons beyond a certain level of complexity were not reliable. Nuttin more complex then a thermonuclear warhhead and it’s ICBM.
The USA had the same problem and went to a triad system until the reliability issue was resolved. The Soviets nevr really had that option, what with them not being able to build a bomber that had a real chance of delivering a nuke. Their Subs were junk. So they HAD to depend on their ICBM’s to deliver the goods.
Those ICBM’s had about a 50% failure rate ( compared to 15% for US Missiles of that same period. So half the Missiles launched would not lift off or guide to their target. Estimates on Warhead reliability was about 30% would actually work.
So a Soviet strike with 600 ICBM’s (leaving 200 for followup shots) would see about about 300 actually on track to hit a target. Of those 300, 90 or so could be expected to work.
The Soviet estimate was that they needed to hit 84 US targets to win the war. So that is why they agreed to the 1200 total warhead limit and why they didn’t agree to cut it to 600. The Soviets couldn’t increase their reliability to the point where 600 would be certain to cover the 84 targets.
Politicians, regardless of their government type, are control freaks. They only play card games where the deck is stacked in their favor. SDI knocked ALL those percentages right out the window. SDI NEVER had to get a 100% kill rate to work. Getting a 50% kill rate was enough. 50% is enough to make using nukes a real risky proposition. Now instead of 90 you have 45. With a 3 layer system that gets another little bite with each layer, that 800 missile launch could be as small as a dozen nukes on target, or it could be 600. One never knows, which to a control freak is a detterent in and of itself.
The Russian, like the Soviets they still are, have nothing even close to SDI. We offered them it, thinking it would ease their paranoia. It couldn’t. So the Russians have to understand that American weapons work. To many battlefields littered with burning Soviet gear for them not to. American ICBM’s WILL go to their target and they WILL ignite.
So their one slim hope is that the USA will not fight back. That seems like a slim reed to me, but I’m NOT a former KGB officer. SO far it looks like Puttie was right.
He never did say what he saw when he looked in Bush’s eye? Naked fear, perhaps?

Anyway, as the US lead in weapons technology increases, it’s willingness to use those weapons decreases. Somewhere in the Kremlin, there is a graph and those two lines have intersected.

Aug 16, 2008 - 9:46 pm 35. njcommuter:

Wrthcard:
“Nancy Pelosi represents Dot-Com and Silicon Valley billionaires. Do you honestly think she wants to allow her constituent billionaires to lose part of their wealth just so some other group can get rich? Or even modestly wealthy?”

The Leftie citizenry of San Francisco provides many more votes than the Dot-Com and Silicon Valley billionaires (or any other collection of billionaires, for that matter). Pelosi needs votes. Any votes will do, so long as they are within her district and can be counted (honestly or not). She can throw every billionaire’s vote to the sharks and still keep winning, especially since she is the senior member of the House with a majority behind her.

There are two ways to unseat her. One is to find her guilty of so great a crime that even the Left wants her jailed. (Such a crime may not exist, unless it is admitting that conservativism is not necessarily evil.) The other is to turn Congress far enough to the Right that Pelosi is marginalized and can be defeated in a primary challenge. (Hence my earlier assertion that one of the Constitution’s biggest flaws is allowing the Houses of Congress to write their own rules of order.)

Aug 16, 2008 - 9:47 pm 36. OldSalt:

Definitely need to consult my editor; he’s falling down on the job. I meant tosay:

“I mean, I’d roll over in a country MINUTE and bring your boys flowers and stuff (oops, I mean, our USA Democrat politicians would do that; I’d be that guy in the shadows waiting to kill the Russians…”

Made quite a few linguistic errors. More attention to detail, is definitely required on my part.

Aug 16, 2008 - 9:51 pm 37. bobal:

Rather, these manipulators in Russia appeared from nowhere”

From nowhere, I tell ya!

Aug 16, 2008 - 9:52 pm 38. M. Simon:

They were not like the Rockefellers of US economic history, who had developed new resources, methods and institutions over the course of several decades. Rather, these manipulators in Russia appeared from nowhere and took over in about five years an enormous infrastructure and enormous wealth that the Soviet Union had developed during seven decades.

“Some see private enterprise as a predatory target to be shot, others as a cow to be milked, but few are those who see it as a sturdy horse pulling the wagon.” Winston Churchill

Ah, that explains Russia seizing western oil company assets in Russia. No new technology for you Ivan. Oil output is already in decline. So conquer or die it is. We get it. Pitler gets it. Bush gets it.

I would say that Bush has chosen your death even if it means war. We shall see if it means a small one now and nips in the bud a big one later.

The Euros? Simpering wimps as always. Churchill had their number:

”Britain and France had to choose between war and dishonor. They chose dishonor. They will have war.” Winston Churchill

Fortunately the US learned a couple of things in the 20th century. Russia? The classic case of forgotten nothing and learned nothing. More is the pity. A truly charming people on an individual basis. Too much in love with their kings.

Aug 16, 2008 - 9:54 pm 39. M. Simon:

I could work up a theory that certain elements in the Kremlin want their empire back and they expect Puttie to deliver.

How about they have run the numbers and have figured out Russia is a dying enterprise? Conquer and loot or die.

A lot of Russians learn American in school and that gives them (esp the ladies) an opening to a better life. Mike is a prime example of that. He has to be careful. Too much exposure to us Americans (by birth or in spirit) and he may loose his faith. An occupational hazard.

Aug 16, 2008 - 10:04 pm 40. NahnCee:

Do we think Mike is Moscow-born or American-born and a relative of Lee Harvey? He strikes me as being a Berkeley moonbat except he’s way too knowledgeable (and sympathetic) about things that a typical Obamaniac wouldn’t know or care about.

Aug 16, 2008 - 10:15 pm 41. OldSalt:

John Samford:

“So their one slim hope is that the USA will not fight back. That seems like a slim reed to me, but I’m NOT a former KGB officer. SO far it looks like Puttie was right.”
The game is still young, and sine we are in a REAL liberal democracy, we are slow to war, slow to commit blood to the fight. While who lead the country matters, the fact is that American’s seem to pick the right leaders for the right time. I was honestly shocked that we put boots on the ground in Afghanistan and actually got Congress to vote to commit to a preemptive invasion of Iraq. (Smoldering ruins in New York City seemed to silence our gutless-left-of-center politicians.)

But the truth is, America will “soldier-up” when the time comes. We don’t have a autocracy, and Bush can’t rush American kids to fight for Georgia absent treaty obligations or a compelling national interest. Iraq and it’s geographically strategic position in a newly militant, threatening Middle East fit that bill, and it took literally years to evolve to that decision. Georgia, while our allies, are not allies by treaty. It sucks, but I understand why we aren’t moving militarily now.

“He never did say what he saw when he looked in Bush’s eye? Naked fear, perhaps? ” That’s got to be pretty far from the truth, and the FSB boys are not fools. (Well, maybe they are, but they had ring side seats to the show for the last 7 years, and Bush doesn’t blink when the game is on the line.)

Bush, unfortunately, isn’t a factor. Unlike Putin and other fascist, he will leave office this year. America will help Georgia, but we cannot save them today. This is a lesson to every free democracy; a strong military is a expensive necessity, but it is a necessity none the less. The lesson to the rest of the buffer states is clear: Open up their economy, FORGET imitating the Western European basket-case welfare state, and put substantial tax $$$ into their Defense infrastructure. They can and should make alliances with NATO, the US, and other buffer states, but when the balloon goes up, they will face the Russian machine alone. How much damage the Russian rapists do will depend on the courage and preparation of the young men wearing uniforms.

Georgia prepared, but they had 20 years, and they did too-little, too-late. The game isn’t over and the full story is still untold, but what I’ve read and heard thus far indicates that Georgia’s military was still too immature, ill-equipped, and of course small, to form an adequate deterrent to Russia. Folks miss the point entirely when I hear them say as common wisdom “… of course, they could not oppose a Russian invasion..”. The point is not to be able to win battles at the outset. The goal is to be able to PROJECT the ability to hurt the enemy sufficiently that you DETER them from committing forces to the field. The USA has no excuse for forming a military that can win against any foe, or combination of foes – we have the assets and resources. But smaller countries can form an effective deterrent. Most large to mid-sized European countries can field those forces. The Georgians appear to have had inadequate forces, young and inexperienced leaders, inadequate equipment, and a poorly defined (if perhaps much improved) Order of Battle. They took too long to prepare their defense, and when the Bear arrived, they were unprepared. At least, that’s what I’ve heard thus far. I hope to hear better, i.e. of irregular forces bloodying the Russians and perhaps even striking deep into Russian (i.e. logistic strikes).

Aug 16, 2008 - 10:17 pm 42. cjm:

the strongest lemming drowns the furthest out, and putin is a very strong lemming.

in a time of falling demand, and given the recent seizures of western oil investments in russia, and given the stark choice between partnering with putin and partnering with the u.s. — which shipping and refining providers are going to bother dealing with russian “companies”?

no announcemens need be made, just a lack of offer tenders, a lack of interest, etc. lines of credit are quietly closed, secret accounts locked, etc.

that satellite we shot down was an arrow straight into putin’s eye; let’s party like it’s 1066.

regarding m. simon’s excellent comment on precious metal and geographic distribution: once energy becomes cheap enough, it’s possible and feasible to convert any element into any other element. so all you gold bugs keep buying.

Aug 16, 2008 - 10:20 pm 43. M. Simon:

Now watch how quicky Europe rediscovers its most beloved bestfriend… “America”.

Gotta love those Euros.

”Britain and France had to choose between war and dishonor. They chose dishonor. They will have war. Winston Churchill

Evidently they don’t read Churchill any more over there (what an interesting turn of phrase). After all he was 1/2 American.

Aug 16, 2008 - 10:20 pm 44. bobal:

Oleg The Russian Knows His Agitprop

And, he’s on our side now.

Aug 16, 2008 - 10:23 pm 45. Doug:

njcommuter:
Or order some Botox from Putin for Nancie’s Plastic Surgeon.
—
Russian forces Digging in in Georgia –

IGOETI, Georgia – Russian forces built ramparts around tanks and posted sentries on a hill in central Georgia on Saturday, digging in despite Western pressure for Moscow to withdraw its forces under a cease-fire deal signed by Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

The United States and France said it appeared Russia was defying the truce already. Russian troops still controlled two Georgian cities and the key east-west highway between them Saturday, cities well outside the breakaway provinces where earlier fighting was focused.

“From my point of view — and I am in contact with the French — the Russians are perhaps already not honoring their word,” U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said.

Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, said Medvedev had signed the cease-fire deal and ordered its implementation, but would not withdraw troops until Moscow is satisfied that security measures allowed under the agreement are effective. He said Russia would strengthen its peacekeeping contingent in South Ossetia, the separatist Georgian region at the center of more than a week of warfare that sharply soured relations between Moscow and the West.

Asked how much time it would take, he responded: “As much as is needed.”

President Bush warned Russia Saturday that it cannot lay claim to the two separatist regions in U.S.-backed Georgia even though their sympathies lie with Moscow. “There is no room for debate on this matter,” the president, with Rice, told reporters at his Texas ranch.

ht – al-Bob

Aug 16, 2008 - 10:23 pm 46. cjm:

let’s not write georgia off just yet.

maybe wait until the t-92’s are rolling through downtown tblisi (and aren’t on fire).

there are four quarters in a game, and this is early in the first quarter. to me, putin looks like the one that got suckered, not bush.

Aug 16, 2008 - 10:26 pm 47. Dave:

nichievo: No chance to answer you on previous post, so will butt in here—–beg your pardon wretchard and everybody else.

Lawyer friend of mine has specialized in oilfield bankruptcies since the mid 1980s.
He says that current sitrep is about like 1982-84, “standing on the cusp” is how he put it. Oil could easily slide under $90 a barrel. That happens, producers do not hire drilling rigs, or pulling units, or seismographs, or mud men or a jillion other things needed to keep oilfields humming. All those people cannot pay their debts and the ability to produce and even maintain suffers greatly. Has taken 20 years to get West Texas back to the capabilities lost 1985 to 1987. $8 a barrel was disastrous.

HOWEVER: This time would not be because the per barrel price is too low—-$80 to $90 a barrel is not—–but because the market for the crude is too uncertain. Nobody knows what
the income will be. It is like putting in 40 hours a week right now and being told 3 months from now how much you will be paid.

Should another 1980s style scenario occur, I would definitely fear for the survivial of our domestic industry.

Hope this clarifies things for you.

Aug 16, 2008 - 10:28 pm 48. OldSalt:

You know, Peters and I have some disagreements. But he’s spot-on in his analysis of the situation. This is a must read:“RUSSIA’S GEORGIA WIN – THE DARK LORD’S ‘DESTINY’”

http://www.nypost.com/seven/08162008/postopinion/opedcolumnists/russias_georgia_win_124659.htm

Aug 16, 2008 - 10:32 pm 49. Charles:

What I like best about Rumsfeld’s famous Unknown Poem — is that it describes accurately the rationale for three funding mechanisms for leading edge R&D.

Here is an example of DOD funding under rationale number 2: known unknowns.

Bell Bio-Energy, Inc. says it has reached an agreement with the U.S. Defense Department to build seven test production plants, mostly on military bases, to quickly turn naturally grown material into fuel.

“What this means is that with the seven pilot plants – the military likes to refer to them as demonstrations – with those being built … it gives us the real-time engineering data that we need to finish the designs for a full-scale production facility,” J.C. Bell, the man behind the project, told WND today.

“In 18 months or so, we will start manufacturing oil directly from waste and we will build up to about 500,000 barrels a day within two years. In another six months, we’ll reach a million barrels a day.”

As the United States now imports about 13 million barrels of oil a day, the only obstacle then to total energy independence from foreign sources will be the money needed to develop the processing plants, he said.

“Working with the USDA we’ve identified enough waste material around the country, we truly believe we can make the United States totally energy independent of foreign countries in about five years,” he said.

Aug 16, 2008 - 10:32 pm 50. Doug:

From bobal’s link above:
“I spoke with Atbashian by telephone, and his work for the Party ought to send a chill up your spine. He said he immediately recognized Obama’s work with ACORN, where Barack was a ‘community organizer’. From the description of Obama’s ACRORN job Oleg snorted and said, “For all intents and purposes that’s the same job as a Party Organizer.”

—
Housing Bill sends millions of dollars in aid to ACORN and La Raza

There’s more to the housing bailout measure than meets the eye, says a Minnesota lawmaker. She contends that members of Congress need to be called back to Washington to reverse the measure that, among other things, sends millions of taxpayer dollars to a radical illegal immigration advocacy group.

The housing package signed into law by President Bush extends an unlimited line of credit to troubled mortgage giants Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and rescues homeowners near or in foreclosure. The measure also increases the federal debt limit by another $800 billion — and sends millions of dollars in aid to La Raza and the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN.

Representative Michele Bachmann (R-Minnesota), a member of the House Financial Services Committee, says she finds it “unconscionable” that the legislation included funding for the two groups, which serve as political action arms of the Democratic Party.

“At the same time that the American taxpayer was being asked to bail these companies out, Barney Frank, the chairman of the Financial Services Committee, instituted a sort of tax on Freddie and Fannie, and that tax goes into what’s called an affordable housing trust fund,” explains Bachmann. “It’s a really a taxpayer-subsidized housing fund, but that money will go to organizations like La Raza and…ACORN.” Both groups — “particularly ACORN,” says Bachmann — have been found to be involved in “activities where they have perpetrated voter fraud,” she contends.

Bachmann advises Congress to get back to Washington, stop the funding stream for ACORN and La Raza, and also get American taxpayers off the hook for bailing out Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Aug 16, 2008 - 10:47 pm 51. Charles:

US gets ready to blow its economy away

Sadly it looks like all the groundwork has been put into place to institute cap in trade policies which will shave trillions off the US economy.

Aug 16, 2008 - 10:58 pm 52. whiskey:

NJcommuter — Nancy’s real power base is the billionaires. It takes money to run a political organization. Staffers, polling organizations, publicists, ancillary political organizations, all cost money.

Or, as some California politico noted, money is the mother’s milk of politics.

Aug 16, 2008 - 11:28 pm 53. M. Simon:

US gets ready to blow its economy away

Sadly it looks like all the groundwork has been put into place to institute cap in trade policies which will shave trillions off the US economy.

Maybe. If so – since when the US gets a cold the rest of the world get pneumonia – how does that help the rest of the world? Who will buy Russian oil and natural gas if the world economy tanks?

Aug 16, 2008 - 11:42 pm 54. buddy larsen:

Polish president criticizes France, Germany

The Associated Press Published: August 16, 2008

WARSAW, Poland: Poland’s president criticized the way France and Germany have handled the crisis between Russia and Georgia, accusing them Saturday of being too soft on Moscow due to their commercial ties with Russia.

Lech Kaczynski also said that European Union policy was being decided by the two EU giants without taking into consideration the views of new EU members such as Poland that once fell under Moscow’s control during the Cold War.

“Once again, it turns out that the real decisions in this organization are being made between Berlin and Paris,” Kaczynski said in an interview published by the daily Rzeczpospolita and also posted on his official Web site.

“Saying that the Union will have a common policy toward Russia is laughable,” Kaczynski said.”

(please read more, it gets better)

Aug 16, 2008 - 11:54 pm 55. fedya:

Kagan’s work is wonderfully clarifying. Of the big conflicts built in to our present global reality, two preoccupy us:

1) the war on terror which cannot be the only preoccupation (and one in which we share interests with Les Russes and Les Chinoises).

and 2) the ongoing tension between liberalism and autocracy (e.g. Putin v Georgia), ongoing since sometime before Cromwell, I’d say, but since the American Revolution, at least, sez Kagan.

He mentioned other built in issues, too, globalism for one. but what is interesting and very puzzling is the fact that there is SOMETHING going on that Bobbit is calling the Market State that is not included in Kagan’s excellent overview. That something has something (exactly what I couldn’t tell us) to do with, as Wretchard put it, a Supranational association of nation states.

So, liberals in Kagan’s sense includes most Americans, conservatives, neocons, Truman-JFK guys, FDR, Wilson, and WJ Clinton. We are all opposed, we all insist, to autocracy.

Kagan points out very effectively that it was exceedingly naive for any of us to imagine “the end of history” or an eternally self-renewing “peace dividend”, but virtually all of us in liberal Anglo/Eurosphere did. Autocrats have good, principled reasons to support strongly defined nations.

Even the most conservative among us have supported the willy-nilly dilution of nations. Bobbitt calls this undefined and yet-future thingie as the “market state”, some sort of Liberty-lover’s paradise that is somehow predestined to swallow up the tedious narrow-minded and violent past.

Only it didn’t. And Kagan points out that we don’t get how destructive the Kosovo business was. We don’t realy worry or think it matters if the UK, in effect, devolves Cornwall and the Manx as part of its self-dissolution into the EU. “Freedom”, right?

Since this “market state” is coming into being and yet it is too obscure to be seen in outline, is it really not a cute fuzzy little lambie-pie, but a dreadfully retro wolf, instead?

If all are included, then none are included. If the universal market state will prevail, it will prevail as a stealth autocracy, imposed by the already rich in a bid to freeze their wealth in place. That is the precise opposite of a free market which rewards risk, innovation, and “creative destruction”.

I submit that the “market state” is most clearly seen in Brussels. It is really an atavistic congerie of bureacratic oligarchs preserving the status quo by breaking nations and peoples down into finer and finer grains of powder. It is no different than Mr. Putin’s new state and it is certainly not going to oppose or attempt to dismantle Mr. Putin’s new state.

No, the market state is a rosy-tinted, vain imagining for Pollyana-ish Liberals (Right or Left), hiding the erasure of Freedom in a fast-setting Politically Correct epoxy.

Give me an American nation preferring smaller alliances of democratic nations, and keeping the seas and continental passageways open for global free trade and innovation, and pushing back against the autocrats ad hoc.

NATO became a collective, it cannot function as an alliance of nations. So, work with an Eastern European Alliance Group, a Black Sea Treaty Organization, a Caspian Mutual Assistance Sphere, an East Asian Littoral Alliance, and so on… based upon committment to practicing democratic governance.

Nation states are capable of freedom, more so than the market state mush. Does the invisible hand of the market have a General Staff? No, and God help us when the invisible General Staff of the “Market State” reveals itself!

Aug 17, 2008 - 12:04 am 56. buddy larsen:

If you need an example, fedya, Kaczynski’s blast (see my post just above yours) is the perfect revelation of that void between market & state. The Pole understands who is and who isn’t on the front line, and he knows they know it to. Protocol would advise him to keep his mouth shut, in public at least. But he didn’t. Instead he gave it to ‘em with both barrels, and let the chips fall where they may. This “I can’t be bought–can YOU?” is no longer implied by embarrassed obfuscation and euphemism but is now an outright clear-as-day question. “Choose” indeed. The hinge of history turns.

Nato meets next week –Tuesday? –and Condi & Bush are said to’ve been on the phones with various NATO ministers all day today.

God I love them Poles –they’re leading again –shades of the Pope & the Plumber –

Aug 17, 2008 - 12:52 am 57. bobal:

A View From Down Under

Aug 17, 2008 - 12:56 am 58. Doug:

the Pope & the Plumber – and Laura Ingraham!

Aug 17, 2008 - 1:00 am 59. buddy larsen:

ACORN is a repulsive crooked election-fraud specialist organization. Look it up. Then get really frikken pissed off that those red sonsabitches are getting a payoff outta your pocket in that Barney bill.

Aug 17, 2008 - 1:01 am 60. 2x4:

Fedya, I specifically relished “fast-setting Politically Correct epoxy”.

I would probably use “resin” (just my preference), but I really enjoy your poetry.

Aug 17, 2008 - 1:09 am 61. bobal:

Buddy, if I got pissed off at everything I should be pissed off at, I’d be an angry wreck. Don’t wish for anything, you won’t be disappointed, said mum.

Aug 17, 2008 - 1:09 am 62. fedya:

God bless teh Poles. And God judge the goof who designed a keyboard layout that makes “teh” come out very durned time I try to type “the”.

Two things about the Kagan article that hit me with the force of insta-revelation.

First, autocracy is not only legitimate, but preferable in principle to its advocates. Why I never got that, that they have an arguable and respectably moral brief, I can’t tell you. I would admit that much more human progress has occurred under autocracies than democracies: they’ve been running for at least 6000 years and we have a hard time claiming 300 (personally, I don’t count Rome, Athens or Germanic tribes in the woods: your mileage may differ).

The second is the shaky metaphysics of “the marketplace”. Kagan does such a concise job of locating all of us liberals (Amcn. conservatives & “Liberals” & NeoCons, whatever–just leave Pat BooCannon out of it, OK?) [tight.smile] … choking chust chokingk, mon…

Where wass me? Ach, misplaced faith in a metaphysically dynamic marketplace Entity. Face it, folks, Adam Q. Smith didn’t confuse markets with The Force, we do. Us’ns da NeoKons. We hier Solid conservatives. heck, a few of the flightier Libertarians have been known to Theo-pomorphize The MARKET.

I think I’m going to stop.doing.that.now.

(BTW, if you LOVE good port, and a lighter, brighter substitue sounds interesting, try Kindzmarauli, a semi-sweet red varietal from Georgia. TO DIE FOR!

(not literally, we hope)

Aug 17, 2008 - 1:15 am 63. 2x4:

Fedya, I would admit that much more human progress has occurred under autocracies than democracies…

The only problem with that notion is that it occurred not because of it, but despite of it. Given enough time, even snakes grow wings.

Aug 17, 2008 - 1:23 am 64. buddy larsen:

right you all is. Ingraham, mum’s sage advice, the view from down under (that’s why women like ozzies, they kiss so good down under), and the grand new word I take to the rack wherst i must now needs flop: Theo-pomorphize. An authentic neologism, as good as “reintarnation” (being reborn as a hillbilly).

Aug 17, 2008 - 1:33 am 65. buddy larsen:

but first, this too apropos to not post –The New Age of Authoritarianism is here, and the folks at the NYTimes LIKE it! Big surprise!

Aug 17, 2008 - 1:46 am 66. bobal:

I would admit that much more human progress

I’d ask what is this ‘progress’ that is spoken of? Reinhold Niebuhr, when asked if mankind had made any progress, thought for a moment, and replied, “Well, in plumbing maybe.”

Aug 17, 2008 - 1:59 am 67. 2x4:

Bobal, there are rumors that when Reinhold Niebuhr said that, one of his cheeks appeared somewhat stretched out.

Aug 17, 2008 - 2:14 am 68. Kirk Parker:

whiskey,

You’re off base comparing Bobbit to Popcorn. I join with njcommuter in suspecting you haven’t actually read him. I highly recommend you do.

Aug 17, 2008 - 2:17 am 69. fedya:

@2×4:
relished “fast-setting Politically Correct epoxy”
Thank you, sir. I figured “epoxy” would be widely understood. Not a pleasant thought, is it?

even snakes grow wings.
NOW, who’s the poet?

@buddy larsen:
Kaczynski’s blast
Thanx fer reminding me. Much about it is spot on, except one durned thing I’d like to complain about, the one big lie that the Russkies seem to have spray-painted into most/many observers’ brains.

What I am referring to is this:

First, the author writes:
The Georgian Government was foolish in trying to retake South Ossetia by force, but Saakashvili claims there was repeated provocation by South Ossetian militias, acting under Russian orders.

Then, the author writes:
It is in any event clear that Putin had premeditated this invasion for some time.

OK. Tskhinvali is/was a garrison town with a military base full of Russian and so-call “Ossetian” forces located, oddly enough, in the middle of residences in town. Hmmm. It is NOT blindingly obvious that every participant knew that the Russian armour and naval forces, and air assets were not just poised to pounce, they were in motion, pouncing? Uh, right, no one knew for weeks and weeks. Not!

At that precise moment, it was a matter of existential survival for the Georgians to destroy the bridge at Tskhinvali, damage the road, and, perhaps, neutralisre facilities on the base. They had to wait until the Russian column was in motion for “Geopolitical considerations”.

However, think about it, when Russia moves an armoured column umpteen kilometres through a strategic point, they ain’t gonna let it fall into their oppponents’ hands, especially having been in a standoff with said opponents for years.

So, as the Russe armour passed thru the Roki Tunnel, Georgia knew they had but one brief opportunity to delay them before they hit the palin around Gori. That chance was not at the Roki tunnel; that had been secured for years. (duh) The opportunity was at Tskhinvali: take out the bridge, command centers, [and fuel dumps?]. But Georgia could not get troops near the place because of dug-in defenders (duh); they had no air support capable of challenging the “Ossetian” base defenses. However, Georgia did manage to emplace an artillery battery close enough to disrupt the bridge and stop the armoured column for hours.

Who knows what happened to that artillery unit? How did they get within range? Did they escape with their lives?

We can infer that they saved Georgia. They saved Georgia by giving Georgia the gift of a few precious hours. Hours to regroup. Hours to fall back IN ORDER. Hours to alert the Olympic-class snoozers of the “Press”. Hours to alert the civilian populace that “Ossetian” ethnic cleansers were falling upon them.

I hope to learn about that unit someday. But I’m sick at heart when I hear people write tripe like “Georgian Government was foolish in trying to retake South Ossetia by force”. What kind of ignorant fools this stuff? They have no critical faculties and they eagerly swallow the biggest lies first.

Aug 17, 2008 - 2:27 am 70. Fletcher Christian:

Actually, the end of history, or the prospect of it, may be the reason why the US is not being a great deal more aggressive over the Georgia situation.

Why is that? Because the end of history is actually a threat, rather than a hope. Not the end of history described by Fukayama, but the end of history described by Kahn, Sagan and others – the end of history that comes after, in Sagan’s words, “World War II once a second for the length of a lazy afternoon”; the end of history that comes to an Earth shrouded in clouds that make high noon as black as midnight; an Earth turned into a burned, blasted, radioactive snowball where nothing above the level of insects can survive, and not many of them.

There are still 30,000 or more nuclear weapons on Earth, still sitting in their submarine missile tubes, silos and bunkers. Above all else, we must keep them there. Provoking Russia is not a way to do that.

Aug 17, 2008 - 3:20 am 71. 2x4:

Provoking Russia is not a way to do that.

Provoking Russia… I see, we Czechs had the audacity to provoke Russia (SU incarnation) in 1968, by our silly experiment and we deserved what was coming to us, right?

How about Russia provoking everyone else, what then? Appeasement here and there, hoping you would be eaten last? At what point you draw a line?

Aug 17, 2008 - 3:44 am 72. 2x4:

Fedya, I thunk there’s a high degree of probability in your scenario. We don’t have (hope someone does, like our intel dudes) enough data to place it beyond the realm of speculation, yet.

Aug 17, 2008 - 3:54 am 73. 2x4:

One more thing, Christian Fletcher, I think you need these
http://www.superiordentalsupply.com/inc/pdetail?v=1&pid=519
while it’s sorted out.

Aug 17, 2008 - 4:02 am 74. Cannoneer No. 4:

I’m tired of pussy footing around the bear as if it will be our fault when he unleashes thermonuclear EOTWAWKI devastation. Crazy Ivan’s bluster has always targeted the weak, frightened, gutless betas who prefer obsequious collaboration to the risks of resistance.

Between “Better to die on your feet than live on your knees”

vs.

“Better Red than dead”

It is time for the bear to relearn that eagles have claws.

Aug 17, 2008 - 4:48 am 75. Cannoneer No. 4:

¡Prefiero morir de pie que vivir siempre arrodillado! — Emiliano Zapata

I prefer to die standing than to live forever on my knees.

Aug 17, 2008 - 4:54 am 76. nichevo:

Do you think Georgia made any mistakes? Say, in not alerting their patron beforehand?

Aug 17, 2008 - 5:04 am 77. LDG:

@fedya

re: your 2:27 am scenario

Based on what I know, that scenario is close to correct. But here’s the rub: Based on open source searches, I have reports of Gerogian Forces as of 7.August having “control of all of South Ossetia except for Java” — AFP story 8.Aug. What I don’t have, open source is any report of Russian Armor in motion inside South Ossetia prior to late 7.Aug, which would be necessary to have happened prior to Georgian Forces “taking” Tskhinvali, if I am following your scenario correctly.

Please do point out to me any misreading, or *any* open source claim of Russian Armor in motion prior to the bombardment of the “bridge” or region of Tskhinvali proper.

Thanks.

Aug 17, 2008 - 5:08 am 78. 2x4:

@nichevo

Their patron? Saint George?

Aug 17, 2008 - 5:44 am 79. Fletcher Christian:

Cannoneer:

Perhaps you do. Have you the right, however, to make that decision not only for everyone else on Earth, not only for other species that certainly don’t have anything to do with our disputes – but also for all the generations yet unborn?

Missile-rattling is not the way to solve this. It also probably isn’t the way to solve the problem of the jihadis, either. Keep them talking while we work on something that will cut off their power and resources at source. Keep them talking, and the nukes unexploded, while we work on energy independence – and then let’s see what Russia and Saudi Arabia are worth when oil is $10 per barrel.

Starvation is just as powerful a weapon, if slower, as any gun.

Aug 17, 2008 - 6:10 am 80. 2x4:

Fletcher Christian,

As the missile rattling is concerned, there was that from Russian side only, when threatening Poland with “you are now 100% nuclear weapons target”. Why? Because Poland decided to go for missile defense shield. Poland was not threatening Russia with nukes.

As far as I know, no one issued a similar threat vis-a-vis Russia. Please provide a source if I am incorrect.

Aug 17, 2008 - 6:34 am 81. Voltimand:

@F. Christian

Oh, please. “Keep them talking while we dot dot dot?”

They’re not talking and neither are the jihadis: both groups believe in one thing only, use of brutal force in the present as the preview of coming brutal force in the future are what they understand. (I do love your invocation of “generations yet unborn”: scratch a liberal and find a sentimentalist)

All this is a fist shoved in your face: “You got the cojones to come fight with us? If not, shut up and eat my leavings.” This is international machismo at its rawest. Every day the U. S. does not demonstrate readiness and willingness to use force the strength of the threat of use of brutal force becomes stronger on the world stage.

I’m beginning to suspect Bush is a prisoner of Rice, and Rice is a prisoner of the U. S. State Department which, being in the diplomacy biz has a professional interest in talking and never fighting. What’s eating at you FC is the standard liberal notion that wars get fought because all who fight them, including the U. S., do so because they’re macho muscle-flexers. “If we could just get the testorone level down on the international scene, everything will be all right.”

Watch the Sopranos: people who live by force and threats of force operate the way the Russians do. That’s why we deal with them through the police who carry weapons and not through social workers.

None of this is very complicated. The Russians signed a cease-fire agreement in an brazen act of saying “F..K you. Here’s my signature on that piece of paper, not get the hell out of my face. You want me to do what you want, make me.” For Rus this is the kind of mentality that makes for national pride, and national pride is much of what this is all about. The fall of the USSR has been rankling this recessive typs for years.

Aug 17, 2008 - 7:34 am 82. 3Case:

KGB assumption, in the conceit, is that the left wing of the Dem party, in full power in DC, will quite obliviously do their work for them.

Geez…it’s not like there ain’t 70-80 years worth of demonstrable work by Dems toward those ends.

I do feel that Albert Gore jr’s recount strategy innovation is the most mischievous development in recent American political history.

Albert Gore jr…went where even Richard Nixon wouldn’t tread.

Aug 17, 2008 - 8:16 am 83. buddy larsen:

What floats in the thin soup of moral equivalence is the Rus drive for ”regional security” (pardon the pomo punctuation), which basically amounts to “only we can prevent us from killing you & your loved ones”.

Gary Kasparov

(snip from essay. bolding mine)

“Although Mr. Saakashvili could hardly be called a model democrat, his embrace of Europe and the West is considered a very bad example by the Kremlin. The administrations of the Georgian breakaway areas of Abkhazia and South Ossetia are stocked, top to bottom, with bureaucrats from the Russian security services.

Throughout the conflict, the Kremlin-choreographed message in the Russian media has been one of hysteria. The news presents Russia as surrounded by enemies on all sides, near and far, and the military intervention in Georgia as essential to protect the lives and interests of Russians. It is also often spoken of as just the first step, with enclaves in Ukraine next on the menu. Attack dogs like Russian nationalist politician Vladimir Zhirinovsky are used to test and whip up public opinion. Kremlin-sponsored ultranationalist ideologue Alexander Dugin went on the radio to say Russian forces “should not stop until they are stopped.” The damage done by such rhetoric is very slow to heal.”

Aug 17, 2008 - 8:26 am 84. Doug:

What is known is that Georgian villages were being mortared more frequently priors to the move on Tskhinvali.
DOS claims they told Georgia to bend over and enjoy it.
I would have liked assurances that a B-2 would close the tunnel.

Aug 17, 2008 - 8:40 am 85. Doug:

Richard Nixon suffered from the affliction of being on our side.

Aug 17, 2008 - 8:46 am 86. Doug:

PJM has an audio in the last few days of Austin’s description of what Ukraine has to contribute to Soviet lust.
(also Austin interview of Gen Petraeus)
Agriculture, resources, Russian partisans, etc.
Leaves out item that moves me most:
Those women.
If they are allowed to roll there, I fear all is lost.
(that being… yes, you guessed it, those women)

Aug 17, 2008 - 8:58 am 87. Doug:

Kremlin Says Troops Will Begin Georgia Withdrawal
French President Nicolas Sarkozy told Russia that there would be “serious consequences” if Russian compliance with the accord was not rapid and complete.
—
Good to have “The Kremlin” in the headlines again.

Aug 17, 2008 - 9:04 am 88. Fletcher Christian:

Me a liberal? Hell, no. However, the fact of nuclear weapons (on both sides) cannot be ignored. If it wasn’t for the nukes, and for the fact that a large percentage of the US Army is otherwise occupied, I’d be shouting for action just like anyone else.

The people in power in all the Islamic fundie countries, and also in Russia, depend on their countries’ resources being highly valuable to stay in power. Whatever anyone does (whatever, that is, that doesn’t have a serious risk of leading to World War III) Russia is going to be in charge in the disputed region for the foreseeable future. And, incidentally, the jihadis are going to continue to be active while there is a cataract of money coming from Western countries, via Saudi Arabia, to them in exchange for their oil. Although it isn’t as important, Chavez’s posturings are made possible for the same reason, and so are the excesses of many other dictatorships including Nigeria. It is unfortunate that so many vital resources are located in totalitarian hellholes, but it is a fact that has to be lived with – for now.

Make oil much less valuable, and the problem goes away. Especially if, once their oil is not needed because all that is needed can be got from less unstable and/or brutal sources – then the civilised countries of the world just refuse to buy any from them. That’s when their leaders quit causing trouble and turn to saving their own skins; when the peoples of those countries find out that oil isn’t edible.

Incidentally, one of the possible routes to independence from thugs, bandits, warlords, terrorists and religious fanatics gives, as a side bonus, the capability to do something extremely final about it, with no nasty side-effects like fallout. The jihadis get uppity? Fine. Give them a nice present of a million tons of high-grade nickel steel. Straight down, at escape velocity. Need I mention where? As a further bonus, the same energy solution probably makes the nukes worthless, as well.

Scarce resources always cause trouble. One solution to that is to make those resources either less scarce or irrelevant or both. I haven’t heard of anyone fighting wars over high-quality flint deposits lately.

Aug 17, 2008 - 9:11 am 89. 2x4:

Did you all read:
Timeline – (How a flat tire started the war?)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/georgia/2570754/Georgia-conflict-How-a-flat-tyre-took-the-Caucasus-to-war.html

Whether there was a flat tire or not, the satellite images indicate a duplicity of Russian side.

Aug 17, 2008 - 10:32 am 90. Mike Sylwester:

OldSalt:
“War starts with a lie …. This guy is right out of the old leftist-Communie play book. … Words matter. What the FSB’s ‘Mike Sylwester’ is saying is arguably as damaging as the planes, tanks, and rapists that Russian is sending into Georgia. Those vehicles exist, because of the words – the lies. God Bless the Georgian’s.”
————-

So, if I have a different perspective than yours, then I am a liar and an FSB agent.

Putin is extremely popular in Russia. Not a lie.

Putin was elected President twice and would have been re-elected a third time if he had been allowed to run again. Not a lie.

The citizens of Russia who love Putin’s leadership want Russia to become a liberal democracy. Not a lie.

Since overthrowing the Communist regime, Russia has had to deal with many enormous difficulties on its path toward a liberal democracy. Not a lie.

Putin is popular because he has dealt with such problems decisively and effectively. Not a lie.

Russia is willing to deal and cooperate with Georgia as a fellow sovereign country and is not taking over Georgia. Not a lie.

Instead of smearing other commentators as liars and FSB agents, you ought to discuss the issues calmly and objectively. The Russians are not devils, and the Georgians are not angels. The Ossetians have valid national aspirations.

As long Russia has troops in South Ossetia protecting Ossetia from Georgians, Russia will not allow Georgia to become a NATO member. The basic ethnic conflict needs to resolved first, and it will take a long time and will not be done without cooperation between Russia and Georgia. Not a lie.

Aug 17, 2008 - 11:47 am 91. Mike Sylwester:

Konyok:
“Can you explain to me the benefits to the Russian people, institutions and political process of the federal president assuming the appointment of provincial governors?”
————

As I recall this issue, this change was made because there was gross and uncontrolled corruption in the provincial leaderships. Ne pravda li?

I don’t intend to get into arguments defending everything Putin has done. I suggest that you ponder Putin’s popularity and that you consider other explanations than that Russians are inherently evil, angry fools who love dictatorship and who want to reassemble the Soviet Union. The Russians perceive that Putin dealt with the country’s real problems in a decisive and effective manner.

Aug 17, 2008 - 11:54 am 92. Mike Sylwester:

tmjUtah:
“Just what part of “combating crime” is covered by shooting women in their apartments? What does recreating the court of the tsars have to do with improving any Russian’s freedom? He hasn’t improved the economy. Russia doesn’t export anything but vodka, mail order brides, prostitutes, and oil… and the money in oil just recently overshadowed the profitability of the women.”
———-

I wholeheartedly favor a full and frank accounting of all relevant events. Let’s study and document all atrocities on all sides. Let’s document all the suffering of all the Georgians and Ossetians, and let’s allocate blame. Let the chips fall where they may.

And in some cases, we might have to ask why Ossetian women too were attacked and chased from the homes and murdered and allocated the blame to Georgian thugs.

What did Russia export during the Yeltsyn years? High technology? Pharmaceuticals? Financial and consulting services? Art?

If Russia rejected Putin’s leadership and replaced him as with, say, Gary Kasparov, then would we suddenly see a boom in such exports?

The fact is that the economy under Putin’s leadership has improved strongly and steadily.

Aug 17, 2008 - 12:06 pm 93. LDG:

@2×4 (and fedya, so you need not reply)

Thank you, that reference from The Telegraph (UK) was just what I was looking for, and it sets right the inconsistancy of the proposed scenario. Substitute the ‘Kurta bridge and the sabotage effort’ in place of the ‘bridge and artillery’, and I’d say you’ve got it all open source now. Single source still, but something to work from.

Aug 17, 2008 - 2:52 pm 94. Bob Murphy:

Sylwester, the Russian economy has improved merely because the price of oil and gas has skyrocketed.
I wonder how much of that revenue gets down to the lumpen proletariat from the KGB gangsters running the circus.
And if the average Russian did get some crumbs, would they spend it on alcohol and die at an average age of 45, probably without reproducing?

Aug 17, 2008 - 3:28 pm 95. Mike Sylwester:

Bob Murphy:
“the Russian economy has improved merely because the price of oil and gas has skyrocketed.”
————

That is a major factor. Another is the improvement of law and order.

Aug 17, 2008 - 5:45 pm 96. fedya:

@LDG:
Well, “in motion” includes filling up the gas tanks, setting up formations at staging points, sending out small units to secure the route, eliminating potential adversaries along the route (lots of news establishing that, including inflammatory, unsubstantiated reports by The Bear, et al, of Georgian atrocities)… all the vast creaking-groaning that accompanies a major armored assault.

In this day and age of cel fones, is it not reasonable to presume that both sides knew with absolute certainty what the large scale movements of the other side were, albeit only broadly? What is amazing is that Georgia had artillery in range of Tskhinvali, was my point.

Other than that, I’m just reading tea leaves and blowing hot fumes, sorry.

Aug 17, 2008 - 6:41 pm 97. fedya:

@LDG:
So, now I see your note above. Just guessing, I’d say the Kurta bridge incident, itself an impressive feat of arms, better represents a serious choke point and hangup for the Russe.

Since there were multiple reports of neighborhoods in Tskhinvali being damaged by errant fire from both sides with reference to Georgians “bombing” a “bridge”, I assumed they referred to the main River bridge at Tskhinvali which could possibly be the only bridge South of Kurta capable of supporting armor.

The Kurta Bridge carries the big highway from Roki but there seems to always be an alternative, smaller road on the Western side of the river from there South. Taking out both big bridges would cramp Russkie freedom of movement to cross the river Eastward until they got further South than Tskhinvali and slow the whole thing down a lot.

Aug 17, 2008 - 6:58 pm 98. LDG:

@fedya

re: “Just guessing…”

not a problem. Just offering an opportunity to fine-tune your guesses a bit. Your understanding of the local geography does you credit.

Thank you most kindly for your replies.

Aug 17, 2008 - 9:58 pm 99. M. Simon:

Mike Sylwester,

Well I’ll buy that you are at least associated with the FSB.

So take this one back to them: the US gets trust because when asked to leave they do. Philippines, Saudi Arabia are recent examples. Iraq as soon as they ask.

Russia when asked to leave and agreeing to leave does not. In addition the current rampage in Georgia is not a confidence builder. Is shows a certain lack of discipline. Which is not law and order.

For 500 year Russia has sucked totally on grand strategy. It appears to be reverting to form. As to law and order: abrogating the contracts with outside oil companies is not a confidence builder. So you made a bad deal. Do better on the next contract. It builds confidence. Or if you really got cheated re-negotiate. Throwing the oil guys out looks bad and discourages new investment. Which you may not need now but who knows what the future will bring?

Aug 19, 2008 - 8:24 pm

Sorry, comments for this entry are closed at this time.