<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Georgia and Russia, Explained</title>
	<atom:link href="http://emergentink.com/2008/08/14/georgia-and-russia-explained/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://emergentink.com/2008/08/14/georgia-and-russia-explained/</link>
	<description>greater than the sum of its parts</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 11:13:03 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: JumpinGeehossiFat</title>
		<link>http://emergentink.com/2008/08/14/georgia-and-russia-explained/comment-page-1/#comment-437</link>
		<dc:creator>JumpinGeehossiFat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2008 23:55:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://emergentink.com/?p=202#comment-437</guid>
		<description>Ploy may be the wrong word in that I think the NeoCons who advise McSame actually think they are doing the best thing for the USA by attempting to revive the cold war. Lets just say there appears (to them) to be a wonderful intersection between their global desires and McSame's need for posturing and they have been quick to take advantage of that intersection. The question, for me, with McSame is it the same as with Bush; is he just ignorant and being used or is he actually in agreement with the Neocons. Thats a question that also applies to Bush and the Iraq war and one that I have not really had answered yet. I think in both cases the ego and the lack of intellectual curiosity has allowed them to be "believers" but I am not sure; then again it doesn't really matter much does it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Ploy may be the wrong word in that I think the NeoCons who advise McSame actually think they are doing the best thing for the USA by attempting to revive the cold war. Lets just say there appears (to them) to be a wonderful intersection between their global desires and McSame&#8217;s need for posturing and they have been quick to take advantage of that intersection. The question, for me, with McSame is it the same as with Bush; is he just ignorant and being used or is he actually in agreement with the Neocons. Thats a question that also applies to Bush and the Iraq war and one that I have not really had answered yet. I think in both cases the ego and the lack of intellectual curiosity has allowed them to be &#8220;believers&#8221; but I am not sure; then again it doesn&#8217;t really matter much does it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Juventus</title>
		<link>http://emergentink.com/2008/08/14/georgia-and-russia-explained/comment-page-1/#comment-435</link>
		<dc:creator>Juventus</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2008 19:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://emergentink.com/?p=202#comment-435</guid>
		<description>Just a question to whomever would like to answer. Gathering from both post, you both feel this has been in the works for sometime. I understand lives are at stake here with the Russia/Georgia attack. Collateral damage seems to have never been an issue for many governments, it appears including our own. I came across an interesting post and wondered could this be a huge ploy? Here is a link from another persons perspective:

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080812_georgia_war_a_neocon_election_ploy/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just a question to whomever would like to answer. Gathering from both post, you both feel this has been in the works for sometime. I understand lives are at stake here with the Russia/Georgia attack. Collateral damage seems to have never been an issue for many governments, it appears including our own. I came across an interesting post and wondered could this be a huge ploy? Here is a link from another persons perspective:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080812_georgia_war_a_neocon_election_ploy/" rel="nofollow">http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20080812_georgia_war_a_neocon_election_ploy/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: paul</title>
		<link>http://emergentink.com/2008/08/14/georgia-and-russia-explained/comment-page-1/#comment-434</link>
		<dc:creator>paul</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2008 17:21:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://emergentink.com/?p=202#comment-434</guid>
		<description>A couple of additional points, though I am mostly in agreement with your analysis of the Stratfor analysis.

I think the oil pipeline is a bigger deal, and it's being masked by the bluster about "invading democracies" in the same way that we do not really care how "democratic" Saakashvili is, in other words as long as he's signing deals to ship oil through his country (and not through Russia) then he can do what he wants to South Ossetians and Abkhazians. And that's a mistake on our part, one we have historically made.

The other big mistake we have been making with Russia has been that since the collapse of the Soviet Union, we have tried to take advantage of their situation, exploit their weakness, and that has not played well over there. We could have been much more helpful towards them and looked for partnerships around the world instead of writing them off as a threat. We also underestimated whether they could come back, and now they are a threat, an economic and military threat (though their athletic machine isn't making much of an impression in Beijing), and we are unprepared to deal with them. We are in a position of weakness and dependence both militarily and economically that they can exploit at their leisure.

The Poland deal was already greeted by Russian generals talking about how this has decreased the level of security for Poland, made it less safe from the threat of invasion. I don't see Russia allowing those missiles to go into place. This is how wars start.

Finally, McCain's response is inappropriate and wrong, and complicated by his association with Scheunemann. It is time for Americans to realize that McCain is a man who served his country with honor in Vietnam, but he is not a military or strategic genius. Presidential candidates need to SHUT UP when it comes to crises in the midst of election campaigns. And they need to have an understanding of the situation and what our realistic options are. The way McCain talks, it is clear that he does not understand the current situation. What Obama has said about this situation is more in line for what a presidential candidate should be saying right now, and also happens to be more in line with what our capabilities for response and actual options are at the present time.

The McCain campaign has criticized Obama for his Berlin speech, for acting as if he was already president. What McCain has done in the past week is dangerously approaching an Alexander Haig "I'm in control here" moment. And by that I intend no disrespect for the former Secretary of State and NATO Supreme Commander.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A couple of additional points, though I am mostly in agreement with your analysis of the Stratfor analysis.</p>
<p>I think the oil pipeline is a bigger deal, and it&#8217;s being masked by the bluster about &#8220;invading democracies&#8221; in the same way that we do not really care how &#8220;democratic&#8221; Saakashvili is, in other words as long as he&#8217;s signing deals to ship oil through his country (and not through Russia) then he can do what he wants to South Ossetians and Abkhazians. And that&#8217;s a mistake on our part, one we have historically made.</p>
<p>The other big mistake we have been making with Russia has been that since the collapse of the Soviet Union, we have tried to take advantage of their situation, exploit their weakness, and that has not played well over there. We could have been much more helpful towards them and looked for partnerships around the world instead of writing them off as a threat. We also underestimated whether they could come back, and now they are a threat, an economic and military threat (though their athletic machine isn&#8217;t making much of an impression in Beijing), and we are unprepared to deal with them. We are in a position of weakness and dependence both militarily and economically that they can exploit at their leisure.</p>
<p>The Poland deal was already greeted by Russian generals talking about how this has decreased the level of security for Poland, made it less safe from the threat of invasion. I don&#8217;t see Russia allowing those missiles to go into place. This is how wars start.</p>
<p>Finally, McCain&#8217;s response is inappropriate and wrong, and complicated by his association with Scheunemann. It is time for Americans to realize that McCain is a man who served his country with honor in Vietnam, but he is not a military or strategic genius. Presidential candidates need to SHUT UP when it comes to crises in the midst of election campaigns. And they need to have an understanding of the situation and what our realistic options are. The way McCain talks, it is clear that he does not understand the current situation. What Obama has said about this situation is more in line for what a presidential candidate should be saying right now, and also happens to be more in line with what our capabilities for response and actual options are at the present time.</p>
<p>The McCain campaign has criticized Obama for his Berlin speech, for acting as if he was already president. What McCain has done in the past week is dangerously approaching an Alexander Haig &#8220;I&#8217;m in control here&#8221; moment. And by that I intend no disrespect for the former Secretary of State and NATO Supreme Commander.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: JumpinGeehossiFat</title>
		<link>http://emergentink.com/2008/08/14/georgia-and-russia-explained/comment-page-1/#comment-433</link>
		<dc:creator>JumpinGeehossiFat</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Aug 2008 16:14:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://emergentink.com/?p=202#comment-433</guid>
		<description>I respect Stratfor and always wished I could afford a membership to their site. Its interesting that they don't even mention the oil pipeline in their analysis. I think the analysis is largely correct and that the oil pipeline is just a side bonus compared with the far more important (to Russia) aspect of NATO encirclement. 

Sratfor didn't really go deep here in IMHO. Did Putin really not understand that his attack would put the final ink on a deal for US anti-missile missiles in Poland (signed today)? Or did he calculate that agreement was already a done deal and so it didn't matter? Or is there actually domestic political positives for Putin in the US arming Poland? I don't know the answers but would like to have heard some discussion on that.

What Stratfor doesn't mention is the US domestic political situation and how it played into all this. McSame desperately wanted Georgia to trigger the Russian invasion in order to allow McSame to posture. The revival of the Cold War is perceived as a major bonus by the McSamiacs for McSame's campaign.

Witness:
McSame claims to have been talking to Saakashvili every day.
McSame placing Georgia in the context of the cold war and himself in the context of Kennedy with the comment "We are All Georgians".

Note that the traditional response by presidential candidates to a foreign crisis is at least silence if not vocal support for the sitting president and yet, "Sen. John McCain has been unusually outspoken about a foreign crisis. In fact, he beat President Bush to a statement on Georgia."

Then there is Randy Scheunemann, McSame's top friegn policy advisor. Randy was, until quite recently, a paid lobbyist working for the Georgian government.

I wanted to include some links but will have to revisit this post as its lunch time. Suffice it to say that it appears likely that McSame's surrogates (if not McSame himself) put Saakashvili up to triggering the Russian invasion and clearly the entire fiasco of NATO membership for Georgia is another Neo-Con wet dream; apparently one foreign disaster (the MidEast) was not enough for Kristol and that ilk, they will not rest until their delusions have entirely destroyed our country.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I respect Stratfor and always wished I could afford a membership to their site. Its interesting that they don&#8217;t even mention the oil pipeline in their analysis. I think the analysis is largely correct and that the oil pipeline is just a side bonus compared with the far more important (to Russia) aspect of NATO encirclement. </p>
<p>Sratfor didn&#8217;t really go deep here in IMHO. Did Putin really not understand that his attack would put the final ink on a deal for US anti-missile missiles in Poland (signed today)? Or did he calculate that agreement was already a done deal and so it didn&#8217;t matter? Or is there actually domestic political positives for Putin in the US arming Poland? I don&#8217;t know the answers but would like to have heard some discussion on that.</p>
<p>What Stratfor doesn&#8217;t mention is the US domestic political situation and how it played into all this. McSame desperately wanted Georgia to trigger the Russian invasion in order to allow McSame to posture. The revival of the Cold War is perceived as a major bonus by the McSamiacs for McSame&#8217;s campaign.</p>
<p>Witness:<br />
McSame claims to have been talking to Saakashvili every day.<br />
McSame placing Georgia in the context of the cold war and himself in the context of Kennedy with the comment &#8220;We are All Georgians&#8221;.</p>
<p>Note that the traditional response by presidential candidates to a foreign crisis is at least silence if not vocal support for the sitting president and yet, &#8220;Sen. John McCain has been unusually outspoken about a foreign crisis. In fact, he beat President Bush to a statement on Georgia.&#8221;</p>
<p>Then there is Randy Scheunemann, McSame&#8217;s top friegn policy advisor. Randy was, until quite recently, a paid lobbyist working for the Georgian government.</p>
<p>I wanted to include some links but will have to revisit this post as its lunch time. Suffice it to say that it appears likely that McSame&#8217;s surrogates (if not McSame himself) put Saakashvili up to triggering the Russian invasion and clearly the entire fiasco of NATO membership for Georgia is another Neo-Con wet dream; apparently one foreign disaster (the MidEast) was not enough for Kristol and that ilk, they will not rest until their delusions have entirely destroyed our country.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
