posted by ![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
orichalcum at 05:48pm on 09/08/2008 under politics
orichalcum at 05:48pm on 09/08/2008 under politicsIn ancient Greece, one of the big special aspects of the Olympics was that there was a Greece-wide truce for three weeks, and everyone agreed not to raid each other's cattle while their leaders were off racing chariots on the plains of Olympos. When the Olympics were restarted in 1896, the idea of the worldwide truce was raised again, and while not always adhered to, it has always been a goal.
Two days ago, Georgia (the country) seems to have taken advantage of the absence of Russian leaders to try and retake the capital of South Ossetia; Russia has responded by invading Georgia; at least 1500 civilians are already dead.
This has been described as a "3 AM" moment for the presidential candidates, as a moment of major foreign crisis, although of course both are hampered by not actually being able to do anything. Obama has taken the same position as Secretary Rice and the European governments in calling for negotiations and trying to ratchet down tensions on both sides. McCain has taken a different approach, placing the blame entirely on Russia and taking a strong pro-Georgia stance; he has compared Georgia to Kuwait in 1991. McCain's chief policy advisor, Randy Scheunemann, is, fwiw, a former lobbyist for Georgia (as well as one of the leading early proponents of the Iraq War).
I think this is indeed indicative of both their policies. I'm not sure that Obama (or Brown/Sarkozy/Rice/etc...) are taking a position which will effectively end the war here, but McCain's penchant for military options makes me very, very afraid. No one benefits from two countries with nukes engaging in war with each other - frankly, even if one side does have righteous justification on its side. And also, _we can't afford to make an enemy of Russia right now_ because we're already fighting two major wars. If the U.S. had huge numbers of combat-ready forces and a healthy budget, we might be in a better position to make threats.
George W. Bush, incidentally, is at the Olympics, apparently judging by Youtube footage, somewhat bored.
Two days ago, Georgia (the country) seems to have taken advantage of the absence of Russian leaders to try and retake the capital of South Ossetia; Russia has responded by invading Georgia; at least 1500 civilians are already dead.
This has been described as a "3 AM" moment for the presidential candidates, as a moment of major foreign crisis, although of course both are hampered by not actually being able to do anything. Obama has taken the same position as Secretary Rice and the European governments in calling for negotiations and trying to ratchet down tensions on both sides. McCain has taken a different approach, placing the blame entirely on Russia and taking a strong pro-Georgia stance; he has compared Georgia to Kuwait in 1991. McCain's chief policy advisor, Randy Scheunemann, is, fwiw, a former lobbyist for Georgia (as well as one of the leading early proponents of the Iraq War).
I think this is indeed indicative of both their policies. I'm not sure that Obama (or Brown/Sarkozy/Rice/etc...) are taking a position which will effectively end the war here, but McCain's penchant for military options makes me very, very afraid. No one benefits from two countries with nukes engaging in war with each other - frankly, even if one side does have righteous justification on its side. And also, _we can't afford to make an enemy of Russia right now_ because we're already fighting two major wars. If the U.S. had huge numbers of combat-ready forces and a healthy budget, we might be in a better position to make threats.
George W. Bush, incidentally, is at the Olympics, apparently judging by Youtube footage, somewhat bored.
(no subject)
(no subject)
(no subject)
Hrmph. You're assuming that the Chimp has anything to do with governing. I'm sure that Darth Cheney is fully capable of keeping himself amused without the Chimp's active involvement.