Until this past week, I bet 80% of Americans didn't even know this place exists.

How embarrassing.

Some people consider McCain the foreign policy choice, too. Doubly embarrassing for them.

"Until this past week, I bet 80% of Americans didn't even know this place exists."

Yet another elitist post from one of TNRLand's kool-aid drinkers.  Everyone knows Georgia is between Alabama and - well, one of them split Southern states.  Now, can we please get to issues that MATTER, like Obama's celebrity status?  Jeesh ...

Mike: but, seriously, do you have to sound like Eeyore all the time?  Remember Le Monde: "We are all 'Murcans now"?  Not that France was hoping to have two airliners ram into La Defense, but that they, like, shared the pain, OK?  McCain can't offer to do anything concrete, and so "we are all Georgians" has to do for now.  It does not mean "we are at war with Russia" or that "we would like to be at war with Russia"; it means "we have no intention of being at war with Russia and have no capacity to do anything in any event, but here is a band-aid and some liquid bromide to tide you over till the next time the Russian decide they feel like bombarding one of the satellite Republics."

I bet when most Americans heard that Russia had invaded Georgia, they probably thought back on "Red Dawn."

Today, we are all Patrick Swayze.

jbently,

Of course they did, Americans know that Georgia is directly north of Florida and its college team is ranked #1 in football.  What's shocking is the way Russia has managed to launch a trans-continental attack in a few short days.

Wait, Georgia's a COUNTRY??  I may have to rethink this.

D'OH.  Beaten to the punch by icarusr.

I bet at least 60% still don't (know that it exists).

McCain is in danger of looking as though he thinks foreign affairs are more important than issues right here in this country. That's not a good idea these days. But let him continue with that approach. Suits me fine.

Nobody remembers the lyric from the Beatles "Back in the U.S.S.R."?  

I think the McCain statement as a whole is pretty smart: it makes voters feel all warm and fuzzy about the U.S. but doesn't really say anything.  

Well, the Ukraine girls really knock me out--they leave the West behind. And Moscow girls make me scream and shout, and Georgia's always on my my my my my my my mind...

Oh, show me round your snow-peaked mountains way down south. Take me to your daddy's farm. Let me hear your balalaikas ringing out. Come and keep your comrade warm.

I'm back in the U.S.S.R.--you don't know how lucky you are, boy.

Back in the U.S.S.R...

Funny, there's at least one leading Democrat who supports this sentiment.

He's furious, and he's gone far beyond words, to level some very specific and real threats owing to his power as the Senate's leader on foreign and international economic policy: www.ft.com/.../707f4ebe-686b-11dd-a4e5-0000779fd18c.html

nb the threat to force "western financial institutions" to start exposing Putin and his fellow thieves' plundering of at least $200b in assets from dear old Mother Russia. Hit 'em where it counts.

There is certainly a sympathy for Georgia here, especially since they do like us. But I'm not going to emotionally involve myself too much in this conflict so as to make it a personal battle against Dmitry Medvedev/Vladimir Putin. And here I go again defending Judis -- I think it's relevant to mention McCain's personal hatred towards Putin and his temper in general. His heart is generally in the right place, but I don't know if he's level-headed enough to figure his way out of this one without making it worse.

"It hardly seems a winning message for McCain to imply that in their hearts the American people should consider themselves at war with Russia."

Hysterical!  When the French said after September 11 that "We are all Americans" was it because in their hearts they wanted to be the victim of a terrorist attack?  It's called empathy.

Anyway, according to Rasmussen, a majority of Americans apparently do support Georgia in the conflict, even though most don't think the U.S. should do anything about it.  Also, 76% of Americans are following the conflict.

rasmussenreports.com/.../59_see_russian_invasion_of_georgia_as_threat

But, you know, polls.

And this news from the BBC ought to be a bit embarrassing for the "freedom fries" rah-rah crowd:

-- Russia and Georgia have agreed a truce brokered by French President Nicolas Sarkozy, and have approved the principles of a full peace plan.

-- Mr Sarkozy, in his current role as EU president, held talks with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in Moscow for most of the day before flying to Tbilisi.

-- He held news conferences with both Mr Medvedev and Mr Saakashvili - with all three leaders saying they had agreed to a six-point plan.

news.bbc.co.uk/.../7557457.stm

That's a nice piece by Biden - he manages to make some pretty sharp, insightful points without getting all Cold War II like McCain the drama queen.

Yes, ndmackenzie,

But surely Sarkozy must have made SOME threats, told Putin and Medvedev that, "This cannot stand," insisted that, "The West will never cease resisting regime change in Tbilisi."  Something.  I mean, all the neo-cons keep assuring us that nothing whatever can be accomplished in foreign affairs in the absence of bellicose threats and ringing summons to defend the world against the latest incarnation of the Nazis.  St. Leon Wielseltier said so.  I am sure that we will soon learn how the French used their military power to bend the Russians to their will because that is the only thing the Russians understand.  You can read it here,

I think McCain is off the ranch at this point, and elite sectors in the US economy recognize the danger he represents. (How else can we explain the media coverage?)

He's quicky morphing into the FP equivalent of Goldwater.

If Obama can mine his modest roots (how about a few 30 second spots with Obama talking about how hard life was growing up on a scholarship while announcing a significant expansion in education grants and third level funding. Maybe even a clenched jaw or steely stare or two; give us some sense of the man's backbone) and stay to the Right of McCain on the obvious FP plays between now and November, then it's electoral college landslide time.

Please god. McCain/Rove is genuinely scary now.

All this makes Dick Morris look pretty goofy, his presidential toutee, and celebrated Russian expert, seems to have postioned the USA in a poor spot.

If she were in charge of the NFL, Brett Farve would be consigned to the L A Clippers.

Totally agree Woody.  How anyone can equate Biden and McCain's statements.

Just saw McCain do his "We are all Georgians now.." moment, and he looked like he enjoyed it way too much.  Goodie, goodie, the Cold War is back and it's 1955 again.  Hungary, Czechoslovokia and all that.  Back to the future.  

Irregardless of the merits of each side in this conflict, and the foreign policy challenges it creates (or reveals..) for the next President....in a strictly political sense, I don't think people want more war.  Cold, hot, or otherwise.  I think John McCain looks too comfortable facing down foreign foes and standing up to some percieved enemy, and I don't think that's where America wants to go.  Whether we should or not, we really, really don't want to.  We're pretty tired of the wars we have and we would like to finish up in Afganistan and get the hell home.  I don't think this works for John McCain, and Barack is probably on the more popular side of this issue by holding back a bit and encouraging negotiations.  It may or may not be the right side, but it is the side that most Americans are going to come down on.  I don't think McCain reassures Americans by looking for a war to fight.  Conventional Wisdom notwithstanding.

I am real sure the Georgians feel ever so much better now. This is an insult to them and to Americans. If we are Georgians then lets fight back. False bravado hoping to leverage Georgian agony so he can win the election. It is not empathy, it is assholery.

bigm, when the French said they were with America, they meant it, that meant that they themselves viewed themselves firmly on the side of the west when it comes to Islamic terrorism. It wasn't useless empathy, it meant that they themselves put themselves firmly in the cross eye of Al Qaeda. I can't believe you can't make this distinction since we have no intention of doing anything there, hell Bush hasn't even canceled a single event showing at the Olympics. Empathy? Horseshit. It is not even sympathy. It is a lie.

Is it presumptuous of a candidate to speak for "All Americans" when he is not yet President... I guess not.

But it is definitely presumptuous to speak as "A citzen of America, and a citzen of the World" in from of a crowd of Germans, right.

Huh...

Seriously though.  I'm no fan of Bush, but he is still the President.  Yes he was galavanting at the Olympics and shoulda hightailed it home to address this problem, but McCain conducted a press conference before the actual President of the United States did.  He was essentially acting as de facto President.  Where is the presumptuous meme?

If Obama had done such as thing Tep and his ilk would have screamed bloody murder.  

Stupid website cutoff.

Totally agree Woody.  How anyone can equate Biden and McCain's statements is beyond me.

"assholery" -- I like it.

Actually, I'm with Mike here.  I'm not sure how many populism points McCain expects to win with this "we're all Georgians now" crap.  I'm surprised McCain didn't declare the we're all South Ossetians now. Sheesh.  We weren't all Kuwaitis after Saddam invaded, but we took action.  Fake empathy with an obscure ally is not flattering.

"He was essentially acting as de facto president. Where is the presumptuous meme?"

lamh, that's a good question for Obama. McCain for sure would've highlighted it in a 30 second negative spot which would then be amplified by the MSM chattering class,  and forcing Obama to spend a week defensively fending off questions about his presumptuousness.

Maybe he's got a good plan but I just don't see why he passes up easy lay-ups on McCain. There's been too many of those.

I've read both McCain's and Obama's statements on the Georgia situation.  (both available on the NYT campaign blog "The Caucus")  They're actually pretty similar in content, though McCain takes time to deliver a primer on Georgian history and outline the current military situation in greater detail than Obama, whereas Obama specifically calls for a review of WTO membership for Russia.

To my mind the most jarring line in McCain's speech was this:

"Georgia is an ancient country at the crossroads of Eastern Europe and Central Asia, and one of the world’s first nations to adopt Christianity as an official religion."

This fact is relevant because...?  Would McCain's reaction be different if Russia invaded one of the several former Soviet republics whose dominant religion is Islam?  

scrubby,

Unfortunately like many aspects of this campaign  cycle, it would be a damned if he does/damned if he doesn't problem for Obama.

It would be too "presumptuous" of Obama to tell McCain about being presumptuous, just like it was "presumptuous" of Obama to run for president against the Clintons.  It's the same problem Obama has with criticizing McCain's military record.  That is something best left to surrogates, but unfortunately for Obama, his best surrogate is actually himself.  So he back to damned if he do/damned if he don't.

Don't worry too much aero, apparently much of that part of the speech came from Wikipedia:

blogs.cqpolitics.com/.../did-mccain-plagarize-his-speec.html

Quite the foreign policy heavyweight, eh?

aero he was just saying what he cut and pasted from wikipedia, and probably wasn't thinking too much about the relevance:

obsidianwings.blogs.com/.../oops.html

oh! this is also good, also from obsidian wings.

obsidianwings.blogs.com/.../shrunk.html

"We Are Georgians" is kinda a rip-off of "We Are Marshall".  I just have this image of the mccain war room looking for a good soundbite.  So some aide probably just watched Matt McConaughey and "We Are Marshall" and a light went off...

I'm a what now?

I'm having trouble focusing.  Didn't this start with Georgia's attempt to assert military dominance in South Ossetia, a region only part of Georgia on paper (and only on some paper at that) which has never been genuinely controlled, militarily or civilly or in any other way, by the Georgian republic?  Was I a Georgian then?  Well, hell if I know.  Russia tells of large-scale civilian casualties at the hands of my country's authorities in South Ossetia.  I know that Russia has a reason to lie and that it is capable of lying, and yet those two facts alone do not constitute proof that it is lying -- or, at any rate, wrong.

No, I don't trust Russia, and yes, Putin's a thug, and yes, I like the cut of Georgia's jib, but it's highly doubtful that Russia will attempt to occupy Georgia proper.  After years of tensions, it seems, Georgia has rather stupidly (with the kinda sorta maybe stupid acquiescence of my other country, says the NYT) brought the legal disposition of the breakaway territories to a head, perhaps falling into a Russian trap, and Russia stands poised to annex them.  That's a worst case.  And this is one Georgian who doesn't care whether South Ossetia, the residents of whom, I gather, overwhelmingly want nothing to do with Georgia, ends up having nothing to do with Georgia.

So, yes, I'm unimpressed with McCain's insipid and impotent attempt at rhetorical goose-bumpery.  When JFK said that he was a Berliner, it was backed with policy.  McCain might as well have given a volley ball player a little slap on the lower back.  I, for one, would be interested in less talky-talky -- particularly of the bellicose and counterproductive and pointless Cold War-ish kind -- and more thinky-thinky.  Or, put another way, the cool art of strategery and diplomacery -- taken up in this case, I gather, by the French.

Meanwhile, I don't recall anyone -- including my enthusiastic choice for president -- suggesting that I am a Darfuri -- now or ever.

What blackton said, exactly.

And the Christianity line, ripped from wikipedia or not, was jaw-dropping.

But somehow, McCain is the deep-thinking, substantive, foreign policy "adult" in this race.

How odd these anti-McCain comments from Obama supporters are. Georgia is an emerging pro-Western democracy of real significance to Europe and the West. Russia is clearly attempting to intimidate former clent states by thrashing Georgia. Wasn't it Obama who wanted to speak at the Brandenburg Gate, to reprise Kennedy's and Reagan's speeches regarding the lifting ot state tyrannies? McCain's comments--substantively and rhetorically--are closer to those speeches that Obama sought to reference than are the comments here or Obama's own original position on the Russia-Georgia conflict--though he has now essentially shifted to take McCain's position.

See also Biden's comments on the Russia-Georgia conflict, which put him in the same stance as McCain.

When do we get to discuss McCain's infidelity (which was at least as bad as Edwards')?

I have argued with my russian girlfriend and another russian co-worker about who's at fault long and hard.  I am utterly shocked at the typical American's ignorance of this event.  This is a potential watershed event in the post-cold war era.  Had Georgia been a NATO member, we could potentially be seeing WWIII break out.

As this conflict unfolds, Obama's idiotic foreign policy becomes more and more naive.  "Engage high leadership in talks? " Are you out of your freaking head? Bush had a heated conversation with Putin.  Where'd that get us? Thugs like Putin and his dog Medvedev know nothing but strength and power.  Teddy Roosevelt knew this.  Obama clearly doesn't.  Obama's strategy is to "Speak softly and beg. "

This is McCain trying to pull an Obama without the trouble of flying all  the way to Berlin.

Unfortunately, it happened in the middle of the Olympics, so the news cycle doesn't favor him.

Russia never had any intention of occupying Georgia.  This was a shot across the bow, a declaration that "we are not a paper tiger."  It worked.  The power that only showed hollow bellicosity was, well, us--or at least the leader of the Republican party.  Thanks, John.  As if we didn't already know that Russia is a dangerously armed kleptocracy.

Welcome back the the Great Game.

mbholman

What infidelity is that? If there was a story there, it would be on the first freaking page of the NY Times.  What I'm shocked at is the utter lack of coverage on Edwards.

blackton:

What would you have Bush do? He called Putin and had a shouting match with him.  The next step is to call up the USS Ronald Reagan aircraft carrier.  And you, of course, would be totally up for that now wouldn't you?

For an intelligent summary of the situation, see

www.rferl.org/.../1190188.html

scire:

This issue IS a hell of a lot more important than some old geezer's health care right now, ok? You people think you live in some vacuum and can spend every nickel and dime of the budget on "social programs" and planting trees and whatever.  A resurgent Russia is a threat to its satellites and to the spread of democracy in the region.  Here is a country that is a poster boy for the pro-American ally.  And we are leaving it to be battered by corrupt thugs.  

Here's to hoping that more Russians drink themselves to death in celebration.  Warfare isn't necessary when their average life expectancy is around 50 and their male population is shriveling.

Woody's exactly right.

The difference between Biden and McCain on Georgia is that Biden offers an insightful analysis, whereas McCain offers mawkish sentiment and empty slogans.  

Unfortunatley, it is the latter that wins you a nomination for President.

Sure, some defenders of McCain here see his "We are Georgians" remark as essentially harmless - a thoughtful expression of empathy.  I wonder if the residents of Tbilsi agree.

JWL says "Had Georgia been a NATO member, we could potentially be seeing WWIII break out."

That's one way of looking at it.  But isn't it just as fair to observe that if Georgia had been a NATO member, there's no way in the world that Putin would have invaded?

"Ich bin ein Tbilis'er"? The Cold War just ain't what it used to be.

jwl, please, do you want to go to war in Georgia? That is the only way to show our strength and power. By all means, get on the next plane to Turkey, smuggle yourself into Georgia and become a partisan, otherwise shut the hell up with your false bravado.

"Had Georgia been a NATO member, we could potentially be seeing WWIII break out."

Had Georgia been a NATO member, it would never have been allowed to use force in Ossetia on the Russian border.

"Had Georgia been a NATO member, we could potentially be seeing WWIII break out."

That's about as fatuous a statement about US foreign policy as is possible to make.  Even in the thick of the Cold War, it was never clear that the US would trade LA and NY for West Berlin, if it ever came to that.  This is why France maintained its indepedent nuclear capacity - to make sure that the US would be dragged into a war if indeed the Soviets attacked Western Europe.  So, even if Georgia had been a Member of NATO and had - independently of NATO - sent troops into South Ossetia, and even if Russia had invaded it, it is not at all clear that the US would be prepared to sacrifice Dallas, Houston and Atlanta - not to mention LA and NYC - for Tbilisi, or Gori.

I mean, honestly, can you imagine France sending the Richelieu to the Black Sea and risking nuclear bombardment of Bordeaux to protect the vineyards of Georgia?

This kind of bellicose arm-chair strategizing on the basis outdated Cold War models, hyperheated bravado, multi-layered conditionals and abject ignorance is precisely what we could expect from a mindset addled by excess testosterone; this is not how you win and maintain Empires.  Incidentally, Teddy Roosevelt said, "SPEAK SOFTLY and carry a big stick", not brandish loudly a stick you can't and won't ever use.

Well said Icarus. This whole episode has our little armchair generals over excited and sadly, I include McCain in that who's sounding like JWL more and more everyday.

jwl, I said above what I think is fair, let abkhasia and south Ossetia have referendums for independence, afterwards give Georgia full entry into NATO. These areas are already controlled by Russia, the people have Russian passports and use the Ruble. It makes no sense to give NATO membership to a country that doesn't have full possession of its own country. I think this solution recognized reality on the ground and cuts the nuts out of Putin. He won't have any excuse to meddle in Georgia or have opportunity since he won't be in control of any parts of Georgia.

Now this is a solution. And citizenghost is absolutely right, if we had a NATO base no way in hell would Russia have invaded. However, because of the two breakaway provinces, I am not in favor of them being part of NATO. Let them be Russia's problem, let Georgia be for Georgians.

Looks like Bush is slicker than you people give him credit for.  He's sending the US military to deliver humanitarian aid to Georgia.  This signals to the Russians that we're not going to stand idly by while they go nuts.  It also signals to Georgia that we're still on their side and we have troops on the ground, all the same time under the guise of humanitarian aid just so we don't "offend" the damned Russians.

US power still carries a lot of weight in the world.  I prefer a president who wields it with authority instead of a feckless one who'd let opinion polls wield it for him.

Secession is a very sketchy subject.  I imagine most of you are for the North in the Civil war.  That war was fought to prevent the south from seceding from the union.  If you're for them, then by parallel logic, you absolutely must be for Georgia, especially since it was the Russians who've been providing the breakaway provinces with arms and passports and support.

I know I'm being contradictory.  Because while I support Georgia's right to reunite their country, I also support Taiwan's right to be an independent country from China.  In secession, you pick the side who's your ally.

yes, jwl, and it is because of the perception that the US behaves exactly in this manner that you suggest -- exploiting international law and institutions on an ad hoc basis to advance its own particular interests and those of its clients -- that our prestige in international affairs has withered to nothing.

Apart from whatever succor it may give the Georgians, the "humanitarian aid" is not for the purpose of impressing the Russians that "we will not stand idly by."  It is for the purpose of covering our own nakedness, a fig leaf for us, not for them.  It is perfectly obvious to all that we are going to stand idly by.  The Russians are no doubt more concerned about their commercial relations with Western Europe than they are about anything we might do.  

roidubouloi:

What international law and institutions do you think we have flaunted that caused Russia to invade Georgia? Where's Russian respect for "international law and institutions? " Did you know last year when Saakashvili called Putin and told him about the support from the EU and the US that Putin told him where to shove the support? "

I didn't say that our flouting of international law "caused" the invasion of Georgia.  But our flouting of the Security Council in order to invade Iraq pretty well killed it as a tool of international law.  We made it clear to the entire world that we invoke international law as and when convenient to ourselves and for no other reason -- and ignore it too when we see fit.  That didn't cause the invasion, it just makes it impossible for us to lead world opinion to create pressure to stop it.  We have no credibility to do so.  

We have by our conduct, including our inattention to all power other than military power, debased the value of our "support" and patronage.  For that very reason, it surprises me not at all that Putin would tell Saakashvili to shove it.  In a situation where we do not have military power to bring to bear, we therefore have nothing.  Yet you and the neo-cons are astonished by this turn of events, proving yet again that y'all are incapable of thinking more than one move ahead on the global chess board.

I agree with roi that the Security Council is dead as a tool of "international law". What killed it was the abject betrayal of its intended purpose by Chirac. Any attempt to excuse naked Russian aggression in terms of our action in Iraq are morally and intellectually bankrupt.

Georgia is hardly Ba'athist Iraq, and Putin's Russian is very far from being the USA, even as ruled by Darth Cheney and his wonderchimp pet Dubyah. Some chessboard.