U.S., Allies Weigh Punishment for Russia

[thcbongman]

This was all caused by the west, not just US. When Billy blow job went to Bosnia and then all the rest of the west recognized them as an independent country apart from Serbia the seeds were sown for this. And Russia even predicted it when everybody OK'd the state of Bosnia. Just wait, the Ukraine is probably next. BTW, when are we finally going to get out of Bosnia, Christmas 1995 was a long time ago Billy.

Could you reiterate this? Georgia seceded from the Soviet Union in 1991. I don't quite get the connection.

It's such a shame that conflict is going down in Georgia. I heard it's has such beautiful landscape, like Central California without the ocean, now the landscape is getting destroyed by the bombs.

[birdgirl73]

Could you reiterate this? . . . . I don't quite get the connection.

I'm not sure you're talking to someone who got the connection in the first place, THCBongman. He doesn't seem to be aware that the Bosnia-Serbian situation was a human rights intervention that politicians on both sides of the political aisle would have intervened in, as they stated clearly. He doesn't seem to realize that we've been present in other countries like Japan since the 40s, so I'm not sure why he's making a big deal of our comparatively brief ongoing presence in Bosnia. This is part of McCain's point about our future involvement in Iraq lasting up to 100 years. We won't still be fighting wars in those places decades or centuries from now, as we're not in Bosnia, but it's completely routine for us and/or NATO (in the case of eastern Europe) to stay behind and see that things go the way we want them to.

It's hard to discuss stuff with folks who don't have the full picture.

EG420ne, I'll have to talk to you some other time about some other subject. You don't seem to realize that Secretary Rice is a diplomat, not a politician. She's never run for or held any type of political office.

[McDanger]

I got the connection. When the west recognized Bosnia as a Country separate from Yugoslavia the Russians, which backed the Serbs, complained about the west intervening in a civil war over territory. And now Russia is doing the exact same thing they say. That was the reason for the comparison.
And my gripe about us still being there (and we are still in Bosnia) was that Clinton said we would be out by Christmas 1995, but all we hear about is how long we have been in Iraq, well we have overstayed our promissed pull out date by almost 13years but nobody complains about that.

[birdgirl73]

Thank you for that very good clarification. My respect to you. You do seem to be familiar with the situation, which is good.

I had always been under the impression that Clinton meant we'd be out out of active military intervention in Bosnia by that timeframe but that oversight-monitoring (and protection of NATO)--as will be the case with oversight and protection of the reconstruction teams in Iraq, which will go on for a long, long time to come--might be ongoing. That's still an area of the world that's fairly tense from an "ethnic cleansing" standpoint, at least according to the last thing I read.

I can see why you'd be wondering about the similarities with the Russian actions.

I don't want this tension between us and Russia to be heightened. I was going to tag along with a team of medical folks to Russia next summer to have a look at some of their medical facilities. I figure that might not be possible now, but perhaps I'm being pessimistic. I don't much want to go if relations aren't easy.

[rebgirl420]

^ Don't go if there is a chance of being held hostage or something!

Dear god we need you here haha. However with your reasoning skills you might just be able to talk your way out of it!

[birdgirl73]

Only if I were held hostage in Mexico, Spain, France or an English-speaking country. I couldn't talk my way out of a sticky Russian situation to save my life . . . .

Dave and a couple of other people are going to read this, think for just a moment, then pick up the phone and buy me a first-class ticket to Moscow leaving tomorrow from Dallas!!

[rebgirl420]

Hahaha I have my name and John's in Russian on my wall. I can't speak a lick of it but I love the way it looks!

[Markass]

What we are going to have to do is print more money, establish military presence and fight off the russians. It's absolutely our job to police the world and make sure that people do what we want them to, at the expense of hardworking american taxpayers.

[rebgirl420]

This is funny in a bad way

[birdgirl73]

Hmmm. Now I know that's one way to look at it. And I certainly have lots of respect for you, Markass.

But this is a lot more complicated a situation than perhaps it seems. Relations with the other global superpowers like Russia and China literally do need to be relatively harmonious in order for the world economy to function well and for our economy to do so. And in the Middle East, we do have a vested interest over there--one that ultimately benefits our taxpayers and citizens and not just because of our dependence on Middle Eastern oil, either.

If we were to simply pull out and leave Iraq and Afghanistan to fend for themselves at this point, we'd leave them and ourselves much more vulnerable to terrorism than we would if we were to stay and finish our work and help with reconstruction of what we've dismantled. This is a lesson we learned after we left unfinished business after intervening in the Afghanistan-Russian conflict in the 80s. By not staying then and completing the Afghanistan reconstruction "end-game," as it was referred to by the officials involved (read the book or see the movie "Charlie Wilson's War"), we left that place vulnerable to the development of the Taliban and its connection with Al Qaeda. Same if we were to leave the Sudan to fend for itself. Often by not intervening, we could ultimately cost our citizens and taxpayers much, much more in security vulnerabilities.

Obviously, any reasonable person wishes we'd had solid actionable intelligence on Iraq in the first place and that we'd directed our resources more toward Afghanistan and Al Qaeda. But a very solid case can be made--no matter which end of the political spectrum you stand on--that we ourselves left Afghanistan vulnerable to the growth of terrorism in the first place.

There are quite literally dozens of situations like these in the world at any given time. Situations where we have to decide to intervene militarily or diplomatically or simply with U.S. assistance (usually money or food or both). When it's a human rights or health question, like the situation in Darfur or the AIDS problem in Africa or ethnic-cleansing, like in the Bosnia-Serbo-Croatian situation, the answer's often easier. Religious tolerance and disease control benefit us all. But in other situations, it's not as easy to understand the potential ramifications of involvement versus non-involvement, and we definitely have to pick and choose what we get involved in.

I just want to remind you to take a step back and look at the bigger picture involved than just what's defined by our borders. We're not an island. The world's more interconnected than ever, economically and medically and security-wise. That's what our leaders and diplomats are taking into consideration even though it may not seem that way when you're simply looking at it from a domestic standpoint. If we were to pull completely out of Iraq and that part of the world went to hell in a handbasket and gasoline began to cost $8.50 a gallon and our economy collapsed, we wouldn't have done right by American taxpayers then, either.

Hope this made sense. Sorry for such a long answer.