Heavy Fighting in South Ossetia

[Adrian II]

Insert NATO: With what?

We have all these nice European brigades, don't we? Almost all of them are from Nato member states. If we can't insert one or those at short notice, next to an American brigade, we are doing something very wrong. Which is probably the case. We've grown fat, lazy and dumb on free market dreams, and we've got crooks in power in European capitals, like Berlusconi who is openly taking Putin's side in this conflict.

Besides, a large part of western public opinion is cynical these days - not unlike yourself, Brenus - and adds nothing in the way of a constructive approach. Public thinking and speaking about politics has been replaced by passing judgment on politicians, or even on politics as a whole, as if it were some remote sphere of existence which you can opt out of if it doesn't suit you. Look how many posters in this thread think they can get away with lapidary judgments, as if the whole issue doesn't really concern them.

I agree completely with you that legally speaking, 'Georgia' is Putin's answer to 'Kosovo'. I also agree with McGruff that this is a matter of pure power politics (after all, that's what 'Kosovo' was, too) and should be dealt wth accordingly. Saakashvili has had his day in the sun, he blew it, and now it's up to international mediation to settle the issue. In order to get a balanced diplomatic result, a Nato presence must balance the Russian presence on the ground.

For clarity's sake: these Nato units should not be stationed in Georgia to protect silly Saakashvili, but to protect Nato interests. Just like the Russians are there not only to protect Ossetians and Abkhazians, but their own interests as well. And we should drop Bush' approach as per his last tv address. This is not about an attack on a sovereign country, it is about a a civil conflict that got out of hand and requires international mediation.