![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
For some reason, this scene has been playing in my head recently.
Which seems to sum up the mindset of people of a certain political persuasion who seem to think that Obama is a spineless wimp on foreign policy, and that the only proper response to Vlad Putin’s aggression in Crimea is to fire a few drone missiles up his ass.
Or … you know, something mighty.
Which seems to be their solution to every foreign policy crisis – just drop some bombs on them. It might not solve the problem, but it will show everyone that America is the greatest country in the world and what we say goes and you do NOT want to fuck with us because we will fuck yr shit up.
Because people respect you when you do that.
Anyway.
There’s a lot of talk about this, obviously. And a lot of it does seem to be happening in a vacuum created by a fundamental lack of understanding of the situation, the relationship between Russia and Ukraine, and how complicated the whole thing is.
So all I really have to say about it for right now is this:
1. The BBC has some good backgrounders summing up the situation. I highly suggest reading them.
2. For all the hawk blathering over the Obama admin’s pussy approach, a military response seems like a very, very bad idea, if only because I’m a child of the Cold War who equates War With Russia with World War III. That’s probably a grand overstatement of the current situation (see point 1, above). However, the pro-military approach seems predicated on the theory that Putin will back off once we show up with navy and air power to stop him. Maybe. But Putin doesn’t strike me as the kind of guy who blinks when you point a gun at him.
3. Ironically, this is one of Putin's more endearing qualities to the same people who criticize Obama’s lack of spine.
Sample:
Which is amusing when you remember that the GOP’s two biggest contenders to challenge Obama in 2012 were “Rugged” Mitt Romney and Rick “The Rock” Santorum.
Anyway, I don’t particularly have any problems with how Obama is handling the situation – at least so far. It’s too early to say if he’s doing the right thing or not. But I think it’s fair to say that he’s at least doing the most realistic thing, and he’s doing pretty much exactly what Mitt Romney would be doing if he was POTUS.
Even John McCain agrees with me that a military option is a no-go, although he does go on to say that Putin is only doing this because Obama’s foreign policy sucks so much:
Which I think means, “People would believe in America’s strength if we bombed countries that are NOT Russia, like everyone in the Middle East who is not Israel.”
Sure. Because Putin totally respected America after we invaded Iraq. Which is why he did not send troops into Georgia in 2008 when George "Shock And Awesome" Bush was running things.
Granted, the situation in Georgia was somewhat different than the one in Ukraine. Still, I’m not sure I’d want to go around saying things like “no one respects America’s authority anymore” if my political party is the one that thinks America can go around invading another country on completely trumped up pre-texts and still be respected.
Which just isn’t done in the 21st century. Just ask John Kerry. Although he was talking about Russia …
… Oh, f*** it.
Yr move,
This is dF
Which seems to sum up the mindset of people of a certain political persuasion who seem to think that Obama is a spineless wimp on foreign policy, and that the only proper response to Vlad Putin’s aggression in Crimea is to fire a few drone missiles up his ass.
Or … you know, something mighty.
Which seems to be their solution to every foreign policy crisis – just drop some bombs on them. It might not solve the problem, but it will show everyone that America is the greatest country in the world and what we say goes and you do NOT want to fuck with us because we will fuck yr shit up.
Because people respect you when you do that.
Anyway.
There’s a lot of talk about this, obviously. And a lot of it does seem to be happening in a vacuum created by a fundamental lack of understanding of the situation, the relationship between Russia and Ukraine, and how complicated the whole thing is.
So all I really have to say about it for right now is this:
1. The BBC has some good backgrounders summing up the situation. I highly suggest reading them.
2. For all the hawk blathering over the Obama admin’s pussy approach, a military response seems like a very, very bad idea, if only because I’m a child of the Cold War who equates War With Russia with World War III. That’s probably a grand overstatement of the current situation (see point 1, above). However, the pro-military approach seems predicated on the theory that Putin will back off once we show up with navy and air power to stop him. Maybe. But Putin doesn’t strike me as the kind of guy who blinks when you point a gun at him.
3. Ironically, this is one of Putin's more endearing qualities to the same people who criticize Obama’s lack of spine.
Sample:
On the March 3 edition of Fox News' Hannity, contributor Sarah Palin questioned the "potency" of President Obama saying, "People are looking at Putin as one who wrestles bears and drills for oil. They look at our president as one who wears mom jeans and equivocates and bloviates."
Which is amusing when you remember that the GOP’s two biggest contenders to challenge Obama in 2012 were “Rugged” Mitt Romney and Rick “The Rock” Santorum.
Anyway, I don’t particularly have any problems with how Obama is handling the situation – at least so far. It’s too early to say if he’s doing the right thing or not. But I think it’s fair to say that he’s at least doing the most realistic thing, and he’s doing pretty much exactly what Mitt Romney would be doing if he was POTUS.
Even John McCain agrees with me that a military option is a no-go, although he does go on to say that Putin is only doing this because Obama’s foreign policy sucks so much:
"This is the ultimate result of a feckless foreign policy where nobody believes in America's strength anymore," McCain said.
Which I think means, “People would believe in America’s strength if we bombed countries that are NOT Russia, like everyone in the Middle East who is not Israel.”
Sure. Because Putin totally respected America after we invaded Iraq. Which is why he did not send troops into Georgia in 2008 when George "Shock And Awesome" Bush was running things.
Granted, the situation in Georgia was somewhat different than the one in Ukraine. Still, I’m not sure I’d want to go around saying things like “no one respects America’s authority anymore” if my political party is the one that thinks America can go around invading another country on completely trumped up pre-texts and still be respected.
Which just isn’t done in the 21st century. Just ask John Kerry. Although he was talking about Russia …
… Oh, f*** it.
Yr move,
This is dF
