<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Of liberal bile and conservative wit and wisdom</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/09/05/of-liberal-bile-and-conservative-wit-and-wisdom/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/09/05/of-liberal-bile-and-conservative-wit-and-wisdom/</link>
	<description>Conservatives deal with facts and reach conclusions; liberals have conclusions and sell them as facts.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Feb 2012 13:48:25 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: BrianE</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/09/05/of-liberal-bile-and-conservative-wit-and-wisdom/comment-page-2/#comment-28966</link>
		<dc:creator>BrianE</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2008 16:03:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3626#comment-28966</guid>
		<description>dg said:
&lt;blockquote&gt;The Chinese understand that a united Korea would be aligned with the US and could put such missiles on their border. &lt;/blockquote&gt;

And the purpose of that would be?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>dg said:</p>
<blockquote><p>The Chinese understand that a united Korea would be aligned with the US and could put such missiles on their border. </p></blockquote>
<p>And the purpose of that would be?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dg</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/09/05/of-liberal-bile-and-conservative-wit-and-wisdom/comment-page-2/#comment-28779</link>
		<dc:creator>dg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 22:36:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3626#comment-28779</guid>
		<description>By the way, if you ask intelligent Chinese why they are not in a hurry to facilitate the fall of the dictatorship in North Korea, which they clearly could given their control of energy supplies (e.g., natural gas) into the hermit kington, they will point to the negotiations to put missiles in Poland.  Ostensibly targeting Iran, they can be as easily used as offensive weapons against Russia.  The Chinese understand that a united Korea would be aligned with the US and could put such missiles on their border.  Sometimes you get the opposite result that you want...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>By the way, if you ask intelligent Chinese why they are not in a hurry to facilitate the fall of the dictatorship in North Korea, which they clearly could given their control of energy supplies (e.g., natural gas) into the hermit kington, they will point to the negotiations to put missiles in Poland.  Ostensibly targeting Iran, they can be as easily used as offensive weapons against Russia.  The Chinese understand that a united Korea would be aligned with the US and could put such missiles on their border.  Sometimes you get the opposite result that you want&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dg</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/09/05/of-liberal-bile-and-conservative-wit-and-wisdom/comment-page-2/#comment-28778</link>
		<dc:creator>dg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 22:32:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3626#comment-28778</guid>
		<description>Wow.  There is only one possibility for my thinking:  that non-Americans are blameless, Americans are evil and I am deluded.  Nice logic there, Danny...

How about Real Politik?  You know, that long-standing philosophy of international relations that even Republicans from Kennan through Scowcroft have adhered to.  That theory would say that Russia absolutely would have invaded its adjacent neighbor even if Georgia were in Nato to maintain a buffer around its country and prevent the US from installing missiles on its border--do you really think we&#039;d let the Mexicans put Soviet missiles 5 miles from El Paso or are you completely unaware of the Cuban Missile Crisis??  The Russian foreign minister two weeks ago stated dryly that the US rhetoric about supporting democracies in the Caucusus is merely that, because they know that the US is not prepared to go to war over it; however, Russia is.  Proximity matters, as military strategists since Clauswitz and Sun Tzu have known for centuries.  I think you are being naive, with all due respect.

As for my logic, I think that there are foolish Americans and foolish foreigners.  I am not passing judgment but merely running through the game theoretic results that will flow from our taking a stand in a country that we are not prepared to lose many more lives than the Iraq War has taken, and the Russians, who know this, will not be deterred.  That is why I said the policy is foolish.  

The reason I took a shot at Cheney is because there are lots of other aspiring democracies to support, but we seem to only give legitimacy to the aspirations of those with oil assets.  Now, I actually do not have a problem with this policy, since it is what Realpolitik would prescribe---except in the case of Georgia because the stakes are too high even factoring in the pipeline.  But I would really appreciate a little more honesty.  Straussians, as you may know, do not like honesty, because they believe the masses should remain in the dark, deluded by the patriotic rhetoric and propaganda of their governments.  But I&#039;m not a Straussians nor even a neo-con, and I find the double-speak on supporting young democracies highly hypocritical.

That is my story.  And, hopefully, you can see that it isn&#039;t the simple, liberal caricature that conservatives feel so comfortable attacking.  Straw men, straw men, everywhere...too easy to be taken seriously.  Sorry.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wow.  There is only one possibility for my thinking:  that non-Americans are blameless, Americans are evil and I am deluded.  Nice logic there, Danny&#8230;</p>
<p>How about Real Politik?  You know, that long-standing philosophy of international relations that even Republicans from Kennan through Scowcroft have adhered to.  That theory would say that Russia absolutely would have invaded its adjacent neighbor even if Georgia were in Nato to maintain a buffer around its country and prevent the US from installing missiles on its border&#8211;do you really think we&#8217;d let the Mexicans put Soviet missiles 5 miles from El Paso or are you completely unaware of the Cuban Missile Crisis??  The Russian foreign minister two weeks ago stated dryly that the US rhetoric about supporting democracies in the Caucusus is merely that, because they know that the US is not prepared to go to war over it; however, Russia is.  Proximity matters, as military strategists since Clauswitz and Sun Tzu have known for centuries.  I think you are being naive, with all due respect.</p>
<p>As for my logic, I think that there are foolish Americans and foolish foreigners.  I am not passing judgment but merely running through the game theoretic results that will flow from our taking a stand in a country that we are not prepared to lose many more lives than the Iraq War has taken, and the Russians, who know this, will not be deterred.  That is why I said the policy is foolish.  </p>
<p>The reason I took a shot at Cheney is because there are lots of other aspiring democracies to support, but we seem to only give legitimacy to the aspirations of those with oil assets.  Now, I actually do not have a problem with this policy, since it is what Realpolitik would prescribe&#8212;except in the case of Georgia because the stakes are too high even factoring in the pipeline.  But I would really appreciate a little more honesty.  Straussians, as you may know, do not like honesty, because they believe the masses should remain in the dark, deluded by the patriotic rhetoric and propaganda of their governments.  But I&#8217;m not a Straussians nor even a neo-con, and I find the double-speak on supporting young democracies highly hypocritical.</p>
<p>That is my story.  And, hopefully, you can see that it isn&#8217;t the simple, liberal caricature that conservatives feel so comfortable attacking.  Straw men, straw men, everywhere&#8230;too easy to be taken seriously.  Sorry.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Danny Lemieux</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/09/05/of-liberal-bile-and-conservative-wit-and-wisdom/comment-page-1/#comment-28775</link>
		<dc:creator>Danny Lemieux</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 22:09:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3626#comment-28775</guid>
		<description>DG - Russia didn&#039;t invade Georgia because if felt threatened by Georgia. They wouldn&#039;t have invaded Georgia if Georgia had been part of NATO because the stakes would have been too high. They invaded Georgia because they could get away with it and...they were right. If Obama (Mr. Zero) gets elected, there will be much more of this because...Russia will know that they can get away with it. Putin will eat Obama for breakfast.

This is not new, by the way - Russia has been doing this for hundreds of years.

&quot;But, of course, there is a gas pipeline hanging in the balance, not to mention big contracts to Halliburton, so maybe it is a little more rational (albeit still treasonous) of a policy than meets the eye. No wonder Cheney is in favor also…&quot;

- so, let me get this straight. It is OK for Russia to invade Georgia to get control of the pipeline because, at least this way, Cheney Darth Vader and Halliburton won&#039;t get big contracts. Uh-huh! 

So, in your world view, Russia is motivated by legitimate concerns about self-defense, while the Georgians and Americans are motivated by greed. You either have no idea of how the world works or, at some point in your life, you felt a need to start hating your country and people by projecting your worst motives on us while projecting your own ideals and best intentions onto those who are &quot;not us&quot;. 

You&#039;re not alone, by the way. I knew many people like you in the expat community when I lived overseas. There, though, I could attribute it to a Stockholm Syndrome - they were falling all over themselves to be accepted and liked by seeking the approval of their host countries. What&#039;s your story?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DG &#8211; Russia didn&#8217;t invade Georgia because if felt threatened by Georgia. They wouldn&#8217;t have invaded Georgia if Georgia had been part of NATO because the stakes would have been too high. They invaded Georgia because they could get away with it and&#8230;they were right. If Obama (Mr. Zero) gets elected, there will be much more of this because&#8230;Russia will know that they can get away with it. Putin will eat Obama for breakfast.</p>
<p>This is not new, by the way &#8211; Russia has been doing this for hundreds of years.</p>
<p>&#8220;But, of course, there is a gas pipeline hanging in the balance, not to mention big contracts to Halliburton, so maybe it is a little more rational (albeit still treasonous) of a policy than meets the eye. No wonder Cheney is in favor also…&#8221;</p>
<p>- so, let me get this straight. It is OK for Russia to invade Georgia to get control of the pipeline because, at least this way, Cheney Darth Vader and Halliburton won&#8217;t get big contracts. Uh-huh! </p>
<p>So, in your world view, Russia is motivated by legitimate concerns about self-defense, while the Georgians and Americans are motivated by greed. You either have no idea of how the world works or, at some point in your life, you felt a need to start hating your country and people by projecting your worst motives on us while projecting your own ideals and best intentions onto those who are &#8220;not us&#8221;. </p>
<p>You&#8217;re not alone, by the way. I knew many people like you in the expat community when I lived overseas. There, though, I could attribute it to a Stockholm Syndrome &#8211; they were falling all over themselves to be accepted and liked by seeking the approval of their host countries. What&#8217;s your story?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dg</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/09/05/of-liberal-bile-and-conservative-wit-and-wisdom/comment-page-1/#comment-28774</link>
		<dc:creator>dg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 21:33:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3626#comment-28774</guid>
		<description>sorry, meant to write: ...less than Burbank and Glendale, California...  But you get the idea.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>sorry, meant to write: &#8230;less than Burbank and Glendale, California&#8230;  But you get the idea.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dg</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/09/05/of-liberal-bile-and-conservative-wit-and-wisdom/comment-page-1/#comment-28773</link>
		<dc:creator>dg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 21:31:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3626#comment-28773</guid>
		<description>I stand corrected on the population.  My memory failed me.  I still stand by my former argument, however.  Georgia has sought and the Bush administration seeks to grant Nato membership to this republic.  Under the Nato charter, we would be required to come to the military aid of Georgia given the Russian invasion of this country.  Rice&#039;s contemplation of military action would have nothing to do with our treaty obligations.  The combined populations of the two enclaves cited is less than Burbank, California and certainly not worth going to war with Russia over.  Yet the Bush administration&#039;s policy remains one of bringing Georgia into Nato.  This is a foolish policy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I stand corrected on the population.  My memory failed me.  I still stand by my former argument, however.  Georgia has sought and the Bush administration seeks to grant Nato membership to this republic.  Under the Nato charter, we would be required to come to the military aid of Georgia given the Russian invasion of this country.  Rice&#8217;s contemplation of military action would have nothing to do with our treaty obligations.  The combined populations of the two enclaves cited is less than Burbank, California and certainly not worth going to war with Russia over.  Yet the Bush administration&#8217;s policy remains one of bringing Georgia into Nato.  This is a foolish policy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BrianE</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/09/05/of-liberal-bile-and-conservative-wit-and-wisdom/comment-page-1/#comment-28770</link>
		<dc:creator>BrianE</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 20:39:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3626#comment-28770</guid>
		<description>dg said:
&lt;blockquote&gt;over 25K people in a tiny republic that no one has heard of.&lt;/blockquote&gt;
Population of South Ossetia is 70,000.

&lt;blockquote&gt;On 30 August 2008, Tarzan Kokoity, the Deputy Speaker of South Ossetia&#039;s parliament, announced that the region would &quot;soon&quot; be absorbed into Russia, so that South and North Ossetians could live together in &quot;one united Russian state&quot;.[5] Russian and South Ossetian forces began giving residents in Akhalgori, the biggest town in the predominantly Georgian eastern part of South Ossetia, the choice of accepting Russian citizenship or leaving&lt;/blockquote&gt;

No one, including Bush, whose policies Rice represents (not her own) is contemplating military action. The EU has already balked at sanctions, since winter is approaching and they receive gas from Russia.

We are also talking about Abkhezti, with a population of 200,000, which is next on Russia&#039;s radar. This is more about what signal this sends to the rest of the former satellite states bordering Russia than the pipeline.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>dg said:</p>
<blockquote><p>over 25K people in a tiny republic that no one has heard of.</p></blockquote>
<p>Population of South Ossetia is 70,000.</p>
<blockquote><p>On 30 August 2008, Tarzan Kokoity, the Deputy Speaker of South Ossetia&#8217;s parliament, announced that the region would &#8220;soon&#8221; be absorbed into Russia, so that South and North Ossetians could live together in &#8220;one united Russian state&#8221;.[5] Russian and South Ossetian forces began giving residents in Akhalgori, the biggest town in the predominantly Georgian eastern part of South Ossetia, the choice of accepting Russian citizenship or leaving</p></blockquote>
<p>No one, including Bush, whose policies Rice represents (not her own) is contemplating military action. The EU has already balked at sanctions, since winter is approaching and they receive gas from Russia.</p>
<p>We are also talking about Abkhezti, with a population of 200,000, which is next on Russia&#8217;s radar. This is more about what signal this sends to the rest of the former satellite states bordering Russia than the pipeline.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dg</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/09/05/of-liberal-bile-and-conservative-wit-and-wisdom/comment-page-1/#comment-28764</link>
		<dc:creator>dg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 20:04:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3626#comment-28764</guid>
		<description>BrianE, no surprise here, but my critique of Rice is different than yours and has little to do with an effort to &quot;control&quot; the State Department.  Her policies, just in the recent confrontation in Georgia, reveal someone who is ready to bring the US into WWIII with Russia (as Nato membership for Georgia would have done, and which she, like Bush, is in favor of) over 25K people in a tiny republic that no one has heard of.  This is sheer stupidity.  But, of course, there is a gas pipeline hanging in the balance, not to mention big contracts to Halliburton, so maybe it is a little more rational (albeit still treasonous) of a policy than meets the eye.  No wonder Cheney is in favor also...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>BrianE, no surprise here, but my critique of Rice is different than yours and has little to do with an effort to &#8220;control&#8221; the State Department.  Her policies, just in the recent confrontation in Georgia, reveal someone who is ready to bring the US into WWIII with Russia (as Nato membership for Georgia would have done, and which she, like Bush, is in favor of) over 25K people in a tiny republic that no one has heard of.  This is sheer stupidity.  But, of course, there is a gas pipeline hanging in the balance, not to mention big contracts to Halliburton, so maybe it is a little more rational (albeit still treasonous) of a policy than meets the eye.  No wonder Cheney is in favor also&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: BrianE</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/09/05/of-liberal-bile-and-conservative-wit-and-wisdom/comment-page-1/#comment-28738</link>
		<dc:creator>BrianE</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 17:53:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3626#comment-28738</guid>
		<description>It may or may not have been Rice&#039;s incompetence (or lack of conservative principles), but I&#039;m afraid no person can tame or control the State Department. 
If you remember a few years ago, Newt took on State and was roundly criticized, but it has become clearer, that the State Department operates as an entity to promote the State Department. Any resemblence to the United States is purely coincidental.
John Bolton for Secretary of State!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It may or may not have been Rice&#8217;s incompetence (or lack of conservative principles), but I&#8217;m afraid no person can tame or control the State Department.<br />
If you remember a few years ago, Newt took on State and was roundly criticized, but it has become clearer, that the State Department operates as an entity to promote the State Department. Any resemblence to the United States is purely coincidental.<br />
John Bolton for Secretary of State!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: suek</title>
		<link>http://www.bookwormroom.com/2008/09/05/of-liberal-bile-and-conservative-wit-and-wisdom/comment-page-1/#comment-28734</link>
		<dc:creator>suek</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Sep 2008 17:32:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.bookwormroom.com/?p=3626#comment-28734</guid>
		<description>I&#039;m definitely not a liberal.  I anticipated the possibility of Condi as a possible future president and was eager to see that happen.

Now I don&#039;t.  I&#039;ve been very disappointed in her.  Certainly 10 -20 years down the road may reveal information that shows that she really has been extremely capable, but I really have not seen that as being the case.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m definitely not a liberal.  I anticipated the possibility of Condi as a possible future president and was eager to see that happen.</p>
<p>Now I don&#8217;t.  I&#8217;ve been very disappointed in her.  Certainly 10 -20 years down the road may reveal information that shows that she really has been extremely capable, but I really have not seen that as being the case.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced
Database Caching 2/14 queries in 0.039 seconds using disk: basic
Object Caching 403/404 objects using disk: basic

Served from: www.bookwormroom.com @ 2012-02-10 07:19:20 -->
