[lbo-talk] Sad Leninism.

[andie nachgeborenen]

At the risk of repeating what other people said here, this seems pretextual. It's cheap to hand out citizenship or claim national/ethnic co-fraternity across a boundary (which as Kagarlitsky, whom I trust on these matters more than you, sorry Chris, points out was a second class sort of "citizenship", anyway, frankly it smells) then use it as an excuse to attack. This was one of the things that led up to WWII. Invading to protect your threatened "fellow citizens" is one of the oldest tricks in the book. And regardless, what is wrong with the standards of international law? Russia (like the US) is committed by treaty to certain ways of handling disputes before going to war, which like the US they routinely ignore. I don't see why we should let them off the hook on that.  What's wrong with the principle of nonintervention? You seem to be neglecting that. Just out of curiosity, is there any act of Russian foreign policy since the fall that you have

 disapproved?

--- On Mon, 8/18/08, Chris Doss <lookoverhere1 at yahoo.com> wrote:


> From: Chris Doss <lookoverhere1 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] Sad Leninism.
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Date: Monday, August 18, 2008, 4:36 AM
> You seem to be neglecting that South Ossetians are Russian
> citizens.
> 
> > On Sun, 17 Aug 2008, andie nachgeborenen wrote:
> > 
> > > This isn't hard. Russia wasn't acting in
> its
> > own self-defense, so 
> > > technically, they should have done nothing. 
> 
> 
>       
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk