Comments on: Regional Powers and Global Threats

By: Russia’s Subs « MANSIZEDTARGET.COM

Russia’s Subs « MANSIZEDTARGET.COM — Wed, 05 Aug 2009 21:53:07 +0000

[...] I have an hypothesis. It involves events of one year ago: Russia’s Counterattack Against Georgia and Liberation (or Annexation depending on your point o… [...]

By: A. MacGarr

A. MacGarr — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 23:20:20 +0000

Yes, that is what I had in mind when replying to you. The Monroe Doctrine was a masterpiece of defensive realism.

By: Maciano

Maciano — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 23:04:04 +0000

Well, if there’s a balance tp be made, or a third alternative, I’m quite interested. How is it possible to combine non-interventionism with realpolitik, a minterventionist state?

The US used to be in favour of the Monroe-doctrine. Is that what you’re suggesting?

By: Brian Roberts

Brian Roberts — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 19:38:06 +0000

Mr. Roach, do you still post at Taki Mag?

By: A. MacGarr

A. MacGarr — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 19:36:28 +0000

“IMHO, it’s gotta be one way or the other. Either it’s realpolitik or it’s non-interventionism” I disagree, and if you look at all the past American leaders whose policies were aimed at securing our position in our own sphere of influence instead of meddling in those of European powers, they’d probably disagree too.

By: Esmerelda_Pearl

Esmerelda_Pearl — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 13:36:31 +0000

NRO casts most world events in the “1939 Munich mode.” I am beginning to believe that almost the entire staff is suffering from some sort of hysteria.

As Mr. Piatak points out; the current situation is neither “1939″ or a replay of the Cold War.

Russia is a world power and has its spheres of influence, as does the USA. We can not maintain the unipolarity of the years immediately following the fall of the USSR.

Russia responded to Georgia’s provocation in South Ossetia. I wish that GWB had responed to Saudi Arabia’s attack on the WTC
in a porportionate manner … I will not elaborate … other than to say that …
the “perfidious princes” and “murderous muslim mullahs” would have gotten their due.

By: David Manley

David Manley — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:23:13 +0000

Imbalance is one thing, but we’ve gone way beyond that. The United States does not have the will or the ability to make the entire world safe for democracy and capitalism. Georgia is a case in point.

By: Maciano

Maciano — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 11:20:40 +0000

Roach,

I’m curious.

How can you argue both in favour of “offensive realism”, i.e. balancing regional power to refuse rising states a regional hegemon status (imperial Japan, Wilhelmine and Nazi Germany, Bolshevik Russia and todays China), AND defend a mind-our-own-business kind of foreign policy for the US. IMHO, it’s gotta be one way or the other. Either it’s realpolitik or it’s non-interventionism

Let’s for a sec assume that the US could just be a little on the realpolitik-side, like, say, freeing Kuwait, because of their oil resources. How are you going to stop the lobbys from the left and right to get in on some of the action? The Soros-crowd will continually argue for intervention around the Third World to overthrow bad guys to save the world, while the Right will use foreign policy for a nationalist agenda and/or some issues it feels somewhat committed to, because of the people they represent (f.e. Israel and Taiwan.)

So, if you’d want to use foreign policy just for US interest alone, you’re going to need some incorruptible leaders and elites who are going to use their powers only in favour of the US interests (and the interests of vital allies, maybe Canada, Kuwait, Mexico and South Korea.)

I don’t see how that’s going to happen. I really don’t know any politicians who are like that. That’s why non-interventionism sounds kind of good to me. It may be far from perfect, but at least things can’t get as bad as they are right now, right?

By: Leif

Leif — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 23:11:58 +0000

“The aim should always be a balance of powers.”
What’s wrong with an imbalanced power structure when the unipole is the U.S. or pre-WWII Great Britain?

By: Roach

Roach — Mon, 11 Aug 2008 21:23:46 +0000

We must wait and see, but we should not assume every act of power politics presages WWIII. The aim should always be a balance of powers.