Rollin' Like Sisyphus

US Foreign Policy Is Feckless And Impotent, And Huck’s Cool With That

Posted in The Fail Pail by Huckleberry on March 3, 2014

Don't know how lucky you are, boy.

Don’t know how lucky you are, boy.

Hey, remember those awesome Olympics in Sochi, and all the funny goofs on the minor issues that crept up against athletes and visitors?
Yeah, nobody else does either.
Russian troops crossed the border into Ukraine as brazenly as 11 million Mexicans, which is to say, as if they owned the place, securing ports both air and sea. Troops set up defensive positions throughout the Crimean region, annexed Ukrainian military assets and offered Russian passports to anyone in the region who wanted one. Knowing that the region is predominantly Russian both ethnically and politically, Russian forces are “freeing” Crimea from the “illegitimate” rabble government established by the protesters in Kiev.
None of the foreign policy experts in the media or in Western governments seem able to cope with the idea that Putin isn’t backing down in the face of tough talk and the threat of sanctions. Why, oh why won’t he take any of the “diplomatic” ways out of this kerfuffle, save face for both sides, and let it be?
Because Putin isn’t interested in a way out, and a not inconsiderable portion of the reason why he’s doing this is to embarrass the West, which in these days of woe and want, is not hard to do.
Which brings us to the West’s response, which has been lambasted as weak and ineffectual, full of vague threats and a school-marm-esque tendency toward scolding the defiant. Which is fine with me. The U.S. should barely have a foreign policy, and the hypocrisy of a glut of Western nations pulling out the fainting couches because Russians are rolling across a border toward those deeply sympathetic to Russian interests when their own nations stand idly by while many more foreigners continuously breach their own borders possessed of sympathies that are antithetical to the interests of those Western nations.
Our political and military priorities should focus around the security of our own borders, without a second thought to events taking place Over There.
Of course, there may be a wrinkle to all of this, which hasn’t gotten much mention. I myself heard it on the radio in passing, so its veracity may be suspect, but the US and the UK signed some form of compact with Ukraine to protect them explicitly against a Russian invasion in exchange for taking possession of their nuclear weapons. The Budapest Memo it’s called. Since it was never ratified by Congress, the US almost certainly isn’t bound to respond to a Ukraine request for military protection, but the UK’s legal responsibility is, and I quote, “not clear.” Because this is the kind of thing where you want as much ambiguity as possible. Which means if the UK is legally bound to respond, then so is the US because of the gay, retarded Special Relationship that has continuously proven to be more trouble than its worth.
A strong foreign policy has often been wrongly seen as a barometer of the health of a nation. However, nothing could be further from the truth. The ability and demonstrated capacity to project power abroad often presages decline in every possible metrically, not least of which is personal freedom and liberty for the citizens of the projecting power.


3 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. El Borak said, on March 3, 2014 at 10:38

    the UK’s legal responsibility is, and I quote, “not clear.”

    Hey, Britain won the last Crimean War – surely this one will just be a day at the Novyi Skit Beach.

    But one thing that does crack me up. It might not surprise you to learn that I read a lot of preppers* who are concerned that our SAAP is about the loose the dogs of martial law on the country, that he is utterly hell-bent on a domestic dictatorship and has an uber-secret** plan to throw all Christians, gun owners, and veterans into FEMA camps.

    I keep wondering where this dictator is that they are talking about. Because I sure don’t see him in Washington.

    * not to be confused with prepsters.
    ** though somehow known to them

  2. Doom said, on March 4, 2014 at 08:24

    I’m with you and against you. The wars we shouldn’t have fought we did, the wars we should fight, that wouldn’t end up in bloodshed, we avoid. Actual ground deployment in the region would see the Russians head home. While we act like a paper tiger, they are one. We just have a paper president.

    On the other hand, it’s all a gig for spectators. If they want it, they will have to fight and die for it. Our involvement won’t make them free. Lets just see how badly they want to be free.

    I had an older brother. He wanted every toy I had, when I was using it. I had a way of enjoying even a stupid toy. If he wanted something, I would tell him a price. He, almost always being broke, usually would forget before he could acquire the blood gelt. If he did, actually, concentrate and come up with the money? I gave him the toy. My business methods have… always been questionable. But as even a boy of means? I could easily replace any gift. So it should be with freedom. Blood money first.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: