ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel
  • »
  • Politics and Social Issues»
  • United States Politics

Can the US afford to get involved in the situation in Georgia? Either way, should the US get involved?

Updated on February 12, 2009

Leave Georgia Alone

However compelling the situation in the former Soviet Republic of Georgia may be, it would be incredibly foolish for the United States to become involved in this conflict. Our resources are already stretched far too thin with the catastrophe known as Iraq, we still have to be vigilant in Afghanistan and keep our eyes on what they are doing in Iran, and the last time I checked, Georgia wasn't real high in our strategic interests. Historically, the world powers have carved out "spheres of interest." Even after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia remained an enormous power, and they still are the 800 pound gorilla when it comes to the affairs of the former Soviet bloc nations.

Set that aside, and just consider how we would handle such a situation. Neocons were already hinting about the need to reinstitute the draft just to handle the Iraq War. Can you possibly imagine a scenario where we could get into a direct conflict with the Russians that would not send us hurdling into World War III? Even Boy George (Shrub) isn't that crazy....I hope....

Bush's Legacy

George Bush may not have to be concerned with public opinion any more (some would say that he never really did concern himself with such matters), but second term Presidents get all wrapped up in their legacy. How will history judge them? Bush is already regarded as a war hawk, and by most accounts he mismanaged the war in Iraq from the get go. Does he really need to make such a disastrous error in the waning days of his Presidency? Not if he cares one iota about how history will judge him.

Another thing second term Presidents have a habit of doing is leaving great big foreign policy messes for their successors to clean up. They all do it. Bush is leaving Iraq to the next President to handle. Could he throw us into another unnecessary military conflict, just to make Obama/McCain's life that much more interesting? Sure. He could also weigh in as a diplomatic factor in this conflict, which would be the politically smart thing to do. Or he could do nothing, which is what I expect he'll do, and which could turn out to be just as difficult for his successor to handle as getting involved in the matter militarily.


    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • crashcromwell profile image

      crashcromwell 8 years ago from Florida

      Thank you allshookup. Thanks, too, for your comment.

    • allshookup profile image

      allshookup 8 years ago from The South, United States

      Good hub! It's a major mess that I hope doesn't get larger. And moonlake, great quote and very true. Keep up the good work cashcromwell.

    • moonlake profile image

      moonlake 9 years ago from America

      Looks bad if Russia can attack Georgia who's next. Never trust a Russian leader.

      They first came for the Communists and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the trade unionists and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a trade unionist.Then they came for the Catholics and I didn't speak up because I was a Protestant.Then they came for me and by that time no one was left to speak up. ---Pastor Martin Niemoeller (Nazi victim)

    • crashcromwell profile image

      crashcromwell 9 years ago from Florida

      I think we may have celebrated too soon. I suspect that the Russians are pushing the envelope a little bit here. In the end, I expect there will be some sabre rattling between Washington and Moscow, but I still don't see us sending troops there. If I'm wrong, God help us.

    • dboman profile image

      dboman 9 years ago from Gainesville

      Haha.  I know what neocon means, but my point was more that a term like "neocon" is kind of a relative term.  I overreacted a little bit at first to the "neocon" comment because a lot of left-wingers that I've encountered use that word as a negative title for conservatives in general without understanding what it really means or understanding that person's true belief. I also don't think the draft was a strong topic before the surge, just the very small percentage of the population that would be considered VERY far right. You can't take the tiny percentage of people on the polar ends of the spectrum serious. Anyways, your hub stirred a little controversy in my head, and for that I say it was a successful hub.  Thanks! 

    • rharper profile image

      Robert 9 years ago from West Texas

      Will Turkey help defeat their age old rival Russia?

    • Shadesbreath profile image

      Shadesbreath 9 years ago from California

      Most fights start with shouting first, though. I just hope we stick to words.

    • crashcromwell profile image

      crashcromwell 9 years ago from Florida

      Neocon is short for Neo Conservative. While I may be guilty of over-generalizing, in the sense that not all neocons were advocating for reinstituting the draft, it was a strong topic of conversation before the surge plan was introduced.

      I will also give the President credit in this case, because I was elated to see that the Russians have halted their operations, at least for now, after Bush weighed in on the matter. Sometimes words are more powerful than weapons!

    • dboman profile image

      dboman 9 years ago from Gainesville

      I believe that I'm what you would call a "neocon", but I've never mentioned - nor heard - any talk about a draft for the Iraq war. Furthermore, Bush has already done more than "nothing" about the conflict. He has sharply condemned the attacks by Russia.

      A quote from CBS news: "President George W. Bush on Monday sharply criticized Moscow's harsh military crackdown in the former Soviet republic of Georgia, saying the violence is unacceptable and Russia's response is disproportionate."

      I believe what Bush has done so far is more than nothing and there's no hint that he is gonig to "send us into WWIII".

    • Shadesbreath profile image

      Shadesbreath 9 years ago from California

      I really, really hope we stay out of it. Let someone else deal with it for once, some of these nations who know so much about everything even though they never do anything about anything. This would be a great time for them to step up and show the US how to handle complicated stuff without angering half the world.

    • blogging2 profile image

      Rebecca Jones 9 years ago from Florida

      I agree completely and I worry that he will do something crazy like try to take us into another war as you say "to make life more interesting" Personally life is interesting enough lets hope he doesn't go for another war!