Mark Silverberg makes a case about Georgia that both blames America and condemns the Russian brutality of invasion.
Silverberg makes some very salient assertions however I am not sure that I agree with whole heartedly.
I believe Silverberg is correct that America dropped the ball on Georgia by not utilizing immediate physical aid to Georgia. I realize America may not be in a sustainable position to confront a massive confrontation with Russia however I am betting Russia is not yet prepared to defy the military potential of America outside of conventional forces.
Yes I am implying that if America had sent American conventional expeditionary forces of some kind which would have at least put a big dent in the Russian invasion, then Russia would have to make another decision. That decision would be to either escalate its invasion of Georgia to force an obviously smaller American presence to retreat or consider American retribution with its superior nuclear technology.
As in the Cuban Missile crisis I don’t think Russia is willing to engage America in a nuclear war which it would lose. Russian payloads may be larger than America’s nukes but Russian missiles are not as accurate. Combine that thought with American does have very advanced technology in anti-ballistic missiles, and then you have a recipe that will slaughter a lot of Russians and perhaps bring down the Russian autocrats themselves.
If Russian nukes managed to slip past America’s anti-ballistic system, then Russia could be expected to be nuked out of existence. The Russians are not crazy Muslims looking to enter a paradise of erotic virgins. I believe the Russians would have pulled back and begin the attrition of another cold war in which America and Russia would vie with the interests of Middle Eastern States.
That is my relatively harsh (and yes gambling) take on the failed American choices. Be sure to read Silverberg’s very compelling analysis of the strategy America should have taken or instituted prior to a Russian invasion of Georgia.
JRH 8/24/08
Silverberg makes some very salient assertions however I am not sure that I agree with whole heartedly.
I believe Silverberg is correct that America dropped the ball on Georgia by not utilizing immediate physical aid to Georgia. I realize America may not be in a sustainable position to confront a massive confrontation with Russia however I am betting Russia is not yet prepared to defy the military potential of America outside of conventional forces.
Yes I am implying that if America had sent American conventional expeditionary forces of some kind which would have at least put a big dent in the Russian invasion, then Russia would have to make another decision. That decision would be to either escalate its invasion of Georgia to force an obviously smaller American presence to retreat or consider American retribution with its superior nuclear technology.
As in the Cuban Missile crisis I don’t think Russia is willing to engage America in a nuclear war which it would lose. Russian payloads may be larger than America’s nukes but Russian missiles are not as accurate. Combine that thought with American does have very advanced technology in anti-ballistic missiles, and then you have a recipe that will slaughter a lot of Russians and perhaps bring down the Russian autocrats themselves.
If Russian nukes managed to slip past America’s anti-ballistic system, then Russia could be expected to be nuked out of existence. The Russians are not crazy Muslims looking to enter a paradise of erotic virgins. I believe the Russians would have pulled back and begin the attrition of another cold war in which America and Russia would vie with the interests of Middle Eastern States.
That is my relatively harsh (and yes gambling) take on the failed American choices. Be sure to read Silverberg’s very compelling analysis of the strategy America should have taken or instituted prior to a Russian invasion of Georgia.
JRH 8/24/08
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment