Ever notice how these experts manage to turn up into down. Thus the aggression against Ossetia becomes protecting the territorial "integrity" of Georgia. Nevermind that Ossetia effectively seceded from Georgia at the time Georgia seceded from the USSR. Nevermind that Georgia had agreed to this arrangment. Nevermind that Georgia launched an aggressive and violent attack against civilians. Nevermind that Russian peacekeepers were killed. Nevermind that was Russia did was 1,000 more justified and 10,000 more restrained than the Bush war against Iraq. Oh and did you know, Condi is also a "expert" on Russia. Next time interview the drunk on the corner. You will probably get more sense out of him.

From what I understand the South Ossetians have never wanted to be a part of Georgia so why do western countries insist that they are? These people are a different ethnic group with their own language. They don't even have valuable natural resources, so it seems that Georgia only wants them as a matter of national pride. South Ossetia has been functioning as a separate country since the early nineties. It seems to me that Americans would support these people's right to self determination rather than siding with Georgia in this just because they sent troops to Iraq.

This is not to say that Russia's response was just in defense of South Ossetia. They used this as an excuse to flex their muscles in this region.

McClatchy is reporting that we told our allies the Georgians not to stir up trouble and told the Russians to limit any response to South Ossetia. So much for our influence in the region! Good thing we have a Russian expert as our Secretary of State.

This "expert" sounds nearly illiterate as far a foreign policy is concerned. He speaks as if he was the guy at the local upscale bar, rather than a professional in the field of foreign policy.

"I would speculate that they’re trying to destabilize the regime, the Georgian government. I don’t quite see how what they’re doing leads to that, but they’ve hinted at that enough to suggest that that’s what they’re trying to do. They’ve said Mr. Saakashvili is the problem."

Really? What an insightful comment! Salon, please find someone who is better informed and professional.

Your Foreign Policy expert, Michael McFaul seems to have forgotten that when President Clinton bombed and invaded Serbia, Slobodan Milosevic, Serbia's freely elected President was also "using force inside his own country".

And when Saddam Hussein was crushing the Kurdish rebellion, he, too, was doing so inside the borders of Iraq that all countries of the world recognized.

Never mind rocket barrage against civilians are ok if in the same country, this "expert" advises Obama?

I don't care that Salon brings him out as expert but to have him advising Obama is a real worry.

Yes, big bad Russia sees the world in old fashioned ways when it objects to Georgia waggling the NATO finger at it, but when the US is egging on that waggling, that's ok.

When Kosovo wants to break away from Serbia, or Chechnya or Georgia wants to break away from the USSR, that's ok, but when South Ossetia wants to break away from Georgia, that's bad.

Politicians stink. Biased "experts" are just as bad. Publishing such tripe as fair and balanced is second nature for Fox; what is it doing here?

When we invaded Iraq. We're in no position to criticize any country who arbitrarily invades any other country.

Bush will say nothing significant because he knows Putin will laugh and throw his own hypocrisy back in his face.

We have lost the right to criticize others and we have lost the right to complain about the treatment of american pow's in future conflicts.

Sir,

It seems that Mr. McFaul has an interest advocating that the US sort out border disputes in the former Soviet Union in that academic grants and work will flow to the former Soviet Union centric academics. The break up of the Soviet Union has been harsh on academia that analyzed the former Soviet Union. Therefore it would be better to work out the intricacies of this principal agent problem before the fourth estate in the form of Salon.com makes itself a platform for US interference in these internecine wars.

The article itself is not too bad. Unfortunately, the US propaganda is obvious here.

The first question everyone in the US and in the west have to answer before they start talk about EU politics is - why is that after US and Russia became so friendly after cold war collapse, US trying to station NATO arm forces on the border with Russia. It is not the way friends behave, but true enemy. The US and the EU cannot let go their cold war semantics and allow Russia to be independent.

It is especially funny to hear from the US government anything in regards to human rights after they initiated unlowfull war in which thousands of civilians of the foreign nation, including children, have been murdered. All these based on simple wish of Bush family. This is embarasing and this should be discussed at UN security consul. I guess UN has no balls to talk about it, or to talk about Georgian army killing people with Russian passport in South Osetia.

You gotta respect the shrewdness of this guy.

He's just illustrated to Western Europe why they should think twice about admitting ex-Soviet republics (ESR) to NATO - that could have been a war with Russia under the mutual defense clause. He also illustrated to all the ESRs that even being the #3 contributor to troops in Iraq will not get the US to defend you from the kind of large power you need defending from. And he did all of this while sitting next to a US president at the Olympics. In case anybody was wondering about his balls - they seem to be both huge and made of brass.

The best analog for this short war in recent time seems to be Israel's recent attempt to teach Lebanon a lesson. Except that is was both less effective at achieving it's goals, and a dirtier conflict because it left southern Lebanon covered with cluster bombs.