4est_4est_Gump
Run Forrest! RUN!
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2011
- Posts
- 89,007
Victor Davis Hanson
I wonder, since war is never the answer, how we plan to handle this diplomatically if he moves on NATO countries to bring them back into the Russian 'soviet?'
Good read: http://www.nationalreview.com/node/415835/print
Nothing that Vladimir Putin has done in gobbling up territories of the former Soviet Union is new. In fact, he simply apes every tyrant’s time-honored four-step plan of aggression.
INVADE, WAIT — AND INVADE
From Philip of Macedon to Napoleon, aggressors did not necessarily have a grand timetable for creating an empire. Instead, they went at it ad hoc. They took as much as they could at any given time; then backed away for a bit, if they sensed strong opposition was building — only to go back on the offensive when vigilance waned.
...
UNHINGED
All dictators feign craziness, or at least exaggerate their undeniably unhinged tendencies. Appearing capable of anything was always a dictator’s advantage, well before the North Koreans, Pakistanis, and Iranians started playing nuclear poker. Demosthenes warned Athenians about the obsessed, one-eyed, limping Philip II, who would ruin every part of his hideous body to destroy the free city-state. Napoleon fired on crowds and kidnapped and executed dukes to remind the old regimes in Europe that his was a new order in which nothing was quite out of bounds.
...
ALWAYS A VICTIM
Aggressive autocrats always have had a list of perceived grievances, what Thucydides once called prophases.
For Philip, the pretext was supposedly Athenian aggression in northern Greece and cultural and racial disdain for his Macedonians. For Napoleon, it was foreign aristocratic cabals always plotting to overthrow his regime, forcing him to preempt and go on an offensive defense. For the imperial Germans, it was snotty colonial powers like France and Britain, neither of which was willing to accept the upstart unified Germany fully into their imperial club. For Hitler, it was the Jews, the socialists, and the Versailles Treaty that had combined to rob Germany of its destiny.
...
THE NARRATIVE
Every aggressor also advances sophisticated lies. These narratives appeal to the better angels of the naïve. They always seem somewhat logical, at least superficially.
For Philip, it was a grand Pan-Hellenic crusade under his aegis against the real enemy of Greek freedom: the slavish and effeminate Persian Empire.
...
NATO grandees talk of opposing Putin, but he is the most popular man in the Orthodox world. Countries like Greece, Serbia, and Cyprus prefer him to either the EU or the United States. Middle Eastern strongmen find him more predictable and reliable than Western leaders. Those who do not respect him at least fear him.
INVADE, WAIT — AND INVADE
From Philip of Macedon to Napoleon, aggressors did not necessarily have a grand timetable for creating an empire. Instead, they went at it ad hoc. They took as much as they could at any given time; then backed away for a bit, if they sensed strong opposition was building — only to go back on the offensive when vigilance waned.
...
UNHINGED
All dictators feign craziness, or at least exaggerate their undeniably unhinged tendencies. Appearing capable of anything was always a dictator’s advantage, well before the North Koreans, Pakistanis, and Iranians started playing nuclear poker. Demosthenes warned Athenians about the obsessed, one-eyed, limping Philip II, who would ruin every part of his hideous body to destroy the free city-state. Napoleon fired on crowds and kidnapped and executed dukes to remind the old regimes in Europe that his was a new order in which nothing was quite out of bounds.
...
ALWAYS A VICTIM
Aggressive autocrats always have had a list of perceived grievances, what Thucydides once called prophases.
For Philip, the pretext was supposedly Athenian aggression in northern Greece and cultural and racial disdain for his Macedonians. For Napoleon, it was foreign aristocratic cabals always plotting to overthrow his regime, forcing him to preempt and go on an offensive defense. For the imperial Germans, it was snotty colonial powers like France and Britain, neither of which was willing to accept the upstart unified Germany fully into their imperial club. For Hitler, it was the Jews, the socialists, and the Versailles Treaty that had combined to rob Germany of its destiny.
...
THE NARRATIVE
Every aggressor also advances sophisticated lies. These narratives appeal to the better angels of the naïve. They always seem somewhat logical, at least superficially.
For Philip, it was a grand Pan-Hellenic crusade under his aegis against the real enemy of Greek freedom: the slavish and effeminate Persian Empire.
...
NATO grandees talk of opposing Putin, but he is the most popular man in the Orthodox world. Countries like Greece, Serbia, and Cyprus prefer him to either the EU or the United States. Middle Eastern strongmen find him more predictable and reliable than Western leaders. Those who do not respect him at least fear him.
I wonder, since war is never the answer, how we plan to handle this diplomatically if he moves on NATO countries to bring them back into the Russian 'soviet?'
Good read: http://www.nationalreview.com/node/415835/print
