signintel wrote:

“so Russian wins this one and Iran continues its rush to get the Bomb…plus we loose face in all respects.”

Yes and no. “Yes” in that Putin shows that overwhemling force achieves what it can always achieve in the short run. Russia wins. We are not getting into, and shouldn’t, a sudden war. “No” in that there is a longer term to consider. Bush looks prescient in arguing that democracies need to support one another and that you can’t trust despots. Europe is going to shiver, in several respects, this winter. It’s time to take sides again, if Europe has the guts. Which it doesn’t seem to have.

and

Armitage wrote:

“Russian incursions into Turkey would trigger Article V. It is unlikely that (a) Russia would attempt even that, and (b) that the Europeans and Canadians would allow a brazen attempt on a NATO ally to go unchecked. To not check it would mean the end of the alliance, completely and utterly, and that is a step too far for most of the members, doubly so in the face of a resurgent Russia (who was, of course, the principal reason for the alliance in the first place).”

Is “Armitage” handle and the treaty-esque comment an exquisite example of Belmont Club irony that is levels beyond the ken of even this overeducated readership?

Perhaps the British can advise NATO regarding how to provide the kind of intervention the UK provided in Basra? Guess that ‘soft power’ works better for carbon emissions capping than for stopping the bad guys.