Now I know that some of your find this guys blog a bit too extreme for consistent reading. I can certainly see where he crosses the line some times. I would ask that you read this particular article however. I think that Misha's more outrageous comments are most easily understood when you realize the scale of contect he has to frame them in. Compared to most of us here in the US his breadth of experience is nothing short of staggering. As Americans we have difficulty imagining teh situations other nations have been subjected to. We often ascribe motivations to other nations that are simply unrealistic given the differences between the security levels of our nations. We have *zero* possibility of invasion and have not had the possibility in a very long time. This gives us a very unusual position in the world and an even more myopic view of the world through our own proserous set of rose colored glasses.

     The fact is that much of the world exists under constant threat from their neighbors. This has promoted a mercenary attitude toward dimplomatic endaevors that we can not even hope to aspire to. The Us and it's philosophically influenced United Nation actually beleive that when a nation makes a diplomatic agreement that they will stick to it! For most of the world this is simply laughable naivete. The main aggressors in Misha's article were great fans of diplomacy. It gave them the ability to have a war completely on their own schedule. Remember that next time people beg for more time to obtain a "diplomatic solution" to a problem.