Comments on: Für Georgien sterben? Reflections on Britain and Georgia http://www.jonworth.eu/fur-georgien-sterben-reflections-on-britain-and-georgia/ At the intersection of the EU, UK politics and tech Sat, 11 Feb 2012 11:21:21 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: raven http://www.jonworth.eu/fur-georgien-sterben-reflections-on-britain-and-georgia/comment-page-1/#comment-120097 raven Wed, 03 Sep 2008 16:13:27 +0000 http://www.jonworth.eu/?p=1451#comment-120097 yes TT, and remember the French started WWII by provoking the Germans. mai, we live in a simplistic world yes TT, and remember the French started WWII by provoking the Germans.

mai, we live in a simplistic world

]]> By: Trooper Thompson http://www.jonworth.eu/fur-georgien-sterben-reflections-on-britain-and-georgia/comment-page-1/#comment-119990 Trooper Thompson Sun, 17 Aug 2008 21:57:41 +0000 http://www.jonworth.eu/?p=1451#comment-119990 Please will you remember that Georgia started this by attacking South Ossetia, after having agreed a truce. Please will you remember that Georgia started this by attacking South Ossetia, after having agreed a truce.

]]> By: James Rogers http://www.jonworth.eu/fur-georgien-sterben-reflections-on-britain-and-georgia/comment-page-1/#comment-119977 James Rogers Sun, 17 Aug 2008 02:27:19 +0000 http://www.jonworth.eu/?p=1451#comment-119977 Jon: Interesting post. There are two ways of looking at the question: Would you die for Georgia? (1) If you are not willing to die for Georgia, are you willing to die for Poland...or Germany...or Spain....or indeed, the United Kingdom? This question applies to Britons, but even more so to Germans, Italians, Spaniards, and all those NATO members whose military budgets are declining or static. And if they would not die for Georgia, why should they expect Britons, French or Americans to come to their aid in case they are attacked? For it is only the latter three powers with the means to implement Article 5 in any real way—it is only they with thermonuclear weapons. (2) The question also reflects the dangerous notion that military power is only for defence. It is not. It never has been, and it never will be. Military power is also for the pursuit of foreign policy objectives: it will and must be used preventatively and proactively to secure national (or European) objectives. A lazy conceit has swept much of Europe, and many think—very wrongly—that we now live in more enlightened times. The case with Russia and Georgia has proven that we do not. Jon: Interesting post.

There are two ways of looking at the question: Would you die for Georgia?

(1) If you are not willing to die for Georgia, are you willing to die for Poland…or Germany…or Spain….or indeed, the United Kingdom? This question applies to Britons, but even more so to Germans, Italians, Spaniards, and all those NATO members whose military budgets are declining or static. And if they would not die for Georgia, why should they expect Britons, French or Americans to come to their aid in case they are attacked? For it is only the latter three powers with the means to implement Article 5 in any real way—it is only they with thermonuclear weapons.

(2) The question also reflects the dangerous notion that military power is only for defence. It is not. It never has been, and it never will be. Military power is also for the pursuit of foreign policy objectives: it will and must be used preventatively and proactively to secure national (or European) objectives. A lazy conceit has swept much of Europe, and many think—very wrongly—that we now live in more enlightened times. The case with Russia and Georgia has proven that we do not.

]]>