4 ms·

Democracies are totally capable of starting wars, but there is a stable way out when they have made a big mistake; the next election. George W. Bush and Lyndon

Democracies are totally capable of starting wars, but there is a stable way out when they have made a big mistake; the next election. George W. Bush and Lyndon Johnson both lost popularity, and then their faction lost power, because they had picked a bad war to fight in. It doesn't mean the next faction is any smarter or wiser, but it does at least provide them the opportunity to pretend that they would never have gotten us into such a mess, and exit (although in this respect, Obama was far wiser than Nixon). It's largely forgotten now, but the first President Bush had gotten the U.S. into a war in Somalia, but the incoming President Clinton knew a quagmire when he saw one, and was able to cut and run quickly, because he was not (as Putin is now) forced to pretend that it had been a good idea in the first place. If there were a parliamentary way for Putin to exit stage left, Russia could just admit that they've lost and get out. Because they do not and cannot, they must try to find some way to pretend that it can still be won.

lapcat 4y ago
> It's largely forgotten now, but the first President Bush had gotten the U.S. into a war in Somalia, but the incoming President Clinton knew a quagmire when he saw one, and was able to cut and run quickly, because he was not (as Putin is now) forced to pretend that it had been a good idea in the first place. This is an extremely extremely extremely misleading characterization of a United Nations humanitarian action that started after Clinton was elected. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Task_Force https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Task_Force "American troops had first entered Somalia during the Bush administration in response to a humanitarian crisis and civil war. Though initially involved to assist humanitarian efforts, the Clinton administration shifted the objectives set out in the mission and began pursuing a policy of attempting to neutralize Somali warlords." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton#Somalia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton#Somalia It's essentially the complete opposite of what you said.

lapcat 4y ago

> It's largely forgotten now, but the first President Bush had gotten the U.S. into a war in Somalia, but the incoming President Clinton knew a quagmire when he saw one, and was able to cut and run quickly, because he was not (as Putin is now) forced to pretend that it had been a good idea in the first place. This is an extremely extremely extremely misleading characterization of a United Nations humanitarian action that started after Clinton was elected. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Task_Force https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Task_Force "American troops had first entered Somalia during the Bush administration in response to a humanitarian crisis and civil war. Though initially involved to assist humanitarian efforts, the Clinton administration shifted the objectives set out in the mission and began pursuing a policy of attempting to neutralize Somali warlords." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton#Somalia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Clinton#Somalia It's essentially the complete opposite of what you said.