Dealing With War in Georgia

Napoleon said of the Bourbons that "they learn nothing and forget nothing." Call the editorialists of The Post "demi-Bourbons"; they learn nothing and forget everything. How else to explain the full-throated war cry ["Stopping Russia," editorial, Aug. 9] for U.S. intervention in the conflict between Russia and Georgia and, with NATO allies, "impose a price on Russia?"

Does The Post identify any vital U.S. interests that justify intervention? No. It demands that we become involved in another military conflict on the basis of the "principles at stake" and the "terrible signal" it would send were we to keep out of this faraway conflict.

The real principle at stake here is whether the United States is going to continue being an imperial global policeman or whether we are going to return to the principles on which this nation was founded. I am sure both presidential candidates will feel compelled to weigh in on the Russia-Georgia conflict. Before they do, I hope they both read Patrick J. Buchanan's new book, "Churchill, Hitler, and the Unnecessary War." They might learn a little something about the terrible costs and unanticipated consequences of entangling alliances and going to war on the basis of abstract principles and signals rather than vital interests.

LAWRENCE A. HUNTER

Warrenton

·

The deepening conflict in Georgia ["Georgia Retreats, Pleads for Truce; U.S. Condemns Russian Onslaught," front page, Aug. 11] exposes not only Russia's larger aims but also the shortsightedness of American policy in a strategically important region.

The United States discontinued its valuable Voice of America broadcasts in Russian, leaving those caught in the conflict little alternative to Russian propaganda broadcasts on U.S. cable channels. When the broadcast cuts were made, the cost of defending U.S. interests in this energy-rich region was evidently judged to be too high. Sadly, we may soon learn the higher cost of not defending them.

LUKE POPOVICH

Washington