Well I'm happy to disagree respectfully, we have had some pretty good dialogues from time-to-time.  And as far as the morality of our positions that is hard to discern without knowing the underlying motives, which when it comes to Republicans, or at least neo-conservatives, leaves me dubious.  I am more of a 'realist' in foreign policy, morality is often a slippery slope.  When it comes to intervention in genocide, sure, but when assessing conflicting claims, as in Georgia, it is far more difficult to see a clear legitimacy among the various actors, given their recent history and mutual resort to 'ethnic cleansing' and political leverage which takes little account of the quality of life of the innocent who ultimately bear the consequences, and the casualties, on either side.

I wasn't charging anyone with unpatriotism, as I said it seems that the Republicans are charging Democrats with that claim any time we propose a more nuanced and measured response to a geopolitical challenge, which I feel is wholly inappropriate.  Recklessness, well, that makes more sense to me in this instance.

It's all McCain really knows.  His entire service was cold war.  His neural pathways are etched very deeply by his outdated world view.

I am fairly certain they dont do phosphorous pouches on anything that matters anymore...

because I have already said enough...

Nah, it wasn't a ploy.  It was just a repeat of the games that the Soviets and US used to play:  How close can we get to each other, without causing an international incident.

The EP-3 was not outdated at all.  It was chocked and blocked full of RF pods and gear, (both ECW, and passive gear).

They were most likely in passive mode, just listening to traffic from the mainland.  If they'd lit up one of those ECW pods, that close to the Chinese planes, they would have fried all of the Chinese avionics.  Those planes would have probably gone down.

The Marines knew what they were doing.

I don't have an issue with supporting Georgia's right to self determination, certainly, against Russian pressure, in fact I believe that is the appropriate course.  But that doesn't seem to be what's at stake here, either.  But I strongly believe we have to act in concert with our European allies in this theatre, and not just by knocking their collective heads together or threatening them.  If I thought we had a coherent strategy which had a broadly-based consensus among our European allies with clear commitments to mutually agreed outcomes I would feel much more comfortable about a little 'bear-baiting.'  Personally I don't think NATO is the right vehicle for containing Russia's ambitions in Europe, for a variety of reasons, and I disapprove of the attempt to recruit a broader membership among former Soviet Republics as being unnecessarily inflammatory, possibly risky and certainly counter-productive.

Having said that I largely agree that South Ossetia needs to be brought back within the authority of the Georgian government in spite of Russia's mischief, but I don't see that as something which will be achieved by a tactical application of force but as part of a broader diplomatic engagement with Russia which includes collective pressure on Iran, the scrapping of our Ground-Based Midcourse Defense System in Europe, agreements on limits to membership of former Soviet republics to NATO, renewed bi-lateral agreements limiting the proliferation of nuclear weapons, broadened nuclear disarmament agreements and support for the inclusion of Russia in the WTO.  We share a space station, for pity's sake.

Exactly, funny you should mention that's exactly where I think we are at.  And we were in such haste with our valiant queen-side march-of-the-pawns we neglected to castle and still haven't moved our king's bishop.  Bummer.