I read the article on the front page of the New York Times, grimacing, brows furrowed, in expected confusion. Why expected confusion? Confusion at how President Bush can threaten Russia for invading a country with a straight face. Expected, because this is not the first time the U.S. president has advised against invading sovereign territory, all the while maintaining troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, sovereign nations we invaded and still occupy today. The same thing happened when Turkey invaded the Kurdish region of Iraq last year.
I can only read things the way I see and understand them. All I know, is it's an audacious man who invades a country without a declaration of war, occupies that country for six or seven years, with no end in sight, who then criticizes another country for doing the same. I would find it hard to not feel hypocritical in pointing the finger at other nations.
Then again, finger pointing is always the most effective way to divert attention from where it really needs to be. In that regard, I'm sure President Bush is glad Russia is showing it's true "evil" colors. We have to have an enemy in order to have someone to fear and fight against. Since the "war on terror" gets more and more unpopular by the day, and we have become "buddies" with North Korea, and we are negotiating with Iran (even though you can't negotiate with terrorists, per the opinion of Bush himself), maybe Russia will fill the void left by the axis of evil countries. You know, in case the wars taking place in the Middle East abruptly end, and we need to war against another country. We wouldn't like to have peace for too long.