Wretchard offers his usual clear-eyed insight and, notwithstanding the armchair generalissimos among them, I found his commenters worthwhile. For example, one asks what the US intelligence community was doing during the Russian build-up, which begs the question of what that community is good for going forward.

This is pathetic (see also Bush’s gaffe):

Rice spoke with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov by telephone yesterday, one of several conversations the two have had since Friday on resolving the crisis, and Khalilzad referenced their exchange in an emergency session of the U.N. Security Council.
…
Lavrov, Khalilzad said, told Rice “that a democratically elected president of Georgia — and I quote — must go.” And the U.S. ambassador challenged Russian envoy Vitaly Churkin, “Is your government’s objective regime change in Georgia, the overthrow of the democratically elected government of Georgia?”

“Regime change is an American expression,” Churkin countered. And he scolded Khalilzad for revealing the contents of a secret diplomatic discussion.

(Cf. also Bush’s gaffe in the statement mentioned above.) It pains me to say this when my country is in a confrontation, but why the devil are our diplomats publicly quoting confidential discussions?! Protocol exists for a reason; some of it is silly and anachronistic, but some of it is important. (Hey, we’re the good guys and we’re for freedom and stuff. That’s alright then. Nevermind.)

The WaPo piece I just linked quotes McCain as calling for revisiting the decision to withhold NATO membership with Georgia. I was unpersuaded because the degree of our national interest is not clear to me. Remarkably, McCain’s full statement addresses the point. I’m still unpersuaded, but my opinion of McCain has risen. Even if I don’t agree, I can support a President who demonstrates competence and policy coherence.