i thought of that and i suspect others will have also.
why? well, russia gave afghanistan back, and this didn't make their invasion okay.
some would probably also add that false pretexts should be excluded from the list of reasons for an invasion.
maybe the us invasion of iraq actually wasn't okay.
putin thinks the us is hypocritical. when it looks in the mirror, it fails to see its own blemishes.
the problem obama has is that he inherited these issues and when he lectures folks, he has less of a pulpit than, say, bush i. not because of what he has done. but because he is president of a country that has a history. and that history includes the actions of bush-cheney.
it was what folks said at the time. moral authority is important. if america (and western powers) do things like iraq and torture, it removes the ability to argue with actions like putin's in crimea effectively. and so we find ourselves here.
this isn't obama's fault.
the positive side of things from o's viewpoint. people find putin scary and so they will stand with the usa on this. if obama is willing to lead from the front. but there's no doubt the legacy issues have made things harder.
maybe also the us wants to find a way not to ignore the things it has done wrong (iraq, torture) and actually to admit them and talk about them and even do something about them (eg torturers belong in gaol) - so that folks like putin cannot argue that exceptionalism conceals hypocrisy.
and just to make sure you know when i include western powers, i think tony blair probably belongs in prison for his role in those things.
| 
