<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[The Dish]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://dish.andrewsullivan.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Andrew Sullivan]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://dish.andrewsullivan.com/author/sullydish/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[What Putin&#8217;s Excesses Can Teach&nbsp;Us]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[
<p><span style="font-size: 8pt;"><em>by Conor Friedersdorf</em></span></p>
<p>Adam Serwer <a href="http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/adam_serwer_archive?month=01&amp;year=2011&amp;base_name=putins_failed_dark_side_draft" target="_self">explains</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Russia offers an experiment in a country giving itself over fully to the  most heavy-handed of responses to terrorism. Putin was given the  freedom to achieve security by any means&#8211;and Russians have ended up  with a state that is less secure and less free. There are strategic  reasons for adhering to the rule of law, beyond actually preserving the  kind of society that terrorists seek to destroy. Even when liberals make  that case though, as Obama did during the 2008 election, we&#39;ve <a href="http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_cheney_offense" target="_blank">fallen</a> short at actually following through on those ideals. The U.S. is not  Russia, but in Russia&#39;s example we might learn a few things about the  limits of unrestrained force alone in defeating terrorism.</p>
</blockquote>
]]></html></oembed>