The United States’ response to Russia’s aggression against Georgia seems weak at best. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice made more than 50 phone calls over the weekend, and President Bush said (between Olympics events) that when he spoke with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and Putin’s puppet president, he expressed “grave concern about the disproportionate response of Russia and that we strongly condemn the bombing outside of South Ossetia.” But Putin seems undeterred by either foreign criticism or Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili’s signing of a cease-fire pledge.
The United States could use some of the credibility it squandered by invading Iraq about now. Lacking that, the Group of Seven, NATO, the United Nations and the European Union need to be tough and unified.
As John McCain urged today, Rice should go to Europe “to establish a common Euro-Atlantic position aimed at ending the war and supporting the independence of Georgia.”
Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Saakashvili says that “if Georgia falls, this will also mean the fall of the West in the entire former Soviet Union and beyond. Leaders in neighboring states — whether in Ukraine, in other Caucasian states or in Central Asia — will have to consider whether the price of freedom and independence is indeed too high.”
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- satatom on Open thread 11/22
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- Regular on Open thread 11/22
- DavidB on Health care reform would save state money
- DavidB on Minority status in Senate; majority approval at home
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Open thread 11/22
- American_Way on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
153 Comments
George Bush looked in Putin’s eyes and saw his soulmate …
Ahh the predicted mccain solution, now run along condi we have an election we need to win.
Did they consumate their spiritual union?
“The United States could use some of the credibility it squandered by invading Iraq about now.”
Are you serious Rhonda? Self-loathing got you so blinded to the past you don’t remember how many Russians were getting filthy rich off of the oil for food scandal? Your concerned with our credibility? Just damn!
Ahh, mis-information.
Russia fought back in reaction to a sneak attack by Georgia (backed by Israel and American advisor’s). Now, Russia’s government is as criminal as our own, but this is the same info delivered by the same people that bring us Miss South Carolina and her missing maps. Hell, it’s safe to say that most people in this country think that Russia invaded Georgia because they want cheap peaches.
What we have here is a reversal of the Cuban-missile crises. This is the start of something big, yes even bigger than American Idol.
http://www.defendamerica.mil/photoessays/sep2002/p090402a1.html
While certainly we are bogged down in Iraq (where arguably we shouldn’t be), let’s not pretend that if we were not there, we would be rushing to Georgia’s aid. Look at a map. Like it or not, the US simply has relatively little ability to project military power there. Try operating a carrier group in the Black Sea – hell, just try gettin into the Black Sea – in the face of hostile land-based forces. Good luck.
The Iraq mess has relatively little to do with our inability to respond with aid to Georgia.
Imagine, conversely, if the US invaded Cuba. What could Russian forces do? Absent going nuke (which neither side is willing to do), Russia could do nothing except mouth protests. We are in much the same position.
Geography still matters, folks.
Rhonda, you can be an idiot at times.
If we had left Saddam in power, thumbing his nose at the United States and the United Nations, we might well have LESS credibility, today.
Had Saddam stayed in power, Russia could honestly claim that we had not enforced our own cease fire agreement, and we had not held Saddam accountable.
Also, Russia was VIOLATING the corrupt “Oil for Food” program, and Russia was promping up Saddam.
Sometimes the choice is not between war and peace.
Sometimes the choice is between war and tyranny.
Russia fought back in reaction to a sneak attack by Georgia (backed by Israel and American advisor’s).
Really? Says who? The Russians?!? Don’t you think the massive armored columns has all the look of wholesale invasion? The “independence” of South Ossetia is just a pretext. Russia is looking to re-establish it’s former imperial and Soviet-era empire.
GMC
Exactly!
Russia is moving as an organized military force executing a well thought out plan.
This has been in the works for a long time.
It does not look like “action-reaction” to me at all.
Maybd condi will FINALLY get to fight the cold war again. Since it is her specialty and all.
And
Georgia WAS helping the United States, in Iraq.
“The United States could use some of the credibility it squandered by invading Iraq about now.”
You Libs love the talking points. Nevermind that it’s not true.
Given that we can’t project any powe in the area, it might have been wiser for bush not to provoke the situration by visiting Georgia and talking up EU membership.
The Georgian conflict is an area where I’m not wholly up to speed. I’m busy today, but it would nice (ha!) to see a discussion of the details. I’ll check back.
Is the region in question really an autonomous, ethnically Russian region? Aside from questions of who started it, Chechnya comes to mind.
At any rate, I can’t get behind gunboat diplomacy, on either side, unless it’s demonstrably a case of self-defense.
P.S. And what’s up with this: “the bombing outside of South Ossetia.”
Surely not all of Georgia is up for grabs!
The Georgian’s were and have been running drills for month’s along the border.
And we’re not looking to put missile’s in their back yard?
What’s going to happen when they want to put missile’s back into Cuba?
No this is just perfect for a fear-vote for McCain. And just what Brzezinski called for in (again) his book The Grand Chessboard.
Swallow a little more propaganda. There’s plenty of it.
It would be nice to have the whole goings-on explained by someone who knows all of the relevant background.
The Libs are really divided on this issue.
First, they LOVE the former Commies who live in Russia. They NEED to side with them.
On the other hand, the LIBS love to Bash Bush and see this as a great opportunity to question why Bush isn’t going to war to defend Georgia! (While at the same time, the Libs BEG for surrender in Iraq!)
And they are blind to the hypocracy of either position.
Sad sacks.
Rage – I believe that S Ossetia is largely ethnic Russian. In many ways this is a continuation of the hangover from the Soviet days when ’settlers’ moved into areas of the other republics. As Russians they tended to be aligned with the rulers. Now as minorities they suffer from the legacy of Russian domination of the old Soviet Union.
Similar in some ways to Arab Iraqis in Kurdistan – they moved in when Saddam ruled from Baghdad but now are having problems.
As for Bush’s claim that it is “disproportionate” for Russia to bomb targets all over Georgia in response to the conflict in S Ossetia: isn’t that what we did in Iraq in Desert Storm – far from Kuwait? And isn’t that what we supported with bombardments across the length and breadth on Lebanon a few years ago?
“Hell, it’s safe to say that most people in this country think that Russia invaded Georgia because they want cheap peaches.”
Actually it’s to crush the Bulldogs and help the Alabama CRIMSON Tide.
Swallow a little more propaganda. There’s plenty of it.
Pleefer, chill out, and produce some links. Thank you.
Here’s Justin Raimondo’s take, which I neither endorse nor condemn:
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=13285
The Georgian’s were and have been running drills for month’s along the border.
Sounds like for good reason, give their very large and hostile neighbor to the north. Given the Russian invasion.
Tighten up the tinfoil, Pleefer. At the rate you’re using it up, you need to keep that hat nice and tight; aluminum foil isn’t geetting any cheaper. Next you’ll be telling us that this is all tied to the vast 9/11 conspiracy, backed by the Freemasons and those devious Jewish bankers . . . (rolls eyes).
P.S. Avid readers of Antiwar.com saw this coming. In a column entitled “Wars to Watch Out For,” I wrote:
“As President Mikheil Saakashvili deflowers his own revolution and shuts down the opposition media, he could well try to divert attention away from his political problems by ginning up a fresh conflict with the breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, both of which are protected by Russian troops and regional militias.”
The real question: in times of peace, who was in charge of Ossetia?
The Georgian’s did a complete provocation, attacking a university and civilians in South Ossetia.
This is scary sh.it.
This is scary sh.it.
Not really. It isn’t our business.
Google maps has squat on Georgia.
Anyone with a link to descent map?
Rest assured, I’m not trying to convince an idgit like you GMC. You’ll go down with all of the other idgit’s.
I’ll be laughing at you and your sorrow cause I’ve already used up all of my sad for you.
The Georgian’s did a complete provocation, attacking a university and civilians in South Ossetia.
Says who? Evidence?
BTW – “South Ossetia” is Georgian territory. How is that a Russian concern?
And you talk about Chas accusing people of rascism. I’ll say you are, you want to bring in “Jewish banker’s”. Tsk, tsk, tsk.
BTW – “South Ossetia” is Georgian territory. How is that a Russian concern?
Break away territory. Russia wants ‘em back.
Interesting…from Wiki…
The United Nations, European Union, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), Council of the European Union, North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and all other countries in the world recognize South Ossetia as part of Georgia.
So, it appears that Russia is invading Georgia, a recognized country and their only stance is supporting the ethnic Russians in South Ossetia.
Essentially, Russia is invading a sovereign country (Georgia) and is in violation of International Laws via hostile conflict.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-080808-georgia-ossetia-webaug09,0,4176197.story
Ask Putin.
Anyone with a link to descent map?
Heckler, use “Tbilisi” and zoom out.
No the libs love that Russia was turning away from communism till Bush and Putin took over. Now we’re going backwards. The one good thing Reagan did, I’ll bet he’s rolling over in his grave.
This is exactly why we should have impeached Bush. There is still too much going on to have him at the helm of the ship.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_(country)
Just some general stuff …
It is my understanding from reading a variety of sources, including but not limited to the Wiki and sources therein cited, that South Osselia is indeed Georgian territory, one, however, populated by a group of folks that are, for the most part, of Russian ethnicity. The province has tried to separate from Georgian rule, based upon this greater commonality with Russia (IIRC, the currency used is Russian, rather than Georgian as an example). The area has been under the watchful eye of a peacekeeping group, made up of Georgians, Russians, and military members of one of the other former Soviet Republics (memory fails me, here) for a number of years.
It is my recollection that the activity which “kicked off” the current unpleasantries was an attack on some of the separists by the Georgian government, during which some of the Russian peacekeeping troops were at least wounded. The Russian military reaction was cloaked in terms of coming to the aid of the Russian troops located there, a “self defense” argument of sorts.
Apologize for lack of links and any faulty memory on what I’ve been reading.
“SolDevVB
Posted August 11, 2008 at 1:16 pm | Permalink
BTW – “South Ossetia” is Georgian territory. How is that a Russian concern?
Break away territory. Russia wants ‘em back.”
Kind of like if Mexico invaded the southwest USA because they “eant ‘em back”
“separists”=”separatists”
MOSCOW — Behind the hostilities in South Ossetia are two nations that have long been spoiling for a fight, with Russia eager to show it is boss in the region and U.S.-backed Georgia determined to prove it can stand up to its huge neighbor.
With Vladimir Putin in Beijing for the Olympic opening ceremony, Georgia may have been betting it could pounce on an opportunity to quickly wrest control of its breakaway province as the world’s attention was fixed on China.
But the gamble seems to be backfiring: Washington won’t endorse Georgia’s power play and Moscow’s counteroffensive has brought the two sides into a fight it will be very hard for Georgia to win.
http://www.cleveland.com/world/index.ssf/2008/08/south_ossetia_war_was_big_gamb.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_South_Ossetia_(2008)
Some more info …
We’re gonna make Russia look bad, so we’re not the only “bad guy’s” in International opinion. With Russia being Iran’s buddy, we’ve got a perfect storm going on. Cheney’s gonna be…er… more rich!
Kind of like if Mexico invaded the southwest USA because they “eant ‘em back”
LOL!
Heh, believe me, Ben, we have some paranoid nutcases here in Tucson who live in fear of exactly that happening!
Whoever “started” it (and in these cases, there’s usually at least some fault on both sides) the Russian intent is clear: re-establishment, bit by bit, of it’s Imperial/Soviet Empire.
And, as noted before, the US has little if any way to project military power into the area. We can do little but protest and watch. That would be true with or without our circumstances in Iraq.
I for one am *glad* we have such team of skilled international negotiators leading our country. I am sure this can all be resolved in a mostly peaceful manner soon.
GMC – Russia has wanted domination over its neighbors for centuries as a buffer to protect it from invasion.
Not really the US’s probelm.
GMC – Russia has wanted domination over its neighbors for centuries as a buffer to protect it from invasion.
But is that really relevant in 2008? This ain’t 1917, folks.
Is it relevant? Probably not. But in the mindset of Bush’s soulmate? Probably yes.
This ain’t 1917, folks
——
Have you ever left the USA?
Ben –
True enough, though I would argue that its empire historically was less buffer than the traditional reasons for empire: economic exploitation, international influence, military power and status. As a general rule (Napoleon and Hitler’s armies being famous exceptions) it has been the Russians who were the aggressors. Russia has over many centuries, expanded from a relatively small Central Asian region, centered on Moscovy, to the dominant central Asian power. Other ethnicities who got in the way have not fared well, whether under Imperial Russia or the Soviets. In most ways, Soviet Russia was just Imperial Russia in new garb.
Russia has also sought – for centuries – warm-water ports which cannot be easily bottled up. That has not changed.
My bad–the Georgia Google Map sucks.
Try Ossetia.
And, as noted before, the US has little if any way to project military power into the area. We can do little but protest and watch. That would be true with or without our circumstances in Iraq.
Which is exactly why this stuff is happening. Read Brzezinski.
It is easy to say that the current Russian-Georgian dispute is not really the U.S.’s problem. Facially, that is true. Not our problem, so let’s not get involved.
However, there is the existence of a pipeline running through Georgia transporting oil to outlets to the world market. Is it still not our problem if the same pipeline is taken over by the Russians? What effect will that have on world oil supplies? What effect will that have on the world market price of oil?
That said, GMC is correct. The geography of the region is such that the U.S., among others, can do little to nothing to project any military power into the region, regardless of Iraq. As such, then, what can the U.S., NATO, et al, do that would be meaningful to try to bring settlement to this situation? Economic sanctions? Please, he who has control of oil given today’s interconnected world and interconnected economies, has the “ace in the hole” insofar as economic sanctions are concerned. In this regard as well, does it not make sense for the Russians to try to restore the Imperial/Soviet Empire and its hegemony in this area?
While it is the business of the U.S. and others in the so-called developed world what happens between Georgia and Russia, bluntly we and they can do little to nothing about it. In that sense, then, it is indeed “none of the U.S.’s business”, as nothing can be done about it.
Why does the US have no military power in the area of Georgia? Because we have very few economic interests in the region. No oil there…
“GMC70″ imagines –
“…the US has little if any way to project military power into the area. We can do little but protest and watch. That would be true with or without our circumstances in Iraq.”
Oh, yeah.
If Cheney/Shrub hadn’t committed 160,000 Americans to Iraq, if those 160,000 troops weren’t battle fatigued and assigned to a hundred year occupation in a country that had nothing to do with 9/11 or the War on Terrorism (at least, until America invaded)… Putin would have carried on an expansionist post-Soviet invasion.
And Joe Lieberman is the Tooth Fairy.
Putin (who’s soul George WMD Bush has seen and approved) is lighting the fuse for a world war. Shrub is getting drunk and signing autographs on the tits of the beach volleyball team members.
That’s the Republic Party in power.
They want to wield power in the worst way.
And they do.
Rage
There are some Mexican American groups that clearly advocate a new country, taking part of Mexico and part of the USA to form that new country.
It makes no sense.
Why come to the US, for a better life, only to ruin the US, by making it more like Mexico?
One pipeline makes it a US problem? Russia itself has vast stores of oil and nat. gas what would happen to the price of oil if Russia decided to close the spigots to punish the US for meddling? The US generally stays out of land disputes what would happen if we decided to take sides in the Kashmir dispute, or in Northern Ireland, Spain wants Gibraltar back do we force Britain to give it back?
Sorry Georgia, you’re on your own, just like the Shiites were after bush 1 egged them into rebellion.
TomPaine, exactly; if Russia was to so react, which would directly punish Western Europe and some of the former Soviet Republics more than the U.S., would it not be to the advantage of the U.S. to keep access to said pipeline open to others?
brian-nuevo, from my recollection of what I’ve read, there are natural gas and some oil deposits in Georgia proper.
Agreed GMC. One big difference between Russia’s empire building and that of other European powers is that Russia’s empire has been contiguous while ours and others have been world-wide. And yes, you are absolutely correct about ports.
Or, how about getting involved in the Iraq/Iran land claims, or, the India/Pakistan land disputes?
Maybe GW will send Russia a stern message, and boycott the Russian competitions! When it’s their turn to compete he could leave, or just turn his back.
Absolutely correct Paul. “Aztlan” would be a stupid disaster for all concerned.
MEChA
http://www.mayorno.com/WhoIsMecha.html
In two years in the town, I have yet to even hear of someone publicly advocating “Aztlan.”
I don’t discount the potential danger of any lunatic fringe group. But that invasion ain’t happening, folks.
Does the “ports” issue really matter here?
Yes, Russia has always craved a “warm water port” — the fact that they don’t have such a port caused the deaths of thousands of American Merchant Marines, who died icy deaths trying to supply the USSR, even befor Pearl Harbor.
However, look at a map, this is the Black Sea. Not the best option for a new port. First, Russia controls other areas of the Black Sea. Second, you have some real bottlenecks, getting any ship out of the Black Sea.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Sea
Buffer – Georgia, along with Armenia and Azerbajain serve as a sort of ‘buffer’ between Russia and Iran/Turkey to the south. Russia’s goal for centuries was to have sacrificial lands that must be overrun before an advancing army could get to Mother Russia.
Hereeee’s Johnie!
“Russian President (Dmitry) Medvedev and Prime Minister (Vladimir) Putin must understand the severe, long-term negative consequences that their government’s actions will have for Russia’s relationship with the U.S. and Europe,” McCain said.
He urged NATO’s North Atlantic Council to convene an emergency session to demand a ceasefire and begin discussions on both the deployment of an international peacekeeping force to South Ossetia and the implications for NATO’s future relationship with Russia.
McCain opened his remarks with what might be seen as a subtle dig at Obama, who is on holiday in Hawaii.
AUGUST VACATIONING
“Americans wishing to spend August vacationing with their families or watching the Olympics may wonder why their newspapers and television screens are filled with images of war in the small country of Georgia,” he said before launching into a lengthy explanation of Georgia’s recent history.
I bet the reference to ‘watching the olympics’ wasn’t meant’t as a criticism of bush.
The Caucasus region, like the Balkans, is a real mess. Lots of extreme nationalism but with populations intermingled:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nagorno-Karabakh
The Caucasus region, like the Balkans, is a real mess. Lots of extreme nationalism but with populations intermingled:
Absolutely. It’s very difficult to define “good guys” and “bad guys,” if indeed such things ever really exist. It is almost impossible for national borders to follow ethinic divisions, because the ethnicities have become so intermingled. Centuries of Russian expansion have made that even more difficult; Russia, and the Soviets after the Imperial era, moved large numbers of ethnic Russians into many of these areas in order to try to extend their control and claim over them. In S. Ossetia, Russia has been handing out Russian passports willy-nilly to Georgian Ossetians (is that the right reference?), it appears as a justification to act as they are now acting to defend “Russian nationals.”
Yup, Ben, it’s a mess. US involvement cannot make it less a mess, even if we could insert military forces there. But we can’t. Geography still matters.
Not far to the West is the Ukraine.
Stalin’s forced starvation of the Ukraine, one of the greatest human rights abuse of all time.
Russia has never been a very nice neighbor.
http://www.ukrainiangenocide.com/dsovietpolicyandukrainiangenocide.html
Russia just rescuing those poor oppressed Ossetians? Riiight.
Or Russia reassembling its empire:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080811/ap_on_re_eu/georgia_south_ossetia
Georgia claims Russians have cut country in half
By DAVID NOWAK, Associated Press Writer
48 minutes ago
GORI, Georgia – Russian forces seized several towns and a military base deep in western Georgia on Monday, opening a second front in the fighting. Georgia’s president said his country had been effectively cut in half with the capture of the main east-west highway near Gori.
Will the Ukraine be next? Likely. At what point does the west say enough?
It makes one wonder what would have happened if this situation developed after Georgia joined NATO.
Things could get very ugly very quickly!
Will the Ukraine be next? Likely. At what point does the west say enough?
Everybody panic! The Russians are coming! The Russians are coming!
Can this be? Do I hear libs saber rattling? A little brut force aggressiveness? Justifiable war without the promise of WMD’s?
Or is this more general crying the blues about the big bad guys?
“At what point does the west say enough?”
West? What west? There hasn’t been a united front from NATO, the EU and the United States for decades.
Socialist pacifist and agendas.
Unless you really mean, “when does the United States say enough?”
Who is the west GMC?
Ukraine has a western border with Europe. That would increase the likelihood of giving them assistance. Georgia is more isolated. As noted, geography matters.
Wait a minute.
All of our conjectures about who’s on the right side and who’s on the wrong side of the Russia/Georgia curfluffle really should look to our President to explain the situation and present a unified American approach to this European conflict.
Too bad George WMD Bush is busy getting drunk in China and signing autographs on the beach volleyball team members’ tits.
Nero fiddled while Rome burned.
Shrub can’t even play a fiddle. He’s drunk and goin’ grab-ass on the beach volleyball team.
It’s the Republican way.
If they were a nato member nato would be obligated to defend.
WWBD?
What would Barack do?
No experience. Lot’s of talk.
No experience. Lot’s of talk.
Interestingly enough, Obama is actually taking a harder line than McCain, talking about Georgia’s “territorial integrity.” But neither is calling for military action.
As for Bush, well, he’s busy: look at that swim team go!
Here’s our prez. gettin a hand(le) on international (deriers), I mean affairs!
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-1043122/Cheeky-George-Bush-works-sweat-getting-know-womens-volleyball-team.html
A thought: Should Obama cut his vacation short to “deal with the crisis”?
American_Way
Posted August 11, 2008 at 4:31 pm | Permalink
WWBD?
What would Bush do?
Invade Alabama … again.
On channel 25, the commentator kept interrupting Richardson, with do you really think Obama talking to them would do any good. What has mccain proposed that obama hasn’t?
Bush must think they should’ve learned their lesson last time the seceeded!
Really though, the U.S. had very little to do with their breaking away from Russia, so we’re not responsible to keep them that way, even if we could.
bth,
I don’t see a Bush on the ballot this fall. This issue will fall to the next CIC. Probably Barack Obama.
What would he do?
“Seeing Red: Prime Minister Vladimir Putin looks rather less amused as he joins members of the Russian Olympic squad in Beijing yesterday”
Yeah – Putin was thinking about what his forces were doing in the Caucasus while Bush was trying to figure out why Russia was attacking ATLANTA!
American_Way
Posted August 11, 2008 at 4:31 pm | Permalink
WWSD?
What would Sidney do?
Crash a jet. And divorce his wife.
Russia has more billionares than the USA. Their proven oil reserves will ensure riches for the Russian government for decades. The Russian balance of trade will be firmly in the black with money coming from American SUV and Pick-em-up truck owners.
Naked aggression? Maybe. Maybe not. But it’s not our affair. Let the wealth EU (Euro = 1.50 dollars today). Afterall, it is their backyard.
Policeman of the world NO MORE.
Here are some excerpts from McCain’s statement on Monday:
“Russian aggression against Georgia is both a matter of urgent moral and strategic importance to the United States of America. …
“Russian actions, in clear violation of international law, have no place in 21st century Europe. …
“Russian President Medvedev and Prime Minister Putin must understand the severe, long-term negative consequences that their government’s actions will have for Russia’s relationship with the U.S. and Europe.”
Democrat Barack Obama — In a weekend statement, Obama said he spoke with U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Georgia’s President Mikheil Saakashvili and that he was “deeply concerned” about the well-being of the people of Georgia. He urged both sides to allow humanitarian assistance and called on Russia to end its “cyber war” against Georgian Web sites. He also called for aggressive diplomacy to secure a cease-fire.
Here are some excerpts from Obama’s statement:
“I condemn Russia’s aggressive actions and reiterate my call for an immediate cease-fire. Russia must stop its bombing campaign, cease flights of Russian aircraft in Georgian airspace, and withdraw its ground forces from Georgia. … Georgia’s territorial integrity must be respected. …
“Diplomats at the highest levels from the United States, the European Union, and the United Nations must become directly involved in mediating this military conflict and beginning a process to resolve the political disputes over the territories of South Ossetia and Abkhazia. A genuinely neutral mediator — not the Russian government — must begin a process of negotiations immediately.” (Editing by Alan Elsner)
http://uk.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUKN1136006120080811
Oops–probably oughta include this:
Republican John McCain — Proposed several steps including a special U.N. Security Council session and high-level diplomacy aimed at bringing pressure on Russia to end the conflict. He also urged humanitarian assistance to Georgia and said the United States should work with Azerbaijan and Turkey as well as others to secure the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline.
“What would Sidney do?”
Call me his friend?
“secure the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline.”
I’m sure Putin will be willing to guaruntee the security of ‘our’ pipeline in return for acquiescence to their attacks in Georgia.
“Here are some excerpts from Obama’s statement:
“I condemn Russia’s aggressive actions and reiterate my call for an immediate cease-fire”
Isn’t he just a first term Senator? He’s calling for what? The audacity of dope.
Georgia has been cruisin for a bruisin for awhile now, they just thought their buddy W would back them.
They should know bushs are misleading. If a bush is talking crap, best to ignore it.
Right, if you haven’t been in the senate half your life, who’s going to listen to you. Gotsta have that gravitas!
I strongly condemn the outbreak of violence in Georgia, and urge an immediate end to armed conflict. Now is the time for Georgia and Russia to show restraint, and to avoid an escalation to full scale war. Georgia’s territorial integrity must be respected. All sides should enter into direct talks on behalf of stability in Georgia, and the United States, the United Nations Security Council, and the international community should fully support a peaceful resolution to this crisis.
Pretty much the same except for the humanitarian slant.
Putin was thinking does that idiot even know we invaded? Is he even in the loop?
But rather than cause the girls on the volleyball team to worry, bush plays grab ass. Falling back on the ‘My Pet Goat” routine.
You know for Libs not wanting the U.S. to be the world’s policeman, they sure are trying to tie President Bush into the situation, as if he was the blame or the solution.
typical.
He’s definitely not the solution, as for blame, he shares some responsibility, after talking crap during his last visit.
What if:
The Russians unilaterally withdraw forces from Georgia, before there is time for any unified diplomatic pressure to be brought (there isn’t any now, IMHO) say on this Wednesday. This action, it seems to me, would do the following:
1) Send a message to the Ukraine to cease and desist in its efforts to create a more democratic country;
2) Send a message to NATO to keep its hands off former Soviet Republics;
3) Send a message to the rest of the world that it is without any power or other way to stop the Russians from acting in their perceived best interests;
4) Send a message to the Georgians to not reelect the current President, and perhaps to take action to remove him from office at the earliest opportunity; and
5) Remind Poland how precarious its position is, both geographically and politically.
BTW, upon withdrawal, the Russian forces stay at the border with Georgia, as a not so subtle reminder that it could all happen again at Russia’s pleasure, and there’s not a thing anyone else can do about it.
“The United Nations Security Council” the home of sharply worded memos with some capital letters and exclaimation points thrown in for good measure.
Will probably be over before the olympics. Looks like muscle flexing.
VT – the fact of the matter is that Russian absorption of Georgia is a fait accompli and the geographic reality is that there is nothing we can do about it, even had we wanted to, short of breaking out the nukes – and that will not happen, nor does anyone advocate same.
That message will not be lost on Ukraine, nor Poland, etc. The more things change, the more they stay the same. Russia is still Russia, whether Imperial Russia, Soviet Russia, or post-Soviet Russia.
Exactly, GMC. And, Russia is still “Mother Russia”, regardless of how styled (Imperial, Soviet or post-Soviet). I do think that the geographical absorption of Georgia into Russia will happen sooner rather than later, on a timetable determined by the Russians.
Wondering, however, with reference to Ukraine whether (as I recall) it has nukes under its control might operate as a bit of a brake on the ambitions of the Russians.
It’s their backyard, not alot to be done. Georgia will have to stand on their own.
While people like fleetwood, and his ilk, are bashing Obama for whatever reason they choose, the real enemy is Putin, Bush’s soul brother. He is doing his best to reintegrate Georgia into the Russian fold by force. After he accomplishes that, he will start on all the countries that separated themselves from Russia.
He will not be satisfied until he starts another cold war, and establishes Russia as another world power (again). There are many countries that saw this coming; it ain’t no day trip.
If we weren’t bogged down in Iraq – a war that never should have happened, in my opinion – we could and should give Georgia all the military support they need to stop Putin. But we are so stretched out now, it would be suicide to send help. It would break this countries bank, as Russia is no Iraq.
Iraq was stupid to invade; Georgia needs our help, as Bush pledged, but Iraq pretty much negated that option. Way to go Bush. Maybe you should send congrats to your soul brother.
Now would be the time for the U.N. to stand up and be counted as a world organization and stop this madman. It is an invasion of a sovereign, democratically elected, government and nation. The U.N. is supposed to be there just for the purpose of stopping just. that.
Sounds like it may be coming to an end. Hard to tell who the aggressor was.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080811/ts_nm/georgia_ossetia_dc_86
Note the comparison to Iraq and saddam.
And what, may I ask, could the U.N. do, what with Russia’s veto power in the Security Council (unless, for some reason the Russian Ambassador doesn’t get the notice of the meeting or walks out). While the U.N. supposedly exists for the purpose you set forth, if there is a veto in the Security Council, then (not willing to look right now) I believe the matter cannot properly come before the General Assembly under the U.N. charter. Also, how supportive of such an action (assuming it might be taken within the charter) would various nations who are members of the General Assembly be if Russia is in control of the source of much of said nations’ oil and natural gas supplies? Maybe OPEC could be persuaded to fill the oil void, but somehow I’m dubious about this.
Going to have to revise my timeline in my hupothetical posted earlier, as Putin cannot cause withdrawal that soon after the remarks that President Bush is reported (all over the internet, pick a favorite source) as making. To do so would imply a relationship to the call for withdrawal, which likely would not sit well with the nationalistic theme of the invasion.
VT, GMC – my guess is that Russia will partially withdraw – holding S Ossettia and Abkhazia as “protectorates.” They will then come up with justifications of their attacks based on “protecting minorities” there. Meanwhile the US will do nothing.
I’m pretty sure Ukraine has no nukes – I think we bought them and dismantled them. However, Ukraine, with its borders to the west, would be more likely to get NATO help.
avtolle,
I may be incorrect here, but I think Russia can’t veto a resolution that is against itself. I also find it interesting Russia invaded before Georgia is accepted into NATO.
Georgia wants its independence, from Russia, but Georgia does not want any Republic to break away from Georgia, and demand its independence.
It is more complicated the more I study the issue.
I’m pretty sure Ukraine has no nukes – I think we bought them and dismantled them.
That appears to be correct:
Ukraine announced in June 1996 that all warheads bad been removed from the country. A problem arose in the removal of SS-19s, which use large amounts of a toxic substance known as heptyl. The United States sent storage tanks to hold 2,200 metric tons of the substance. After the SS-19 missiles were removed from combat duty, 19 were re-used in Russia.
In May 1997 Ukraine agreed to destroy its SS-24 missiles, in addition to SS-19 missiles, silos and launch sites, utilizing $47 million provided through the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction program. Withdrawal from combat duty of the SS-24 (RS-22) missiles started on 01 July 1998. Complete liquidation of intercontinental ballistic missiles in Ukraine is planned to be completed by 04 January 2001. In September 1998 a US Department of Defense delegation, headed by Assistant Secretary of Defense Edward Warner, took part in the decommissioning of a SS-24 silo launcher in Pervomaisk, the Nikolayev region, Ukraine. The Pervomaisk base comprises 46 silos with SS-24 solid-fuel intercontinental ballistic missiles. Decommissioning of a single silo launcher is estimated to cost about US$ 1 million, and the US Government is allocating a total of US$399.2 million. The Bechtel company is the main contractor in the decommissioning program of the Ukrainian silo launchers.
http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/ukraine/
That slimey Bill Kristol is always up for nukes, remember his line?
“What’s the use of having nukes if you can’t use them”?
He may finally get what he’s always wanted…all of you chicken-hawks may get it. Isn’t that like totally kick ass?
With God’s help, we may make it to WW3!
And what’s not to love about that?
I submit, 2+2=5.
http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=marshal%20law%20in%20Helena%20AR&rls=com.microsoft:*:IE-SearchBox&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&sourceid=ie7&rlz=1I7GFRD&um=1&sa=N&tab=wv#
On a “lighter” note…
A little truth never hurt nobody.
The Moronic Party
By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS
“Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative.”
– John Stuart Mill
Many years ago, during the 1970s if memory serves, neoconservative Irving Kristol, echoing John Stuart Mill, called his conservative party, the Republican Party, “the stupid party.”
Kristol was referring to the Republican’s inability to compete on the policy front. Jack Kemp and Ronald Reagan led the Republicans out of the wilderness, but now Republicans have reverted to the stupid party, or more precisely the moronic party.
Take a minute to examine the presidential campaign propaganda that Republicans send around the Internet, and you will see what I mean. For example, recently while Obama was traveling abroad, showing himself to the remnant of our allies, Republican political operatives blitzed the Internet with the suggestion that Obama might not be an American citizen. Doubt was cast on either of his parents being American citizens. The message went on to suggest that Obama refused to produce his birth certificate. All the while, Obama was traveling abroad on a US passport, a document that cannot be obtained without a US birth certificate.
Considering that the Republican candidate, John McCain, was born in the Panama Canal Zone, only the GOP would be dumb enough to make an issue over whether the Democrats’ candidate was born in one of the 50 states.
The innuendo and negativism with which the Republicans are conducting their presidential campaign are unprecedented. There is no sign of issues in McCain’s Karl Rovian campaign. Issues have been superseded by hate, lies, and war.
Republicans stand for war without end, a police state to make us “safe,” and “energy independence,” which means drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Preserve and offshore of Florida’s Gulf Coast beaches.
What Republicans really mean by “energy independence” is prevailing over environmentalists. Republicans lump environmentalists in the same category with abortionists, gays, feminists, food stamp recipients, trade unionists and terrorists. To a Republican, saving America means prevailing over these people.
The notion that Americans can achieve energy independence by drilling offshore wells and in the arctic is absurd. A number of experts have pointed out that the best data do not support any such possibility.
For example, Robert Kaufman at Boston University, citing US government data, reports that the US might have 40 billion barrels of oil in undeveloped reserves which are not off limits. Another 19 billion might be in off limit offshore sites and in the Arctic National Wildlife preserve.
All of this oil cannot be brought up at once, and apparently none before 2017. Bringing it all into production would, experts think, increase US oil production by 1-4 percent. In other words, nothing. Currently the US uses 21 million barrels a day, and the entire world uses 86 million barrels a day. At best, the Arctic Wildlife Refuge could by 2017 produce 1 million barrels a day, about one-twentieth of current US use and one-eighty-sixth of current world use.
This is not energy independence, and it would have no material effect on price. Indeed, the offshoring by US corporations of US jobs has a much greater effect on the dollar price of oil by inflating the US trade deficit and driving down the exchange value of the US dollar. But, of course, here we are talking about facts, and facts are of no interest to Republicans.
Republicans are interested in prevailing over the “bad guys.” The fact that the bad guys are Bush, Cheney, Rice, Wolfowitz, Perle, Billy Kristol, and other such is beyond the Republicans’ imagination. Bad guys are “towel heads” with beards and robes and are “over there” where they must be killed before the come “over here.” The extent of the Republican intellect boils down to “over here” vs. “over there.”
The other great bugaboo of Republicans is “the liberal media.” Fox “News” has Republicans convinced that “the liberal media” is endangering America by siding with terrorists.
Clearly, Republicans never look at “the liberal media.” It was Judith Miller at the “liberal” New York Times who served up as fact all the neocon disinformation about Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction and al Qaeda connections. Without the New York Times leading the way, the neocons could never have pulled off their illegal invasions.
On July 18, 2008, the New York Times allowed the Israeli historian Benny Morris to spew lies about Iran that he used to justify an attack on that country possibly even involving nuclear weapons. This is the same New York Times that the idiot conservatives believe is part of “the liberal media.”
It was ABC News that served up the neocon disinformation that the anthrax had been traced to Saddam Hussein. And, today, August 9, 2008, as I write, it is the “liberal” Washington Post that has written an editorial urging the US to go to war with Russia.
With its editorial, “Stopping Russia: the US and its allies must unite against Moscow’s war on Georgia,” the Washington Post has established a world record for the maximum number of lies in the minimum number of words.
Except for the Washington Post, the entire world knows that Georgia (the birthplace of Joseph Stalin, not Georgia USA) initiated the aggression that killed Russian peacekeepers and hundreds of civilians in South Ossetia, peacekeepers who were there with the blessing of Georgia and international agreements.
The true facts are available all over the world press. But the “liberal” Washington Post serves up the lie that Russia has attacked Georgia and conceivably plans to conquer all of Georgia. “This is a grave challenge to the United States and Europe,” thunders the Bush Regime’s mouthpiece, aka, “the liberal media.”
Thirsting for blood, the “liberal media” declares: “The United States and its NATO allies must together impose a price on Russia.”
Here we see the combination of idiocy and delusion in one sentence. The United States has proved that it is incapable of occupying Iraq, much less Afghanistan. Russia has a large trade surplus. America’s NATO allies are dependent on Russian natural gas. Yet the “liberal” Washington Post wants a bankrupt US and “its NATO allies” who are dependent on Russian energy “to impose a price on Russia” for defending its peacekeepers!
Seldom has the world seen such total insanity as the neoconservative Washington Post, a propaganda sheet as far from “liberal media” is it is possible to be.
Georgia was part of Old Russia and the Soviet Union for two centuries. After Soviet communism collapsed, the US taxpayer funded neoconservative National Endowment for Democracy broke every agreement that President Reagan had made with Gorbachev and began using US taxpayers’ money to rig and purchase elections in former constituent parts of the Russian/Soviet empire.
The Endowment for Democracy purchased Georgia as a US colony. The affront to Russia was extreme, but at the time Russia was weak. Oligarchs with outside money had grabbed control over Russian resources, and Russia was in dire straits and could not resist American imperialism.
Putin corrected the situation for Russia.
Now using American weapons Georgia for reasons yet to be revealed has violated its own agreement with Russia and attacked South Ossetia, killing in the process Russian peacekeepers. Vladimir Vasilyev, chairman of the Russian State Duma Committee for Security told the press: “The things that were happening in Kosovo, the things that were happening in Iraq – we are now following the same path. The further the situation unfolds, the more the world will understand that Georgia would never be able to do all this without America.”
Yes, without America there would be no war in Ossetia and no war between Russia and its former constituent part.
Without America there would be no war in Afghanistan. No war in Iraq.
Without America there would not be 1.2 million dead Iraqis and 4 million displaced Iraqis. We have no idea of the toll on Afghan civilians, although women and children appear to be the prime targets of the US/NATO forces that are “bringing peace and freedom to Afghanistan.”
Recently, US Secretary of State Condi Rice said that the US government could not prevent an Israeli attack on Iran. Israel is an independent country, said the American Secretary of State. What an extraordinary lie.
Israel cannot exist without American weapons and money. Israel cannot attack Iran without overflying Iraq, which the US air force can easily prevent. It is clear as day that the Bush Regime has given the green light to Israel to attack Iran so that the Bush Regime can rush to “Israel’s defense.”
Meanwhile the “liberal” media is urging the US to get involved in a war between Russia and Georgia. The insanity will lead to the unloosening of nuclear weapons.
Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in the Reagan administration. He was Associate Editor of the Wall Street Journal editorial page and Contributing Editor of National Review. He is coauthor of The Tyranny of Good Intentions. He can be reached at: paulcraigroberts@yahoo.com
“This is not energy independence, and it would have no material effect on price.”
Actually, that is not true. By encouraging wasteful consumption and discouraging in investments to decrease our addiction (Bush’s term) such actions would serve to INCREASE prices; especially in the long term.
Hey, I have a great Idea! Lets put anti-ballistic missiles in Georgia!.
Well, let’s see, we have all our available military force tied down in the middle-east, we’re depending on the Russians for diplomatic access in North Korea and elsewhere. Kinda in a jam here! I know, we can trade them our Georgia for theirs!
“we can trade them our Georgia for theirs!”
It’ll never happen. Alabama would then be threatened; GWB protected Alabama back during the VietNam war; he will protect it again.
Looks like Russia is expanding outside of the disputed settlements. They may be going for the Gold, first time out.
Where on earth did Putin get the idea that he could just manufacture a non-existent crisis, invade a sovereign nation and overthrow its government just because he personally detests that nation’s leader?
Oh. Never mind.
MH – from his soulmate?
Looks like the Russians have called something of a cease-fire, and will not (they say) advance further into Georgia.
For a while anyway, it was looking like they were pulling a General Sherman on Georgia
I’m pretty sure Ukraine has no nukes – I think we bought them and dismantled them.
It looks like that was a mistake, huh?
If we weren’t bogged down in Iraq . . . we could and should give Georgia all the military support they need to stop Putin.
No, JM, we couldn’t. Look at a map. Just how does the US project effective military power in this area? How does one even get a carrier group into the Black Sea? Turkey is NATO, but unless this is a NATO operation, Turkey will not permit operation from its bases – they have to live with the Russians on their doorstep.
It would be the equivalent of the Russians operating effectively to defend Cuba against the full weight of the US military – it ain’t gonna happen. Geography still matters.
Pleefer gets the response he deserves . . . (eye roll).
It looks like that was a mistake, huh?
Take a good look at the India-Pakistan situation, and see if you still think it was a mistake. Nukes are the deterrent of last resort, a threat that can never be made good, at least by sane leadership. All they really accomplish is making dangerous situations more so.
But I’m glad you’re so trusting of Ukrainian leadership.
Just heard Mccain, pronouncing “Today we are all Georgians”, Shameless Mccain has spoken.
Also threw in an allusion to Hitler, with something about historical lesson = we’ve learned we can’t stand by while a small country is invaded.
Interestingly, today BP announced they’ve closed down one of the Georgian pipelines, the oil market responds with over a dollar drop in prices.
Monkeyhawk, “The Sky is falling! The SKY is falling! It’s those dumb, greedy republicans falult too! I guess I’ll just stand here….and when it falls……..I’m gunna’ sue……
Mr. Obama, given that Russia has just invaded Georgia, what is your response…..
“uuhh”…
The entire free world is waiting sir….
“The Russians invaded Georgia? That’s not in the spirit of the olympics”……”oh no, no, no, that won’t do”….”during the olympics?”…..
So that is your response sir?
“uh…yeah.”
“oh, and I may also add, I’m going to change it!”
(right after I watch Kobe dunk!!!)
obviously biased – and just what did your boy Bush do besides slap a couple of womens v-ball players butts?
“uh … Georgia? … are they near Atlanta? … I better get the Alabama ANG activated … “
Yea, Rage, a mistake. Because nukes are such an awful thing, they are an effective deterrent. Absent the threat of nuke war, which neither side wants, the US & USSR would likely have been in a shooting war at some point in the Cold War years. That was avoided in large part because each side understood that escalation of such a shooting war brought grave consequences neither side wanted. Instead, there were proxie fights; certainly not a desirable thing, but better than the alternative.
Like it or not, the nuclear genie CANNOT be put back in the bottle (note Obama recently waxing idiotically about a “world without nuclear weapons.” It’s a fantasy. Can’t happen). Absent a nuclear deterrent, how is the Ukraine to avoid reabsorption in a new Russian Empire? It’s not a sure thing at all that NATO or the US would act to assist the Ukraine in a conflict against Russia. Perhaps we shouldn’t do so in any case. The Europeans, rather than the US, have much more at stake. For the Ukraine, their existance as a nation is on the line. They will do whatever it takes to survive as a nation – as would any sane nation.
But a nuclear Ukraine make the potential cost of Russian expansion much higher. A rational leader would not use nukes lightly, of course; that same rational leader WOULD use nukes as the price of retaining the existance of the nation. Only such a willingness to use them – if necessary – makes them an effective deterrent.
Let’s take a look at India/Pakistan, as you note. Lots of border skirmishes; major, nation-threatening conflict avoided. India is much larger, and richer, than Pakistan, and has much more military capability. Absent Pakistan’s nuclear deterrent, would Pakistan still exist? Perhaps not. Now, in the bigger picture, perhaps the existance of a set of artificial lines delineating a place called “Pakistan” may not matter a whole lot; but it sure matters to the Pakistanis.
As it matters to all nations. No one “likes” nukes. But they are a fact of life, and will be for any foreseeable future. That will not change; we cannot go back and “unnuke” the planet. They are also effective at their intended purpose – to raise the cost of aggression to a cost that is unacceptable to the aggressor. That intended purpose comes at a price, of course; and a nuclear exchange would be horrible for everyone, not just the combatants. It is that very cost that makes a nuke such an effective deterrent.
Ukraine will cease to exist if they were to use a nuke against Russia.
Good point GMC. Explains why a certain US enemy might want its own nuclear deterrent.
Perhaps, Ben. But Iran’s nukes are not sought as a a deterrent to the US, rhetoric notwithstanding. Irans’s nukes are sought at best to counterbalance, at worst eliminate Israel; not as a deterrent, but as an offensive force. Given Israel’s short history, their need to keep clear military superiority over their neighbors is understandable, and if I were in their shoes, I’d see a nuclear Iran as entirely unacceptable too.
Israel doesn’t need deterred; they’ve never been the aggressor in the series of wars fought between them and their neighbors. In fact, Iran needs Israel, and the US, to be the boogiemen to keep their own people distracted while the Mullahs retain power. If Israel and the “Great Satan” didn’t exist, Iran’s leadership would have to invent them.
Yes, I know the Ed & Cos. will now pop out of the woodwork, praising the goodness of the poor, poor Palestinians and condemning those evil Israelis. Whatever. Ed is fanatically anti-semite (his protestations notwithstanding); most of the rest are simply romanticizing the underdog. And yes, I understand that the conflict is not that simple, and doesn’t easily break down into “good guys” and “bad guys.” When Israel’s neighbors cease to have, as a policy goal, the elimination of the state of Israel, then Israel treat its neighbors in good faith as good neighbors. Not until. As noted above, nations value their survival as a nation above all else.
Thought this was interesting; I’ll share it for your review and consideration. A sample:
Putin Makes His Move
By Robert Kagan
Monday, August 11, 2008; Page A15
This war did not begin because of a miscalculation by Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili. It is a war that Moscow has been attempting to provoke for some time. The man who once called the collapse of the Soviet Union “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the [20th] century” has reestablished a virtual czarist rule in Russia and is trying to restore the country to its once-dominant role in Eurasia and the world. Armed with wealth from oil and gas; holding a near-monopoly over the energy supply to Europe; with a million soldiers, thousands of nuclear warheads and the world’s third-largest military budget, Vladimir Putin believes that now is the time to make his move.
. . . .
Historians will come to view Aug. 8, 2008, as a turning point no less significant than Nov. 9, 1989, when the Berlin Wall fell. Russia’s attack on sovereign Georgian territory marked the official return of history, indeed to an almost 19th-century style of great-power competition, complete with virulent nationalisms, battles for resources, struggles over spheres of influence and territory, and even — though it shocks our 21st-century sensibilities — the use of military power to obtain geopolitical objectives. Yes, we will continue to have globalization, economic interdependence, the European Union and other efforts to build a more perfect international order. But these will compete with and at times be overwhelmed by the harsh realities of international life that have endured since time immemorial. The next president had better be ready.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/10/AR2008081001871.html
Discuss.
GMC – you are correct that the Iranian regime needs the “satans” to maintain its existence; we have helped them a lot with (a) our saber-rattling and (b) our overt support for Saddam during the Iraq invasion of Iran.
As for the Israel-Palestine situation it would help if the US and Israel would support the ‘roadmap’ and ‘two-state solution.’ We do not – if we and they did the settlement policy would not be carried out such to preclude the establishment of a West Bank state. Israel is even establishing settlements on the Jordan River which is the eastermost part of the west bank. That leave nowhere for a Palestinian state. Zero.
I didn’t mean to suggest that Iran’s nuke (if they make one) would be to deter the US. Rather it would be to deter another nuclear power in the region. By the way – I think it was the 6-day war that was started by Israel.
Read Kagan’s piece, GMC. While I think he’s a bit over the top, there are many points made that are valid.
I won’t cut and paste this, but offer a bit of a different perspective here: http://www.newsweek.com/id/152087 on the invasion.
Good article about Bush’s soulmate GMC. I think BOTH of them want the cold war back.
The petro dollar is funding Russia’s ascension, we are no longer in the position of a spending war to drive them into bankruptcy building nukes.
Just another reason we need to get off of oil.
By the way – I think it was the 6-day war that was started by Israel.
Israel’s “attack” was a pre-emptive strike against some 160,000 troops massed on its borders. The
By the way – I think it was the 6-day war that was started by Israel.
Israel’s “attack” was a pre-emptive strike against some 160,000 troops massed on its borders. While Israel certainly initiated hostilities, the “hostilities” were begun long before; Egypt alone had seven divisions massed in the Sinai.
Egypt was coming, and the attack was prepared; Israel took the inititave from them. Tactically, the right move (from Israel’s perspective, of course).
Sorry ’bout the double.
You are correct in that GMC. The sad thing IMO is that Israeli troops were welcomed by the Palestinians as liberators in 1967 (they had been oppressed by Egypt and Jordan). If we had moved then toward ‘nation-building’ in Palestine today would be much different.
Lesson: Careful who you invite in!