Europe News
Russians in control of South Ossetian capital (Roundup)
Aug 10, 2008, 11:43 GMT
On the Web
Similar articles
- Russian troops withdraw from South Ossetia border village
- Second anniversary of Georgia-Russia war commemorated (Roundup)
- Georgia and South Ossetia commemorate second anniversary of war
- Russian-Georgian diplomacy talks end in Geneva without progress
- Russia ups marine patrols off coast of Georgia's breakaway republic
Latest Headlines in Europe
- 1. In Germany hospital, wounded Libyans recover, dream of home
- 2. US Army to end Germany-based brigades amid defence overhaul
- 3. Russian astronauts complete six-hour ISS spacewalk
- 4. US Army to phase out Germany-based brigades
- 5. Prosecutor takes step to prosecute German President Wulff
Older Talkback
page: 1
All right! Done in the true spirit of the United States: Bomb and Occupy!
Way to go: 'Mission Accomplished'!
So, what is the point? Are they liberating the region? bringing freedom? removing WMDs? Bringing the word of jesus? Will they have freedom under occupation?
Only 1600 civilians dead? Wow, that is really good compared to the U.S. record. Looks like those russians really know how to copy the bomb and occupy strategy of the U.S. well.
Hum 'peace mission', eh. 'Peace With Bombs'. Done in the true spirit of the United States.
...don't we have enough on our plate already???
Don't worry Lance....totalitaianism is alive and well thanks to enablers like you...
All of a sudden a decision has been made to recall 2000 Georgian troops from Iraq.
The question is have they accomplished their task in Iraq?
Will they make a difference considering the deployment which has been made by the Russians?
I think the Georgians should comply with the Russians for the good of their people they stand to loose more if they have recalled their troops from Iraq to engage the Russians, its like a twin-engine farm aircraft fighting a MIG29 fighter. And even if Nato intervened it would mean more fire for the Georgians after all the homeground will be the battlefield!
And mind you if Nato comes in it will mean a declaration of war on the Russians.
Food for thought!
Let the Olympics run till the last day we are enjoying them.
Peace unto the world
A nation that wishes to defend it's own nation, as opposed to peacekeeping in another nation, would certainly seem to have every right to do so, whether their 'goals' have been accomplished, or not.
Since Georgia is not part of NATO, I hardly see them coming in as anything but peacekeepers, and that is a very long line of conditions before it ever happens.
It does appear as though the President of Georgia counted on his assistance to the U.S. in Iraq as a bargaining chip to go up against Russia. Sorry about that, fella. A couple of thousand troops in Iraq does not get you the U.S. repelling Russia.
This is an example of what happens when we meddle in foreign affairs, inventing democracies in what Russia still considers its 'sphere'; only to see them outgrow their britches and create a problem for Russia. Russia will, I expect, do more and more to gain influence again in some of these countries, as once they gain a military foothold, they will attempt to expand it. THIS is why you don't give them a reason to do so, in the first place.
Think back to where this latest round started:
articles.latimes.com/2008/feb/02/world/fg-poland2
'The Bush administration has proposed placing missile interceptors in Poland and radar installations in the Czech Republic to deter possible missile attacks from “rogue” states. The proposal has met with fierce opposition from Russia, which fears that a system in its backyard could be expanded and used to neutralize its huge missile force.'
The Russians see us as imperialistic (just as they are), and the Iraq War as an attempt to gain influence over an oil producer (Iraq).
Georgia has at least one key oil pipeline running through it, and we cannot afford to see an expansion of Russia's military towards that area.
(Or so claims the Georgian government. Might be an attempt to spur U.S. involvement)
www.reuters.com/article/GCA-Russia/idUSL961816420080809
TBILISI (Reuters) - Russian fighter jets targeted the major Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline which carries oil to the West from Asia but missed, Georgia's Economic Development Minister Ekaterina Sharashidze said on Saturday.
'This clearly shows that Russia has not just targeted Georgian economic outlets but international economic outlets in Georgia,' she said at a news briefing.
There have been no independent verifications of Russian jets targeting the BTC pipeline.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/georgia/2534767/Georgia-Russi a-targets-key-oil-pipeline-with-over-50-missiles.html
Russian jets targeted a key oil pipeline with over 50 missiles in a weekend bombing raid in Georgia that raised fears the conflict will tighten Moscow's stranglehold on Europe's energy supplies.
Deep craters pockmark the landscape south of the Georgian capital Tblisi in a Y-shaped pattern straddling the British-operated pipeline. The attack left two deep holes less than 100 yards either side of a pressure vent on the pipeline. Shrapnel of highly engineered munitions litters the area.
There was no visible damage to the pipeline. Its vulnerability is summed up by a yellow hazard sign next to the vent warning against digging in the area. Anyone venturing on to the site is warned against smoking.
Local police recorded 51 strikes. 'I have no doubt they wanted to target the pipeline, there is nothing else here,' said Giorgi Abrahamisvili, a policeman who witnessed the attack.
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/georgia/2534767/Georgia-Russia-ta rgets-key-oil-pipeline-with-over-50-missiles.html
Georgia is a crucial link in a three country energy corridor vital to Western Europe's oil and gas supply. The £2 billion pipeline is the only major conduit for Central Asian resources not under Russian control.
The Kremlin under Vladimir Putin, Russia's former president and now prime minister, used gas exports to Europe as a tool of foreign policy.
Reduced supplies to eastern Europe forced Russia's neighbours to curtail pro-Western ambitions. Western Europe, especially Germany, is dangerously vulnerable to reduced supplies from Russia at times of political tension.
Georgian politicians accused Russia of waging the war, which Moscow has portrayed as an intervention on behalf of beleaguered renegade enclaves, to achieve wider strategic goals.
'They need control of energy routes,' the Georgian president, Mikhail Saakashvili said. 'They need sea ports. They need transportation infrastructure. And primarily, they want to get rid of us.'
(The icing on the cake - after our spending years, lives, and dollars to get rid of Saddam, Iraq will cut oil deals with out competitors. This is one of the issues separating the Kurds from the other groups in Iraq - the Kurds want their OWN oil deals; and not to share the revenue equitably. Saddam was not any imminent threat in 2002, and we should have finished the job in Afghanistan against the Taliban and al Qaeda, messy as it was.)
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080810/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_china_oil
BAGHDAD - Iraq and China are set to revive a $1.2 billion oil deal that was canceled after the 2003 U.S.-led invasion, the Iraq's oil ministry said Sunday. An initial agreement with China is expected to be signed at the end of August to develop the billion-barrel Ahdab oil field south of Baghdad, the ministry said in a statement. 'Iraq and China are keen to show their cooperation by finalizing an agreement on developing the Ahdab oil field,' it said.
The announcement came after a meeting between Iraqi Oil Minister Hussain al-Shahristani and China's ambassador to Baghdad. No further details were released, but if the deal is signed it will be the first Saddam Hussein-era oil deal to be honored by the new Iraqi regime.
In 1997, Saddam's government signed an agreement with the state-owned China National Petroleum Corp., despite United Nations sanctions that barred direct dealings with Iraq's oil industry. The two countries restarted talks in October 2006.
washingtonindependent.com/view/levin-gets-gates-to
“After U.S. taxpayers have paid at least $27 billion for Iraq’s reconstruction -- while Iraq has tens of billions of dollars in accounts all over the world from profits from skyrocketing oil prices – it is unacceptable that U.S. taxpayers continue to bear a burden that the Iraqi government can and should assume,” Levin said. “At the same time administration officials, including President Bush, continually tell the American people that Iraq is taking greater responsibility for reconstruction funding, it is unconscionable that they are sending notices to Congress saying that U.S. funding for these activities is increasing.
“I am pleased that Secretary Gates has personally reviewed this reallocation and decided to reduce the funding in light of the concerns I raised about it,” Levin said. “However, U.S. taxpayers continue to spend far too much on Iraqi reconstruction, particularly given the huge sums sitting in Iraqi government bank accounts.”
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080810/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq
BAGHDAD - Iraq's foreign minister insisted Sunday that any security deal with the United States must contain a 'very clear timeline' for the departure of U.S. troops. A suicide bomber struck north of Baghdad, killing at least five people including an American soldier.
Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari told reporters that American and Iraqi negotiators were 'very close' to reaching a long-term security agreement that will set the rules for U.S. troops in Iraq after the U.N. mandate expires at the end of the year. Zebari said the Iraqis were insisting that the agreement include a 'very clear timeline' for the withdrawal of U.S.-led forces, but he refused to talk about specific dates.
afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jotpI5j2c2C3f2e34jo48rUBhyIw
BAGHDAD (AFP) — A spate of bomb attacks across Iraq on Sunday targetting a bank, a town hall and a string of military patrols killed at least nine people and wounded more than 50, security and hospital officials said.
Four military patrols came under attack in succession in Baghdad, they said.
In Khilani, in the centre of the embattled Iraqi capital, a car bomb exploded as a military patrol escorting a finance ministry convoy passed by, killing an Iraqi soldier and two civilians, a security official said.
At least nine people were injured in the attack, among them four soldiers.
At Maidan, on the southern outskirts of Baghdad, an Iraqi soldier was killed and five others injured when their patrol was hit by car bomb, the official said.
In the Shiite enclave of Kadhamiyah in northwestern Baghdad, a roadside bomb that exploded as a joint Iraqi-US military patrol passed by wounded three soldiers, the official said, without providing their nationalities.
'Don't worry Lance....totalitaianism is alive and well thanks to enablers like you...'
The 'bomb and occupy unrelated nations' and 'preemptive warfare' strategy was created by the Bush administration.
When you speak of totalitarianism (requires complete subservience to the state) you make direct reference to the United States occupational forces, the U.S. military and the President of The United States.
Russia is just following the lead of the U.S., specifically president bush.
I do not agree with the totalitarian attitudes of any nation. I merely recognize it.
Avoid the democratist temptation of the internationalists
With the Cold War ending, we should look, too, with a cold eye on the international set, never at a loss for new ideas to divert US wealth and power into crusades and causes having little or nothing to do with the true national interest of the United States. High among these is the democratist temptation [free the world], the worship of democracy as a form of governance and the concomitant ambition to see all mankind embrace it, or explain why not. Like all idolatries, democratism substitutes a false god for the real, a love of process[political pragmatism] for a love of country. The true national interests of the United States are not to be found in some hegemonic and utopian world order. Bush holds global democracy as a goal. This is a formula for endless conflict.'
Source: Where The Right Went Wrong, by Pat Buchanan, p. 13-17&34-35 Sep 1, 2004
Interventionism is the incubator of terrorism
In the presidential campaign of 2000, we failed to make foreign policy the issue. But what I said then retains relevance:
How can all our meddling not fail to spark some horrible retribution.... Have we not suffered enough--from Pan Am 103, to the World Trade Center, to the embassy bombings in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam--not to know that interventionism is the incubator of terrorism? Or will it take some cataclysmic atrocity on US soil to awaken our global gamesmen to the going price of empire?
America today faces a choice of destinies. We can choose to be a peacemaker of the world, or its policeman who goes about night-sticking troublemakers until we, too, find ourselves in some bloody brawl we cannot handle.
Source: Los Angeles Times, Op-Ed page Sep 18, 2001
(THAT'S a Conservative. Cheney is a hoodlum, and Bush is an imbecile. McCain would be a camp-follower, because force is all he understands. The current (and growing) problem with Russia is the LAST place you want McCain taking the lead)
==============
blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/06/17/randy_scheunemann_mccain_a dvis.html
CHICAGO -- Randy Scheunemann, the foreign policy adviser to Sen. John McCain who today accused Sen. Barack Obama of a 'policy of delusion' toward terrorism, was a prominent advocate of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in the lead-up to the war.
In late 2002, Scheunemann helped create The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq and became the group's executive director. Its mission, pursued with the Bush administration's blessing, was to build public support for the overthrow of Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein.
Scheunemann is a longtime GOP foreign policy specialist who has also worked on the staffs of former Senate Republican leaders Bob Dole (Kan.) and Trent Lott (Miss.) He was a board member of the neoconservative think tank, the Project for the New American Century, which often reflected the views of Bush administration hardliners.
In recent years, Scheunemann has registered as a lobbyist for several foreign governments, including Georgia, Macedonia and Taiwan, according to published reports. His firm has also lobbied for the National Rifle Association and defense contractor Lockheed Martin.
A Washington Post article in November 2002 reported that The Committee for the Liberation of Iraq was being created as the Bush administration was preparing the nation for a likely war that was ultimately launched in March 2003.
The committee's founding coincided with what administration officials called a 'new phase' of briefings for foreign policy leaders, Iraq specialists and other opinion makers. One goal was to reverse a decline in support for possible military action.
Pat Buchanan was an ass when he ran for president, but he seems to have mellowed out in his later years.
It would be good to know that a center hardline republican can change their ways and realize that you don't have to believe in jesus to have an afterlife and that there is more than one type of religion and way of doing things.
To bad Bush is such a stubborn christian bigot.
Both McLaughlin and Buchanan were a part of the Nixon Administration, but both have been well set against Bush's adventures. Buchanan makes a lot of sense on SOME things, if you scan through that link. He was seen as isolationist, but based on today's world, he should be seen instead as prescient on foreign affairs. His social agenda I find disgusting and bigoted.
www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Pat_Buchanan_Foreign_Policy.htm
www.nndb.com/people/053/000023981/
Buchanan is an example of how you can detest some of a person's policies, while admiring others. Only imbeciles and TRUE bigots like SP4 pigeon-hole others, rather than listening and LEARNING something.
That strict Catholic upbringing can contribute, and Buchanan's father was a McCarthy advocate. You have to LEARN to be a bigot.
Yup, Buchanan seems to have a really interesting foreign policy attitude now.
But, can he really hold it together? Can he go to a mosque and take religious direction from a imam without puking? Or is he a closet bigot and just pretending to be an enlightened free thinker that values many perspectives? I still get the feeling that deep down inside Buchanan does not believe in, or understands, who he presently is. I wonder if he has a lot of inner conflict. I also wonder how well he could follow through on his alleged new-found foreign policy agenda if he had the opportunity. Or if he got the chance would he 'pull a Bush' and start randomly bombing, killing and denigrating people he found revolting.
Has this site turned into a hate America site, hate Bush site? The postings are so off base and off topic. This is not an American problem... It is a Euro-Russian problem. But of course they will draw the Americans into it as they seem to be the only ones who save everyone's arses. Russia clearly has overstepped and is invading a country. The Georgians are not entirely without fault as they let the Russians impose their will on their country.
Stop blaming the USA, Bush, NATO or any free society for the invasion by Russia into a small country.
'Stop blaming the USA, Bush...'
I believe in leading by example.
If I were the president my example would be very different.
Bush is president and the incident of this article shows where Bush's policies lead the world.
It is VERY relevant.
'The postings are so off base and off topic. This is not an American problem...'
===============
This kind of post is why I sometimes feel so hopeless about the ignorance of some American voters.
Key pipelines delivering fuel to Europe run through Georgia, and the Russians have expanded their original targeting to include a key pipeline. Russia holds the key to controlling the Iranians; and the key for the U.S. is to get Western nations to stand together as to critical policies; even outside of NATO and the U.N. If Iran can sell to nations who've signed on to sanctions, what good are the sanctions? China is now a major buyer from Iran, as is India.
Sec'y Paulson today gave a great interview to Tom Brokaw on how much progress China has made, as compared to past periods, and why we should be complimenting them for that progress; even while pushing for more improvements in human rights and other issues.
www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26124346/
Brokaw brought up that 750,000 Chinese die annually from the effects of pollution, and that the problem is expected to get worse as the country builds coal power plants at a rate of one per week.
“The world can’t solve environmental issues without the engagement of China,” Paulson said.
Likewise, increasing dialog with China will encourage the country to pursue a path of reform by expanding freedoms, he said.
“Those that think we need to contain or counter China’s economic growth or we should be concerned that they are going to overtake us are worried about the wrong thing,” Paulson said. “The best thing that could happen to the United States would have China continue to grow, continue to progress and continue to reform. The worst thing is China to seriously stumble.”
===========
Since many American voters actually think we can DRILL our way out of the long-term need for the West to buy oil and gas from both Russia and the Mideast, and Venezuela and Africa as well, the solution to the energy problem becomes more distant.
What we need is a crash program for energy independence. Key to this is the TIME requirement to bring sources on line.
The oil companies have huge offshore leases that they are NOT drilling on, and have held those leases for years. SOLUTION: Get them in front of Congress to declare WHEN they'll start drilling; or take those leases back, so someone more productive can develop them.
SOLUTION: Improve the energy grid, piece by piece, to protect against outages, and to improve capacity. This can be begun NOW. The problem is getting the industry to pay for it. Tax them; and set up a fund from the proceeds to attract others to build it - if THEY won't build it. The utilities get big tax breaks and other benefits, and need to kick back in.
SOLUTION: Give homeowners a financial reason to put up solar cells, wind turbines, or other energy-efficient solutions. For any home that generates enough energy to actually CONTRIBUTE to the grid (i.e., they produce more than they consume), DOUBLE the payments for that excess energy for a year to the homeowners. Small and mid-size businesses can earn the very same benefits.
SOLUTION: A 'Manhattan project' approach, or something along the lines of what DARPA was able to do in terms of technology. Have contests for highest productivity from solar energy, or wind farms. Listen to what T. Boone Pickens has been saying.
SOLUTION: Take a long-term approach towards clean-coal and gasification projects; as well as more modern forms of nuclear reactors. It can take YEARS to get a reactor built and certified, so McCain's overt push for 'nuclear' is as dumb-and-blind as his push for offshore wells as a solution. The man has no idea what he's talking about. The nuclear waste needs to be disposed of and/or recycled, and we do not have enough trained technicians to man the plants, in any case.
SOLUTION: Oil-Shale holds promise, but uses a LOT of water, and needs a boost in efficiency - it's basically a huge mining operation.
SOLUTION: Look at what's being done with sugar cane in South America to power their automobiles. There are alternative crops that can be grown in the Southern U.S. that would help.
'What we need is a crash program for energy independence'
If humans became vegetarians, ate the right amount of calories, did not smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol or do drugs and used only hybrid cars then the energy and health crisis would be over. The energy and health industry would see such a drop in revenue that those industries would be put into a spiraling downwards crisis. Hospitals and nursing homes would have to close, pharmaceutical companies would contract.
The world would be a much different place if humans simply behaved in a reasonable fashion. It does not take a 'crash program'. Infact, a 'crash program' is just a misguided effort to pretend like there is a solution when the problem is: humans, not lack of oil.
Lance, why don't you write the rules and regulations telling everyone else how to live down to the minutia. Let us know how it goes. Don't forget your mantra of how religious fanatics want to control and regulate everyones lives with their ignorant bigotry.
'Lance, why don't you write the rules and regulations telling everyone else how to live down to the minutia.'
I choose to walk to work, be a vegetarian, eat healthy, buy organic produce (from local farmers when I can), exercise (for free near home without driving to the gym), not drink alcohol, smoke cigarettes or do drugs, not go to doctors or hospitals, etc.
I lead by example. You can choose the way you lead your life.
I merely point out the difference. You can make a difference, or not.
'The world would be a much different place if humans simply behaved in a reasonable fashion. It does not take a 'crash program'. Infact, a 'crash program' is just a misguided effort to pretend like there is a solution when the problem is: humans, not lack of oil.'
=========================
People have to be CONVINCED of what is good for ALL; because they act in their own interests. That's why McCain can bribe people with a promise of lower taxes, while deficits rise.
There's a movement now to put a floor under oil prices - for example, if oil goes below $100, add a tax on the buyer to add up to a total of $100 (purchase price plus tax). Business Week had a good article on it.
The $100 price will continue to provide impetus to alternative energy producers; and the 'tax' can go straight towards infrastructure spending, which the 18 cent a gallon tax now does. That creates JOBS that cannot be exported - no one in another country can build your highways. It could also fund basic alternative energy and power transmission research, such as what DARPA provided.
I'd lower that 'floor' as the nation managed to actually lower oil consumption. If someone used 100 barrels at $100, that's $10,000, and no tax. If someone used 90 barrels at $100, that's $9,000 (and $1,000 in their pocket), and no tax.
If the reduction in demand dropped oil to $90 (won't happen, because the oil producers would keep the price up, and new demand would crop up; but for the sake of the example we'll use $90):
A person using 90 barrels pays $8,100, plus $900 in tax - which equals 90 barrels at $100. The $900 in tax goes directly to highway improvements, bridge and tunnel repair, and creation of jobs related to those industries. That also creates activity in the building MATERIALS sector supplying steel, concrete, cement, etc.
If demand stays low (bear in mind that lower prices INCREASE demand), the 'floor' drops to $95. The person using 90 barrels of $90 gas pays $8,100 (90 x $90) plus $450 in tax (90 x $5), for a total of $8,550.
People pay less, and our infrastructure gets repaired.
If anything is left over it could go to mental health spending for SP4.
ok, now we have to hate the russians again, as well as the arabs, the muslims in general, the chinese, most of africans,probablay the europeans and the indians maybe in the future, (not the barbaric indians we killed to extiction level here in america, to make the holy good US OF A).
any one else left on the list........ohh wait, koreans and iranians....we nuked the japs anyway,that sums up about the whole world....id say.
yup lets rule the world, its our natural birth right anyway, we are the elite, the light of the world,the police of the world, the gurdian of freedom and justice,the supreme chosen people,the best allround, we ARE THE WORLD!.
Size matters?
It might be time to start thinking about cutting Russia down to size.
Did you notice? Russia bollixed up everything it tried to do, including its own version of communism.
Russians are just dumb and violent, and they actually let an ugly little ex-KGB monster run their country! Nobody really wants to have anything to do with them.
The only people dumber than the russians are the georgians, just for starting up this shitstorm.
The hell with them.
Well I guess the President of Georgia is regretting his order to take his disagreement with the South Ossetians up a couple of notches by shelling the capital of South Ossetia right at the start of this current chapter. He must have believed that if Israel can get away with doing similar to Lebanon that he could do the same in his back yard.
Do I think the Russians are right to press for 'regime change'? Yes.. there has to be some real price to the thugs in charge of Georgia for ordering military attacks on civilians in order to force their will on the territory. Do I think its right for the Russians to continue to destroy Georgian military capability? Yes.. otherwise the risk is that they'd just come back again.
Do I think the Russians should cancel their energy sales to Georgia? Only if its not selling at market prices.. why subsidise the energy of a nation led by a government that tries to murder people because they are living in a territory where the majority of that population don't feel the government has their interests at heart?
..to bolster our military security and keep the peace.. NOT!
Its clear that having countries like Georgia in NATO would INCREASE the probability of armed conflict spreading through the NATO territory! Think about it. if Georgia were part of NATO (like its government sure wishes it were).. NATO would now be obligated to take on Russia. Bully countries (after gaining NATO membership) like Georgia would feel it could get away with almost anything because the cost to someone outside NATO responding militarily would be a NATO response. (Why did Sadam's Iraq never take its war with the Kurds into Turkey? Because Turkey is NATO.. thats why.)
Oh, the neo-cons are so shocked about what the Russians are doing! Bad Russians! So, Saakashvili, the mad dog of Bushey in the region, bombards Ossetia, and when the Russians give him the same treatment, Cheney don't like? Ooooh, poor Cheney! I just hope the Russians put that lackey of Saakashvili out of Georgia!
Up to now, they've tolerated the breakaway republics; as they had no casus belli to take action.
Either the President of Georgia made some dumb assumptions about the U.S. capability, in the face of our being bogged down with Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan - OR Cheney and the numbskull neocons urged him into a confrontation, which of course backfired. It would be interesting to know how Georgia's getting into this conflict came about ... THEIR idea, or OURS?
Russia now gets to make the case that these 'democracies' have no military backing beyond their own forces and weaponry - the U.S. cannot afford to get bogged down in an actual fight with Russia. This even potentially puts Ukraine in a bad spot, since there are plenty of Russian supporters in the Eastern portion of that country. Russia would like to rebuilt the USSR, and between their military capability, and their position as energy supplier to Europe, they have more leverage than in years past.
This is another case where the Neocons saw 'Communism' as defeated with the fall of the Berlin Wall, taking Russia itself for granted. This is why I have a problem with those same Neocons calling Iraq a 'success'; when the country is totally reliant on U.S. troops' presence, and cannot even hold a damned election due to ancient sectarian rivalries.
Bush has not ONE DAMNED IDEA of what he's gotten us into. Once again, Pat Buchanan got it right; but no one listened. Our need for imported energy is holding us as an economic hostage to these situations. With Obama, the tone will change, and he can work on getting a new structure in Europe (post-NATO) for the DIPLOMATIC push that's really needed, along with economic measures. McCain, on the other hand, appears reckless, and will further inflame the situation.
www.ontheissues.org/celeb/Pat_Buchanan_Foreign_Policy.htm
Avoid the democratist temptation of the internationalists
With the Cold War ending, we should look, too, with a cold eye on the international set, never at a loss for new ideas to divert US wealth and power into crusades and causes having little or nothing to do with the true national interest of the United States. High among these is the democratist temptation [free the world], the worship of democracy as a form of governance and the concomitant ambition to see all mankind embrace it, or explain why not. Like all idolatries, democratism substitutes a false god for the real, a love of process [political pragmatism] for a love of country. The true national interests of the United States are not to be found in some hegemonic and utopian world order. Bush holds global democracy as a goal. This is a formula for endless conflict.'
Source: Where The Right Went Wrong, by Pat Buchanan, p. 13-17&34-35 Sep 1, 2004
Interventionism is the incubator of terrorism
In the presidential campaign of 2000, we failed to make foreign policy the issue. But what I said then retains relevance:
How can all our meddling not fail to spark some horrible retribution.... Have we not suffered enough--from Pan Am 103, to the World Trade Center, to the embassy bombings in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam--not to know that interventionism is the incubator of terrorism? Or will it take some cataclysmic atrocity on US soil to awaken our global gamesmen to the going price of empire?
America today faces a choice of destinies. We can choose to be a peacemaker of the world, or its policeman who goes about night-sticking troublemakers until we, too, find ourselves in some bloody brawl we cannot handle.
Source: Los Angeles Times, Op-Ed page Sep 18, 2001
Bush should get his ass home and tend to business.
The only reason Bush has not faced impeachment is the fact that Cheney would become President.
It's too bad the Georgians chose to pick a fight with a country like Russia that acts in it's own interest, and fights pretty effectively.
They should've got the U S to attack them instead. Then the U S taxpayers would rebuild their infrastructure and prop up their economy.
page: 1
Your Talkback on this Story