McCain urges coalition troops be sent to Georgia

[December]

It seems like Americans are going to put a CRAZY MAN into the White House...

Quote:

Mr. McCain urged NATO to begin discussions on “the deployment of an international peacekeeping force to South Ossetia,’’ called on the United Nations to condemn “Russian aggression,’’ and said that the secretary of state should travel to Europe “to establish a common Euro-Atlantic position aimed at ending the war and supporting the independence of Georgia.’’

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/08/11/mccain-calls-for-halt-of-violence-in-georgia



http://blog.wired.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/06/03/060308_mccain2_630x_2.jpg



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nqtL-P8kzo

[william the wierd]

McCain is simply trying to tag Obama "it" for the economic meltdown that has been expected for the next presidential term for nearly 20 years. Get a copy of "Generations" by Strauss & Howe and look at the publication date. Given the increasing rate of walkaways in the US single family Real Estate market by 2010 US GDP will be 8-10 T it is 13T now. Already tax exempt municipal bonds are not moving due to a lack of bond insurers as spill over from the subprime mess. That combined with reduced property tax revenues may cause the first state bankruptcies since the 1840s to happen in 09. McCain not being completely stupid is trying to come across as a lunatic to combat Obama's tactic of acting like an empty suit who doesn't know his own name without a teleprompter to remind him.

It's called politics.

[PostmodernProphet]

it would seem logical, wouldn't it?.....the purpose of NATO was to counter Soviet aggression.....up until a week ago, it had no purpose, but since Russia seems intent to restore Soviet aggression, NATO has renewed purpose and now, obligation......

[NIOSA]

What shoud we do about Russia attacking Georga?
I believe the big target for Russia is The Ukraine & oil. I believe that Georgia is just on the path to Russias goal.
Seems to me that we had best start taking our own oil out of the ground or Russia will come after us. China has the money & people, Russia has the energy & getting/taking more all the time.
What would Obama do, "talk" to Putin?

[tecoyah]

Funny thing is....McCain says he "Knows War".

Obviously Not!

[NIOSA]

Funny thing is....McCain says he "Knows War".

Obviously Not!

& Obama does?

[tecoyah]

What shoud we do about Russia attacking Georga?
I believe the big target for Russia is The Ukraine & oil. I believe that Georgia is just on the path to Russias goal.
Seems to me that we had best start taking our own oil out of the ground or Russia will come after us. China has the money & people, Russia has the energy & getting/taking more all the time.
What would Obama do, "talk" to Putin?

Yeah...funny thing that. The whole "Talking" thingy does indeed get in the way of people getting Blowed up, and wasting resources on tanks, trucks, planes, bombs etc....

I wonder how many barrels of oil we would need to use in the first 10 yrs. of war with Russia. Maybe if we doubled what we use in Iraq we could come up with a close number?

[bishop]

it would seem logical, wouldn't it?.....the purpose of NATO was to counter Soviet aggression.....up until a week ago, it had no purpose, but since Russia seems intent to restore Soviet aggression, NATO has renewed purpose and now, obligation......


georgia isn't a NATO member, and if it were to fall back behind the iron curtain it would be inconsequential to us in reality. georgia's collapse should be a bigger concern to europe, and they certainly aren't running around singing "bomb, bomb, bomb - bomb, bomb - russia"...

screw the senile old retard. russia's certainly in the wrong, although that doesn't mean that we need to get involved - despite what sensationalist and overemotional individuals may think.

and as for obama's wet-behind-the-dumbo-ears-self... well, he's arguing for the same damn thing that mccain's pushing for - an international peacekeeping force in georgia..

[potter]

Wasn't McCain chastising Obama for making "presumptuous presidential statements"?

Another pot/kettle moment.......

[PostmodernProphet]

georgia isn't a NATO member, and if it were to fall back behind the iron curtain it would be inconsequential to us in reality. georgia's collapse should be a bigger concern to europe, and they certainly aren't running around singing "bomb, bomb, bomb - bomb, bomb - russia"...

screw the senile old retard. russia's certainly in the wrong, although that doesn't mean that we need to get involved - despite what sensationalist and overemotional individuals may think.

and as for obama's wet-behind-the-dumbo-ears-self... well, he's arguing for the same damn thing that mccain's pushing for - an international peacekeeping force in georgia..

It is irrelevant that Georgia isn't a NATO member.....the purpose of NATO was to act against Soviet expansionism.....if this isn't an example of that, what is it?.......

[micfranklin]

Does McCain want to start another war just to up his ratings?

[potter]

Does McCain want to start another war just to up his ratings?


Probably.....Hey, it's not his money he's spending and it would sure boost profits of his contributors......

[apdst]

Does McCain want to start another war just to up his ratings?

Don't look now, but the war has aleady started.

[Stoner]

Don't look now, but the war has aleady started.

Yeah, I was scrolling through this, scratching my head wondering why no one has corrected the libbies with their, "McCain wants to start a war." McCain has a few months before he takes office and they're already starting their lies against him. Libs are notorious for hating/falsely accusing Republicans of lying. Look at the laundry list of lies we listed in another thread of all the crap Bush has been falsely accused of.

Apdst nailed it. War has already commenced. McCain isn't starting shit. He's doing what a real leader should do...talk tough when the situation warrants it. And this definitly warrants tough talk. And where's Obama? Cowering under a table somewhere in a puddle of piss with a snot-bubble hanging out of his nose.

[apdst]

Obama is smiling for the camera talking about how we have entered and era of friendship with the Ruskies. That's kinda worrisome.

[potter]

You guys just live for that macho war, death and destruction dont ya? Doesn't matter who or why.....doesn't even really have to be justified....always gotta have someone to blame and kill for whatever...

Must be hard having a hateful black heart.....

As an American Russia has absolutely zero impact on my life. So why do ya'll want to kill them? Do you work for the arms industry? Is this hate just a means of ensuring employment? I suppose one can easily come up with thousands of reasons to hate someone. Nobody ever comes up with reasons to like one another....that would take too much courage....to lay down the weapons and forge a peace.

It would seem that the end to war should be peace...but nobody ever talks about peace, just about going from one war to another. Conquer one "enemy" then find another reason to hate another one as quickly as possible.

Personally, I'd like a little peace in my lifetime.

[micfranklin]

I read this and wonder what exactly did Russia or Georgia do to us to even bring up sending troops there?

[Stoner]

Why don't you join the services then you can legally kill anyone you want,

Does 10 years as a jarhead count?

I read this and wonder what exactly did Russia or Georgia do to us to even bring up sending troops there?

To defend a helpless country against a bully. Same thing you would do if you walked outside and saw a grown man beating down a 10 year-old.

[potter]

I read this and wonder what exactly did Russia or Georgia do to us to even bring up sending troops there?

I think that perhaps until we in America are on the receiving end of war, with our cities bombed level and hundreds of thousands of women and children killed, Americans will continue to think of war as a game....a joke played on someone else.

[AlanC]

The last time I looked, NATO has more countries than the US. Suggesting that NATO take steps to halt the Russian aggression and re-establish peace in the region does not have to mean a committment of AMERICAN troops.

Simply placing a peace keeping force in Georgia without direct engagement might be sufficient to limit the Russian presence to the southern region that had been autonomous anyway.

It might also make the Russians an bit less eager to continue the bombing attacks on Georgia itself.

I personally doubt that any of the NATO countries would have a stomache for it, but they should bring it up. This is also a good debating topic for the UN to use to prove it's absolute worthlessness as well.

[xLIBREx]

I guess the liberals won't be happy until Russia achieves energy hegemony in the region. I guess no one realizes this was about a competing oil pipeline to Russia's.

I'm not saying we should go to war with Russia, I am saying we need to drill here so we negate their ability to literally hold us over a (n oil) barrel in a time of crisis.

[December]

What shoud we do about Russia attacking Georga?
I believe the big target for Russia is The Ukraine & oil. I believe that Georgia is just on the path to Russias goal.
Seems to me that we had best start taking our own oil out of the ground or Russia will come after us. China has the money & people, Russia has the energy & getting/taking more all the time.
What would Obama do, "talk" to Putin?

Russia is beating America's ally, and America is doing nothing. So what's up with that?
Is America AFRAID to fight Russia?

[micfranklin]

I think that perhaps until we in America are on the receiving end of war, with our cities bombed level and hundreds of thousands of women and children killed, Americans will continue to think of war as a game....a joke played on someone else.

9/11 wasn't good enough for you, that wasn't the receiving end of a conflict for us?

We don't have the funding to get involved in another conflict, we don't have a reason to get involved and moreso we're making the same mistakes we did last time.

[December]

Does McCain want to start another war just to up his ratings?

Come on, America! Bring it on!...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2hvObzZt0g

[AnnEsthesia]

December, only a fool would wish for war between two superpowers.

[December]

December, only a fool would wish for war between two superpowers.

Well, Americans are voting for a fool. McCain is your next president.

[potter]

9/11 wasn't good enough for you, that wasn't the receiving end of a conflict for us?

We don't have the funding to get involved in another conflict, we don't have a reason to get involved and moreso we're making the same mistakes we did last time.


First, 9/11 wasn't the receiving end of a conflict, it was a warning to quit interfering and meddling in the affairs of other nations. A warning that as Americans we need to start paying attention to the devious things our government is doing in our name. A warning lost on most all Americans.

It was good enough for me, but face it, it was just two buildings. I'm talking about the same sort of treatment we met out on countries like Iraq, where our entire infrastructure is destroyed and entire cities leveled. Until it happens to us, Amercians will consider war to be a game.

9/11 didn't teach us a thing, except perhaps to be more beligerant, and that we'll gladly sell our freedom and honor for a small measure of security.

[AlanC]

I will say it again. NATO is mostly an European organization. The members of NATO have some very definite interests in this conflict.

If there are NATO troops sent to assist Georgia, they should be European, not American. The United States has the air power to back such a play, but it doesn't need to commit troops to the ground in Georgia.

It's time Europe started providing for those things that threaten their own existence and their own energy suppplies.

Using NATO is an excellent suggestion for these reasons. I don't see anything in McCain's remarks that even hinted at an American committment of forces.

[Stoner]

First, 9/11 wasn't the receiving end of a conflict, it was a warning to quit interfering and meddling in the affairs of other nations. A warning that as Americans we need to start paying attention to the devious things our government is doing in our name. A warning lost on most all Americans.



BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZT!!!!! Wrong answer.

Your post reads like something out of an AQ recruiting pamphlet. The 9/11 attacks were done out of pure, evil hatred for America and everything it stands for. They despise everything about us and have waged eternal war. They hate the fact we are free. They hate the fact women and minorities have rights. They hate that we have democracy.

So Potter can take 9/11 as a "warning" to us. I'll take it as a cowardly, dispicable act that killed over 3,000 of my brothers.

[xLIBREx]

Well, Americans are voting for a fool. McCain is your next president.


Yes, McCain is a fool, but lucky for him Obama is even worse.

[micfranklin]

BZZZZZZZZZZZZZZT!!!!! Wrong answer.

Your post reads like something out of an AQ recruiting pamphlet. The 9/11 attacks were done out of pure, evil hatred for America and everything it stands for. They despise everything about us and have waged eternal war. They hate the fact we are free. They hate the fact women and minorities have rights. They hate that we have democracy.

So Potter can take 9/11 as a "warning" to us. I'll take it as a cowardly, dispicable act that killed over 3,000 of my brothers.

No, they don't hater us because we're free they do because we stay in their areas for far too long when they don't want us there at all.

In any case there's no reason to disperse troops anywhere else in the world as of now.

[AnnEsthesia]

Funny how we only care about what is happening in some parts of the world and ignore genocides in others... (yea, I know, there is nothing there for us, so why bother?)

[apdst]

If there are NATO troops sent to assist Georgia, they should be European, not American. The United States has the air power to back such a play, but it doesn't need to commit troops to the ground in Georgia.

I would agree, except the NATO troops that would be deployed will get their asses handed to them by the Russians. I mean, who's going to take on the Russians? The French?

[apdst]

Funny how we only care about what is happening in some parts of the world and ignore genocides in others... (yea, I know, there is nothing there for us, so why bother?)

Some conflicts will remain local and some have the potential to become more widespread. Russia's invasion of Georgia is one of the latter.

Let's not act as if Russia hasn't ever done this before. Right now, Poland, Latvia, Estonia and Ukriane are shitting themselves. They can definitely see history repeating itself.

I have a question for all that oppose any intervention: How far out of hand should this get, before we jump into the fray?

[Stoner]

Funny how we only care about what is happening in some parts of the world and ignore genocides in others... (yea, I know, there is nothing there for us, so why bother?)

There was nothing for us in Iraq but we went there and did the right thing.

I love my country, was proud to have served and am glad we go out of our way to help out others. Makes you proud to be American.

[apdst]

First, 9/11 wasn't the receiving end of a conflict, it was a warning to quit interfering and meddling in the affairs of other nations.

Which events do you speak of?

[AnnEsthesia]

There was nothing for us in Iraq but we went there and did the right thing.

I love my country, was proud to have served and am glad we go out of our way to help out others. Makes you proud to be American.

Sure there was. Oil and maintaining a stable flow. If we went there for any other reason, we would have gone BEFORE 10 years had passed.

If we went out of our way to help others, we would go and stop genocides.

[December]

Thanks to Israeli training, we're fending off Russia - Jewish Georgian Minister Temur Yakobshvili

Source - http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1010187.html


http://www.pankisi.info/img/analitic/yakobashvili-temuri.jpg

Temur Yakobshvili

[potter]

There was nothing for us in Iraq but we went there and did the right thing.




Except of couse the second largest oil fields in the world.....

I disagree that we did "the right thing" as would the 100,000 civilians killed....I think we went in there for purely self serving reasons, mainly corporate bottom line, .......but then I'm also not a warmonger.

[Elrathin]

There was nothing for us in Iraq but we went there and did the right thing.

There wasn't? According to some conservatives it was to have a staging area for Iran and Afghanistan. And Iraq doesn't have oil?

Sell it to someone who might buy that, I'm not and neither is most of America.

[AnnEsthesia]

There wasn't? According to some conservatives it was to have a staging area for Iran and Afghanistan. And Iraq doesn't have oil?

Sell it to someone who might buy that, I'm not and neither is most of America.

Amen!

[Stoner]

Guys, guys, guys...the whole "We invaded Iraq for oil" conspiracy theory has been debunked a hundred times over.

You can only bring horses to water...

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2004/02/26/images/2004022600090901.jpg

[brien]

The US has no business butting in over in Georgia. Let the Europeans handle this through NATO, minus the US, and if they get heir heads handed to them by the Russians, so be it. Let them arm themselves against the Russian aggression and imperialism. Tell me where in Europe is there any admiration for the US today? All I see is disdain, and even comtempt. If France doesn't want to have its children speaking Russian in 30 years, let them defend themselves this time. If Germany doesn't want to rearm themselves and get back into it with the Ruskies, then that's their business. Europeans need to learn to defend themselves or suffer the consequences.

None of this is our business, not one bullet's worth. This is a European problem, not an American one. The US has a vote on the UN Security Council and they should use it.

[potter]

:thumbsup: Yup

[December]

So is America afraid to defend its ally?

[apdst]

Do ya'll really understand what being a, "member", of NATO actually means?

if they get heir heads handed to them by the Russians, so be it.

That's exactly what will happen, too.

None of this is our business, not one bullet's worth. This is a European problem, not an American one.

At what point does it become our business? After milions are dead? We've already tried this approach and it didn't work all that well either time.

[suedanim]

Some conflicts will remain local and some have the potential to become more widespread. Russia's invasion of Georgia is one of the latter.

Let's not act as if Russia hasn't ever done this before. Right now, Poland, Latvia, Estonia and Ukriane are shitting themselves. They can definitely see history repeating itself.

I have a question for all that oppose any intervention: How far out of hand should this get, before we jump into the fray?

The major powers of the world were asking themselves the same question when George Bush invaded Iraq. But, no one would dare challenged THE superpower. We do what we want and can make up any shoddy story we want and the world is forced to go along with it, even when its pure imperialism as we accuse Russia of being at this moment.

Instead of shooting off your mouths with both gonads and assuming John McCain is anything more than an opportunistic parrot.. read the below article that puts this conflict in perspective and offers reason, instead of knuckle-dragging, chest thumping. McCain's response was intended to appeal to those of you who think with your ass, instead of your head.


A Path to Peace in the Caucasus (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/11/AR2008081101372.html)

By Mikhail Gorbachev

Tuesday, August 12, 2008; Page A13


MOSCOW -- The past week's events in South Ossetia are bound to shock and pain anyone. Already, thousands of people have died, tens of thousands have been turned into refugees, and towns and villages lie in ruins. Nothing can justify this loss of life and destruction. It is a warning to all.


The roots of this tragedy lie in the decision of Georgia's separatist leaders in 1991 to abolish South Ossetian autonomy. This turned out to be a time bomb for Georgia's territorial integrity. Each time successive Georgian leaders tried to impose their will by force -- both in South Ossetia and in Abkhazia, where the issues of autonomy are similar -- it only made the situation worse. New wounds aggravated old injuries.

Nevertheless, it was still possible to find a political solution. For some time, relative calm was maintained in South Ossetia. The peacekeeping force composed of Russians, Georgians and Ossetians fulfilled its mission, and ordinary Ossetians and Georgians, who live close to each other, found at least some common ground.

Through all these years, Russia has continued to recognize Georgia's territorial integrity. Clearly, the only way to solve the South Ossetian problem on that basis is through peaceful means. Indeed, in a civilized world, there is no other way.

The Georgian leadership flouted this key principle.

What happened on the night of Aug. 7 is beyond comprehension. The Georgian military attacked the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali with multiple rocket launchers designed to devastate large areas. Russia had to respond. To accuse it of aggression against "small, defenseless Georgia" is not just hypocritical but shows a lack of humanity.

Mounting a military assault against innocents was a reckless decision whose tragic consequences, for thousands of people of different nationalities, are now clear. The Georgian leadership could do this only with the perceived support and encouragement of a much more powerful force. Georgian armed forces were trained by hundreds of U.S. instructors, and its sophisticated military equipment was bought in a number of countries. This, coupled with the promise of NATO membership, emboldened Georgian leaders into thinking that they could get away with a "blitzkrieg" in South Ossetia.

In other words, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili was expecting unconditional support from the West, and the West had given him reason to think he would have it. Now that the Georgian military assault has been routed, both the Georgian government and its supporters should rethink their position.

Hostilities must cease as soon as possible, and urgent steps must be taken to help the victims -- the humanitarian catastrophe, regretfully, received very little coverage in Western media this weekend -- and to rebuild the devastated towns and villages. It is equally important to start thinking about ways to solve the underlying problem, which is among the most painful and challenging issues in the Caucasus -- a region that should be approached with the greatest care.

When the problems of South Ossetia and Abkhazia first flared up, I proposed that they be settled through a federation that would grant broad autonomy to the two republics. This idea was dismissed, particularly by the Georgians. Attitudes gradually shifted, but after last week, it will be much more difficult to strike a deal even on such a basis.

Old grievances are a heavy burden. Healing is a long process that requires patience and dialogue, with non-use of force an indispensable precondition. It took decades to bring to an end similar conflicts in Europe and elsewhere, and other long-standing issues are still smoldering. In addition to patience, this situation requires wisdom.

Small nations of the Caucasus do have a history of living together. It has been demonstrated that a lasting peace is possible, that tolerance and cooperation can create conditions for normal life and development.

Nothing is more important than that.

The region's political leaders need to realize this. Instead of flexing military muscle, they should devote their efforts to building the groundwork for durable peace.

Over the past few days, some Western nations have taken positions, particularly in the U.N. Security Council, that have been far from balanced. As a result, the Security Council was not able to act effectively from the very start of this conflict. By declaring the Caucasus, a region that is thousands of miles from the American continent, a sphere of its "national interest," the United States made a serious blunder. Of course, peace in the Caucasus is in everyone's interest. But it is simply common sense to recognize that Russia is rooted there by common geography and centuries of history. Russia is not seeking territorial expansion, but it has legitimate interests in this region.

The international community's long-term aim could be to create a sub-regional system of security and cooperation that would make any provocation, and the very possibility of crises such as this one, impossible. Building this type of system would be challenging and could only be accomplished with the cooperation of the region's countries themselves. Nations outside the region could perhaps help, too -- but only if they take a fair and objective stance. A lesson from recent events is that geopolitical games are dangerous anywhere, not just in the Caucasus.

The writer was the last president of the Soviet Union. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1990 and is president of the Gorbachev Foundation, a Moscow think tank. A version of this article, in Russian, will be published in the Rossiyskaya Gazeta newspaper tomorrow.

[micfranklin]

So is America afraid to defend its ally?

Don't know about you but I'd rather not get involved in another conflict that never did involve us.

[apdst]

So, Sue, are you going to answer the question, or post information apologizing for Russia's actions?

But it is simply common sense to recognize that Russia is rooted there by common geography and centuries of history. Russia is not seeking territorial expansion, but it has legitimate interests in this region.

Russia controls ever petroleum pipeline in region, save but one. Anyone wanna guess where that one is?

[brien]

So is America afraid to defend its ally?

December you act like a school boy egging someone on for a fight. Most peoople who do this get their ass whipped.

The US isn't afraid of anyone or anything that threatens its independence and safety. If it were in the best interest of the US to invade and occupy Georgia, it would do it, and kick Russia's sorry ass all the way back to the Kremlin if need be there. But Russia doesn't want to go one on one with the US for obvious reasons, and it is none of the business of the US what they do in Georgia anyway.

It is the Europeans that need to be involved here, not the US. BP gas and oil goes to them, not to the US. Russian European aggression is not the business of the US. It is the concern of the Europeans. Does anyone see China puffing up for a fight here? They could care less until you bring the problem to the UN.

Russia has, through the sheer military brutality it has brought to Georgia, ceded its right to criticize the US on military aggression in the eyes on the world stage. RIP

[Phyxius]

I think that perhaps until we in America are on the receiving end of war, with our cities bombed level and hundreds of thousands of women and children killed, Americans will continue to think of war as a game....a joke played on someone else.

Exactly. One of the reasons we were so reluctant to get into WWI is the fact there were still people alive who remembered the aftermath of the last large-scale war on American soil. Maybe we do need a dose of it to remind us why it's something to be avoided... :ponder:

[suedanim]

So, Sue, are you going to answer the question, or post information apologizing for Russia's actions?



Russia controls ever petroleum pipeline in region, save but one. Anyone wanna guess where that one is?

We have no dog in this fight... except for our incessant meddling..we have NO business being there. Are we not spread thin enough? Do you WANT the draft reinstated? I think you old farts that adore bloodshed, even of our own young people PRAY for it...

Check it... you people, McCain, Lieberman and the Bush admin are already ramming Iran down our throats an Bush JUST sent to new aircraft carrier battle groups to the ME to join another two, with coalition additions as well. That kind of massive buildup foretells...trouble and a lot of it.

WTF are you thinking that we should enter into this issue between Georgia and Russia except diplomatically?

European diplomats are own this. Our job is to stay the fuck OUT of it...as we should have all along. We DID play a role in the Georgian government believing its ally...the USA, would have its back... Now what?

Chill out and play a diplomatic role ONLY and get our military advisors and trainers the fuck out of there too!

[brien]

Russia controls ever petroleum pipeline in region, save but one. Anyone wanna guess where that one is?

This may actually prod the Congress of the US get off the dime and pass a resolution for the US to expand drilling its own territories because when the Congressional dunderheads realize that this is one more oil pipeline going under the control of another foreign nation, which "ain't so friendly" as some other cottonheads in Congress would lead you to believe, then the message will begin to come through loud and clear; drill more and drill now, for American national security.

[AlanC]

December you act like a school boy egging someone on for a fight. Most peoople who do this get their ass whipped.

The US isn't afraid of anyone or anything that threatens its independence and safety. If it were in the best interest of the US to invade and occupy Georgia, it would do it, and kick Russia's sorry ass all the way back to the Kremlin if need be there. But Russia doesn't want to go one on one with the US for obvious reasons, and it is none of the business of the US what they do in Georgia anyway.

It is the Europeans that need to be involved here, not the US. BP gas and oil goes to them, not to the US. Russian European aggression is not the business of the US. It is the concern of the Europeans. Does anyone see China puffing up for a fight here? They could care less until you bring the problem to the UN.

Russia has, through the sheer military brutality it has brought to Georgia, ceded its right to criticize the US on military aggression in the eyes on the world stage. RIP

This pretty well covers it.

As to Gobachev's view, he is Russian, is he not? I wonder when the South Ossetians will realize they have traded their autonomy to become a Russian province yet again.

[Phyxius]

So is America afraid to defend its ally?

As much as I am against another war, we all know that if we did, it would be a VERY bad day for the mighty Bear, Sparky... :fight:

[bishop]

I will say it again. NATO is mostly an European organization. The members of NATO have some very definite interests in this conflict.

If there are NATO troops sent to assist Georgia, they should be European, not American. The United States has the air power to back such a play, but it doesn't need to commit troops to the ground in Georgia.

It's time Europe started providing for those things that threaten their own existence and their own energy suppplies.

Using NATO is an excellent suggestion for these reasons. I don't see anything in McCain's remarks that even hinted at an American committment of forces.

typically, the country pushing for nato involvement is always the first one to commit troops. this is particularly why i wasn't pleased with the "volume" of mccain's rhetoric. i don't see the european states wetting themselves over a potential NATO mission, do you? kind of odd since this issue is undoubtedly a bigger issue for europe than the u.s...

and two points for you to consider are that despite being a predominately european organization, NATO action has always been motivated by the u.s., not european members... and, georgia is not a NATO member, therefore the organization is not obligated to get involved.

[Trish]

The major powers of the world were asking themselves the same question when George Bush invaded Iraq. But, no one would dare challenged THE superpower. We do what we want and can make up any shoddy story we want and the world is forced to go along with it, even when its pure imperialism as we accuse Russia of being at this moment.

Instead of shooting off your mouths with both gonads and assuming John McCain is anything more than an opportunistic parrot.. read the below article that puts this conflict in perspective and offers reason, instead of knuckle-dragging, chest thumping. McCain's response was intended to appeal to those of you who think with your ass, instead of your head.


A Path to Peace in the Caucasus (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/11/AR2008081101372.html)

By Mikhail Gorbachev

Tuesday, August 12, 2008; Page A13


MOSCOW -- The past week's events in South Ossetia are bound to shock and pain anyone. Already, thousands of people have died, tens of thousands have been turned into refugees, and towns and villages lie in ruins. Nothing can justify this loss of life and destruction. It is a warning to all.


The roots of this tragedy lie in the decision of Georgia's separatist leaders in 1991 to abolish South Ossetian autonomy. This turned out to be a time bomb for Georgia's territorial integrity. Each time successive Georgian leaders tried to impose their will by force -- both in South Ossetia and in Abkhazia, where the issues of autonomy are similar -- it only made the situation worse. New wounds aggravated old injuries.

Nevertheless, it was still possible to find a political solution. For some time, relative calm was maintained in South Ossetia. The peacekeeping force composed of Russians, Georgians and Ossetians fulfilled its mission, and ordinary Ossetians and Georgians, who live close to each other, found at least some common ground.

Through all these years, Russia has continued to recognize Georgia's territorial integrity. Clearly, the only way to solve the South Ossetian problem on that basis is through peaceful means. Indeed, in a civilized world, there is no other way.

The Georgian leadership flouted this key principle.

What happened on the night of Aug. 7 is beyond comprehension. The Georgian military attacked the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali with multiple rocket launchers designed to devastate large areas. Russia had to respond. To accuse it of aggression against "small, defenseless Georgia" is not just hypocritical but shows a lack of humanity.

Mounting a military assault against innocents was a reckless decision whose tragic consequences, for thousands of people of different nationalities, are now clear. The Georgian leadership could do this only with the perceived support and encouragement of a much more powerful force. Georgian armed forces were trained by hundreds of U.S. instructors, and its sophisticated military equipment was bought in a number of countries. This, coupled with the promise of NATO membership, emboldened Georgian leaders into thinking that they could get away with a "blitzkrieg" in South Ossetia.

In other words, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili was expecting unconditional support from the West, and the West had given him reason to think he would have it. Now that the Georgian military assault has been routed, both the Georgian government and its supporters should rethink their position.

Hostilities must cease as soon as possible, and urgent steps must be taken to help the victims -- the humanitarian catastrophe, regretfully, received very little coverage in Western media this weekend -- and to rebuild the devastated towns and villages. It is equally important to start thinking about ways to solve the underlying problem, which is among the most painful and challenging issues in the Caucasus -- a region that should be approached with the greatest care.

When the problems of South Ossetia and Abkhazia first flared up, I proposed that they be settled through a federation that would grant broad autonomy to the two republics. This idea was dismissed, particularly by the Georgians. Attitudes gradually shifted, but after last week, it will be much more difficult to strike a deal even on such a basis.

Old grievances are a heavy burden. Healing is a long process that requires patience and dialogue, with non-use of force an indispensable precondition. It took decades to bring to an end similar conflicts in Europe and elsewhere, and other long-standing issues are still smoldering. In addition to patience, this situation requires wisdom.

Small nations of the Caucasus do have a history of living together. It has been demonstrated that a lasting peace is possible, that tolerance and cooperation can create conditions for normal life and development.

Nothing is more important than that.

The region's political leaders need to realize this. Instead of flexing military muscle, they should devote their efforts to building the groundwork for durable peace.

Over the past few days, some Western nations have taken positions, particularly in the U.N. Security Council, that have been far from balanced. As a result, the Security Council was not able to act effectively from the very start of this conflict. By declaring the Caucasus, a region that is thousands of miles from the American continent, a sphere of its "national interest," the United States made a serious blunder. Of course, peace in the Caucasus is in everyone's interest. But it is simply common sense to recognize that Russia is rooted there by common geography and centuries of history. Russia is not seeking territorial expansion, but it has legitimate interests in this region.

The international community's long-term aim could be to create a sub-regional system of security and cooperation that would make any provocation, and the very possibility of crises such as this one, impossible. Building this type of system would be challenging and could only be accomplished with the cooperation of the region's countries themselves. Nations outside the region could perhaps help, too -- but only if they take a fair and objective stance. A lesson from recent events is that geopolitical games are dangerous anywhere, not just in the Caucasus.

The writer was the last president of the Soviet Union. He was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1990 and is president of the Gorbachev Foundation, a Moscow think tank. A version of this article, in Russian, will be published in the Rossiyskaya Gazeta newspaper tomorrow.

The "major" powers of the world? You mean Russia, Germany, and France? The same Russia, Germany, and France who were in cahoots with Saddam in raping the oil-for-food program, defrauding the UN AND the Iraqi people? The major powers that lobbied to keep the US from getting UN approval for the IRaq war to protect and hide their own double dealing? THOSE major powers? Yeah.....those major world powers were REALLY altruistic in their Iraq position. Yep, yep, yep....they REALLY cared about the Iraqi people!

And exactly what is opportunistic about McCain saying NATO should intervene? Is this not a European crisis? Should not NATO be involved since its concerns are primarily EUROPEAN? Aren't the countries who would be most immediately impacted by this conflict also EUROPEAN? Of course McCain is an American, but more importantly to his detriment, a Republican. So there's no doubt that the unbiased, completely reasonable RUSSIAN perspective is more accurate and acceptable.

[AlanC]

typically, the country pushing for nato involvement is always the first one to commit troops. this is particularly why i wasn't pleased with the "volume" of mccain's rhetoric. i don't see the european states wetting themselves over a potential NATO mission, do you? kind of odd since this issue is undoubtedly a bigger issue for europe than the u.s...

and two points for you to consider are that despite being a predominately european organization, NATO action has always been motivated by the u.s., not european members... and, georgia is not a NATO member, therefore the organization is not obligated to get involved.

True and not actually. First off McCain's suggestion will be moot by the time it is a decision he could even advance.

Secondly, not all NATO actions have been urged by the US. Bosnia and the troubles there were a concern to the Europeans, not us. Though we did provide the bulk of the airpower for the operation, we seemed to "volunteer" to provide the ground troops that we did. You might have to ask Clinton how that came about.

France has always been a cheerleader, but a hesitant participant in any NATO action. Germany has only recently shown any willingness to admit that they have an army, much less offer to use it. Britain will be reluctant to get too engaged, even though they are far more concerned than we are, or they should be. The rest of the NATO countries are unable to committ the bulk of any forces that might be needed, even though they will all suffer the consequences of Russia controlling all the oil and natural gas coming to Europe.

If the will is there to do something, Europe can do it. Having the will is another discussion entirely. But to say that the future security of Europe is a consideration is to understate the problem. A lot of countries should be very nervous right about now.

[bishop]

i don't recall how all NATO members acted, but britain vociferously opposed involvement in the balkans.

the bottom line as far as i'm concerned is that european states need to take the leadership role in this affair, and we should be supportive of their actions rather than imposing the typical pro-war slant.

as far as i'm concerned, if georgia is overrun by russia, it is more of a symbolic loss than strategic. a gross miscalculation on the part of georgia, and irresponsible behavior by the russians are not enough justification to get involved in another conflict. bush is not a competent or respected leader, and mccain/obama are not president. sarkozy is the one to keep an eye on since he's the one doing all the real negotiating at the moment (while our diplomat throw handfuls of shit at the russians).

[apdst]

To think that this has NOTHING to do with is ludicrous. The mindset that we should stay as far away from it as possible is infantile, at best. History has proven that nonaction during times such as these, is the worst strategy imaginable.

I'm not promoting an all out assault, but I'm damn sure suggesting we let it be well understood that we're not going to sit back on our laurels and do nothing. That will only show weakness and encourage more hostilities.

[potter]

So, Sue, are you going to answer the question, or post information apologizing for Russia's actions?

The cold war is over apdst. Russia is not our enemy.



Russia controls ever petroleum pipeline in region, save but one. Anyone wanna guess where that one is?

So?....as if that's any of our business. We don't own the oil, the pipeline, or the land they sit on.

[brien]

"Russia is not our enemy."

They aren't our friend either...

[PostmodernProphet]

So is America afraid to defend its ally?

so, Russia isn't afraid to kill innocent civilians who are nowhere near military targets?......

[bishop]

To think that this has NOTHING to do with is ludicrous. The mindset that we should stay as far away from it as possible is infantile, at best. History has proven that nonaction during times such as these, is the worst strategy imaginable.

I'm not promoting an all out assault, but I'm damn sure suggesting we let it be well understood that we're not going to sit back on our laurels and do nothing. That will only show weakness and encourage more hostilities.

with the realization that talk is cheap, do tell us what you think we should do ourselves.. and, tell us what we'd stand to gain from such actions - especially with consideration of what russia's response might be. they certainly aren't going to just sick back and accept our demands, despite what you may think.

[PostmodernProphet]

Russia is not our enemy.





They have made it painfully clear they are not civilization's friend......

[potter]

They have made it painfully clear they are not civilization's friend......


Civilization would require civilized people. I don't know enough of Russia to make that claim, although I do know we do not qualify to make such judgements.

[apdst]

Russia is not our enemy.

Yeah, keep believing that.

with the realization that talk is cheap, do tell us what you think we should do ourselves.. and, tell us what we'd stand to gain from such actions - especially with consideration of what russia's response might be. they certainly aren't going to just sick back and accept our demands, despite what you may think.

You're right. Let's just do nothing. That's the solution. Can't do anything wrong, if you do nothing at all. Right?

although I do know we do not qualify to make such judgements

The United States' foreign policy decisions haven't always been right, and perfect, but it's fact, that without us, the world would be a much sadder place. Just imagine a world with Russia and China as the only two super powers.

[potter]

Just imagine a world with Russia and China as the only two super powers.

We're just about there.....bankrupt and morally bereft too.....:nana:

All we need to do is keep these republicans in office and it's clinched.

[apdst]

We're just about there.....bankrupt and morally bereft too

Only a Liberal could be that naive.

[potter]

Only a Liberal could be that naive.


almost 10 trillion in debt and over one person in every hundred in prision....this year.... Fraud and theft costing hundreds of billions yearly, trust no one, corruption from the very top of government down. Torture, eradication of basic human rights..and a corporate owned government.

We're heading towards bankruptcy and third world status...and you call me naive..... :ponder:

[apdst]

almost 10 trillion in debt and over one person in every hundred in prision....this year.... Fraud and theft costing hundreds of billions yearly, trust no one, corruption from the very top of government down. Torture, eradication of basic human rights..and a corporate owned government.

We're heading towards bankruptcy and third world status...and you call me naive

You're right and I apologize. You're are NOT naive. You're paranoid.

[DamnYankee]

Russia is not our enemy.

They most certainly are.

[potter]

They most certainly are.

How so?

[brien]

almost 10 trillion in debt and over one person in every hundred in prision....this year.... Fraud and theft costing hundreds of billions yearly, trust no one, corruption from the very top of government down. Torture, eradication of basic human rights..and a corporate owned government.

We're heading towards bankruptcy and third world status...and you call me naive..... :ponder:

Americans will probably awaken all too late before they realize it is both the Democrats and the Republicans that have got us to this point over the last 60 years.

10 trillion in debt: Cause: Wars and entitlements that grow the debt daily.

one person in every hundred in prision(prison): Cause: Antiquated drug laws.

corruption from the very top of government down: Cause: The best government money can buy.

Neither party has a lock on any of the causes for your dire prediction. Both parties are responsible for this mess, and what's worse, neither are willing to take repsonsibiility to clean it up now. The finger pointing goes on in the politics of "gotcha"!

[apdst]

If more hardcore criminals were to be executed, there would be alot fewer people in prison.

[DamnYankee]

How so?

Why place offensive military weapons in Cuba?

Why arm Venezuela?

Why invade Georgia, an ally of ours?

The Soviets are not friends.

[Blueneck]

it would seem logical, wouldn't it?.....the purpose of NATO was to counter Soviet aggression.....up until a week ago, it had no purpose, but since Russia seems intent to restore Soviet aggression, NATO has renewed purpose and now, obligation......I think the same argument could be made of focusing on alternative energy resources.

I can't help but think there's something underneath all this besides what's in the headlines. But to be honest, I don't have the time or energy to waste on figuring out the geopolitics of the this one, besides, I think it will probably be over pretty quick for some reason, just a hunch. I'll have to let the more intelligent types do the thinnin' for me here. :embarrased:

[Blueneck]

What shoud we do about Russia attacking Georga?
I believe the big target for Russia is The Ukraine & oil. I believe that Georgia is just on the path to Russias goal.
Seems to me that we had best start taking our own oil out of the ground or Russia will come after us. China has the money & people, Russia has the energy & getting/taking more all the time.
What would Obama do, "talk" to Putin?Oops. :embarrased: sorry meant to put this

I think the same argument could be made of focusing on alternative energy resources.



here.

[suedanim]

so, Russia isn't afraid to kill innocent civilians who are nowhere near military targets?......

Iraqi civilian death toll... estimated at hundreds of thousands... but officially the count is 95,000

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

I doubt the USA was much concerned about civilian casualities during shock and awe ....

Tommy Franks "we don't do body counts"

Remember Fallujah..

[December]

So is America afraid to liberate poor angelic Georgia from bad Russia?

[potter]

Americans will probably awaken all too late before they realize it is both the Democrats and the Republicans that have got us to this point over the last 60 years.

10 trillion in debt: Cause: Wars and entitlements that grow the debt daily.

one person in every hundred in prision(prison): Cause: Antiquated drug laws.

corruption from the very top of government down: Cause: The best government money can buy.

Neither party has a lock on any of the causes for your dire prediction. Both parties are responsible for this mess, and what's worse, neither are willing to take repsonsibiility to clean it up now. The finger pointing goes on in the politics of "gotcha"!

Can't argue with that.

So where do we go from here? Taxes eating up an ever larger portion of income to pay for war, debt service, and if any is left over, things government should be taking care of. Good paying jobs will continue to be shipped overseas while we become the china of the Americas...

[Elrathin]

So is America afraid to liberate poor angelic Georgia from bad Russia?

Is Russia run by a bunch of war mongers and idiots?

[potter]

Why place offensive military weapons in Cuba?

Because it is an ally and the US is a constant threat.


Why arm Venezuela?

Because the US is always trying to overthrow their government...most likely another bid to control the oil....


Why invade Georgia, an ally of ours?

Because Georgia attacked peackeepers first...funny how our allies don't have to display any ethincal or moral standards to be allies.....they just have to do as we say and accept the bribes.....


The Soviets are not friends.

Just because you're paranoid about the Russian people doesn't mean they are my enemy.....

Sounds to me like the US is the neighborhood shit disturber and everyone is just protecting themselves from us.......

[PostmodernProphet]

Iraqi civilian death toll... estimated at hundreds of thousands... but officially the count is 95,000

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

I doubt the USA was much concerned about civilian casualities during shock and awe ....

Tommy Franks "we don't do body counts"

Remember Fallujah..

officially the count is around 95,000......and around 90,000 of those were killed by terrorists, not by coalition forces.....if you don't think American forces are concerned about civilian casualties you are f u c k e d up...

don't even begin to compare anything in the Iraq war with bombing civilian airports in Georgia.....

[potter]

officially the count is around 95,000......and around 90,000 of those were killed by terrorists,


prove it...and I mean a link that is not a US government sponsored propaganda site.

[PostmodernProphet]

prove it...and I mean a link that is not a US government sponsored propaganda site.

read the lists at iraqbodycount and look at the cause of death.....less than five percent died as a result of coalition action......now, asshole....YOU prove that the US doesn't care about civilian casualties....and don't use a dumbfuck liberal asshole website......

[potter]

read the lists at iraqbodycount and look at the cause of death.....less than five percent died as a result of coalition action......now, asshole....YOU prove that the US doesn't care about civilian casualties....and don't use a dumbfuck liberal asshole website......


Shock and awe....:blah:

This from the same site:

How the West values civilian lives in Iraq

Comment by Lily Hamourtziadou
12 November 2007
The American military has expressed regret “that civilians are hurt or killed while coalition forces search to rid Iraq of terrorism,” after the 11 October killing of 15 women (one pregnant) and children in an air raid near lake Thar Thar.1 The civilian death toll by US fire was 96 in October, with 23 children among them, while in September US forces and contractors killed 108 Iraqi civilians, including 7 children. In August US troops killed 103 civilians, 16 of them children, and in July they killed 196. In fact, during the last five months US forces in Iraq have killed over 600 Iraqi civilians. Regrettably, as always.
It is the ‘price to pay’, the ‘sacrifice’ that has to be made as we fight terrorism, the ‘cost’ of this war against evil forces. That is what we say to justify these killings. But those of us who speak of this price to be paid, this sacrifice to be made, do not pay this price, do not make this sacrifice. Our own country is not being destroyed, attacked, occupied. Our own children are not being blown up, our civilians are not becoming homeless by the millions. Those who speak of the necessity of this sacrifice, would they be prepared to pay such a price? In their own country? With the blood of their own families?
1 Iraq strike 'kills 15 civilians' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7040697.stm) BBC, 12 Oct 2007. IBC record k7704 (http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/incidents/k7704)
2 'Army Bates 550 - 554' (http://www.aclu.org/natsec/foia/pdf/Army0550_0554.pdf)13 Feb 2006 (via ACLU (http://www.aclu.org/natsec/foia/search.html)) IBC record d1910 (http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/incidents/d1910)
3 'Army Bates 762' (http://www.aclu.org/natsec/foia/pdf/Army0762.pdf) 18 Feb 2006 (via ACLU (http://www.aclu.org/natsec/foia/search.html)) IBC record d1908 (http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/incidents/d1908)
4 'Army Bates 342 - 343' (http://www.aclu.org/natsec/foia/pdf/Army0342_0343.pdf) 1 Jan 2006 (via ACLU (http://www.aclu.org/natsec/foia/search.html)) IBC record d1904 (http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/incidents/d1904)
5 'Army Bates 1149 - 1152' (http://www.aclu.org/natsec/foia/pdf/Army1149_1152.pdf) 1 Jan 2006 (via ACLU (http://www.aclu.org/natsec/foia/search.html)) IBC record d1905 (http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/incidents/d1905)
6 Knowing the enemy difficult in Iraq (http://www.usatoday.com/news/topstories/2007-10-07-1595865157_x.htm) Katarina Kratovac, AP, 7 Oct 2007. IBC record k7615 (http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/incidents/k7615)




How much easier it is to sacrifice others, to let others pay with their lives. The value of those lives is hardly high enough to trouble us. It is nothing our military cannot afford. Here is an example:
“A fisherman was fishing in the Tigris river in the early morning, when a Coalition Forces (CF) helicopter flew over and shone a spotlight on him. The fisherman began to shout in English, ‘Fish! Fish!’ while pointing to his catch. A patrol of Humvees arrived, and as the deceased bent down to turn off the boat’s motor, CF shot and killed him. CF did not secure the boat, which drifted off and was never retrieved.” Compensation for death denied due to combat exemption; compensation for boat granted: $3,500 US.2
The US Army paid $7,500 to two children whose mother they killed inside a taxi that ran a checkpoint — both children were also in the taxi, and were shot and injured; they also paid $6,000 for killing a child looking out of the window, while a raid was on-going in the house across the street.3 4 They refused, as they do in the majority of cases, to compensate the child whose father they killed as he drove home, but agreed to make a ‘condolence payment’ of $1,500.5 More recently, the US military is reported to have paid $2,500 to each family of the three men they killed near Abu Lukah, as they guarded their village.6
There are more:
Al Matasan Street, Samarra, Iraq

Claim on behalf of Iraqi [Redacted] by son. [Redacted], who was deaf, was shot and killed by US forces near the Samarra museum. Two eyewitnesses corroborated the story. Finding: denied for lack of evidence and combat exception. Condolence payment granted: $500 US.7
Samarra, Iraq

7 'Army Bates 0952 - 0958' (http://www.aclu.org/natsec/foia/pdf/Army0952_0958.pdf) 4 Nov 2005 (via ACLU (http://www.aclu.org/natsec/foia/search.html)) IBC record d3353 (http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/incidents/d3353)
8 'Army Bates 588 - 591' (http://www.aclu.org/natsec/foia/pdf/Army0588_0591) 28 Apr 2005 (via ACLU (http://www.aclu.org/natsec/foia/search.html)) IBC record d3352 (http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/incidents/d3352)
9 'Army Bates 889 - 892' (http://www.aclu.org/natsec/foia/pdf/Army0889_0892.pdf) 27 May 2005 (via ACLU (http://www.aclu.org/natsec/foia/search.html)) IBC record d3348 (http://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/incidents/d3348)




Claim on behalf of Iraqi [Redacted] by parent. [Redacted], a four year-old girl, was playing in her front yard when she was killed by Coalition Forces’ (CF) fire. The CF and a Humvee were trying to cross the road and they shot to clear the traffic. A bullet ricocheted off of a wall and hit [Redacted]. Army memo: “A SIGACTS investigation revealed no activity meeting” the incident’s description, and “the claim is too old to verify.” Finding: denied due to lack of evidence. Condolence payment of $2,500 US granted.8
Tikrit, Iraq

Claim on behalf of Iraqi [Redacted], an ambulance driver. [Redacted] was on his way to the scene of an accident with an IED when he was shot and killed by a US soldier. Finding: negligent fire; Compensation: $2,500 US.9
Reading through the Army compensation reports, it is fairly clear just what the value of an Iraqi life is, of how the loss of a beloved child, parent and sibling is valued, priced. A few thousand dollars (if that) is how much they are worth, and no more. Their loss covered by a shockingly low monetary compensation. No further consequences, punishment, no further accountability.
Those of us who opposed this war and the long occupation that followed hold our political leaders responsible for the horrors of Iraq. We sometimes blame our soldiers. We always blame the terrorists. But we are reluctant to blame our nation or ourselves. “We can continue to blame the Bush administration,” writes Frank Rich, “but we must also examine our own responsibility for the hideous acts committed in our name in a war where we have now fought longer than we did in the one that put Verschärfte Vernehmung on the map.” We cannot simply ‘look the other way.’10
10 The 'Good Germans' Among Us (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/14/opinion/14rich2.html) Frank Rich, New York Times, 14 Oct 2007.




We, who have lost very little, who have sacrificed very little, who have paid very little, we ‘turn the page,’ to use Rich’s phrase, and we continue to speak of ‘our’ war, of ‘our’ fight against the terrorists, ‘our’ ideals, ‘our’ kindness, ‘our’ courage; things that we value far more than the lives of millions of others, people whose deaths do not hurt us, whose loss does not affect us, and whose sacrifice we do not see bloodying our own hands.

[December]

America is all hot air.... The USA is afraid to protect its ally in Georgia...

[apdst]

Because it is an ally and the US is a constant threat.

The United States hasn't threatened Cuba in nearly 50 years.

Because the US is always trying to overthrow their government

Show us documentation proving that the United States has EVER attmepted to overthrow the Venezualan government.

All in all, though, this isn't about fair play. It boils down to two single facts, the Commies are the bad guys and we are the good guys. Claiming that Russia's actions are ok is like saying it's ok for criminals to use artillery against the cops, in the interest of fair play and all.

[apdst]

December,

Can I have your boss's email? I want to send him a note telling him how good of a job you're doing spreading propaganda. You almost pissed me off with that last post, almost...LOL!!

[PostmodernProphet]

Shock and awe...

did not target civilian targets.....