PDA

View Full Version : Bush Announces $1 Billion in Aid for Georgia


Milton Bradley
09-03-2008, 11:27 PM
By JENNIFER LOVEN, Associated Press Writer

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080903/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_georgia

WASHINGTON - Pushing back against an increasingly aggressive Moscow, President Bush said Wednesday the U.S. will send an extra $1 billion to Georgia to help the pro-Western former Soviet republic in the wake of Russia's invasion.

"Georgia has a strong economic foundation and leaders with an impressive record of reform," Bush said in a statement. "Our additional economic assistance will help the people of Georgia recover from the assault on their country, and continue to build a prosperous and competitive economy."

Vice President Dick Cheney, due in Georgia on Thursday, planned to make the massive aid package a major highlight of his discussions with Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili. Cheney is on a tour of three former Soviet republics that are wary of Russia's intentions in what Moscow likes to call its "near abroad" sphere of influence and what Cheney termed while in Azerbaijan on Wednesday "the shadow of the Russian invasion of Georgia."

"The free world cannot allow the destiny of a small independent country to be determined by the aggression of a larger neighbor," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters at the State Department in a simultaneous announcement with Bush.

She mocked Russia for its recognition of the two separatist regions in Georgia that are at the heart of the conflict that broke out last month, and for its failure to garner international backing.

"Almost no one followed suit, I might note. It isn't really an impressive list to have Abkhazia and South Ossetia recognize each other," she said.

Also in tandem with Bush, the International Monetary Fund announced it has agreed to lend Georgia $750 million for economic recovery.

The administration is delaying an announcement on some sort of punishment of Russia for its actions against Georgia and its refusal thus far to comply with a French-brokered cease-fire. However, the decision to shower tiny Georgia with such substantial aid and have Cheney talk about it in Moscow's backyard will likely be seen by the Kremlin as highly provocative, if not a punitive measure in and of itself.

The dollar total is half the $2 billion a year the U.S. gives Israel, its largest aid recipient. But the sizable amount still shows the strategic importance the U.S. places on both supporting Saakashvili's Western-leaning government and countering the desire by a newly resurgent and energy-rich Moscow for greater regional influence.

Cheney made a point in Azerbaijan of saying that Washington has "a deep and abiding interest" in the region's stability.

That said, the U.S. has found during this conflict that it has little leverage with Russia. Moscow has drawn condemnations from the United States and Europe, but little else. Meanwhile on Wednesday, Russia closed its embassy in Georgia, following Georgia's severing of diplomatic ties with Moscow.

After years of tensions, the recent fighting began Aug. 7 when Georgian forces went into its breakaway province of South Ossetia in hopes of re-establishing control. Russian forces repelled the offensive and pushed deep into Georgia proper.

Both sides signed the cease-fire in mid-August, but Russia has ignored its requirement for all forces to return to prewar positions.

Bush said the money will meet humanitarian needs, such as helping to resettle families that were displaced. The U.S. already has provided $30 million in humanitarian relief since the conflict began.

The United States has sent two military ships bearing aid to Georgia, and the USS Mount Whitney — the flagship of the Navy's 6th Fleet — steamed through the Dardanelles early Wednesday and was expected to pass through the Bosporus later in the day. The two Turkish-controlled straits link the Mediterranean to the Black Sea.

The new funds are also aimed at helping impoverished Georgia, wedged between Russia and Turkey on the Black Sea, to rebuild infrastructure and boost an economy that has been growing but is nowhere near grown.

Georgia wants to rebuild and modernize its badly routed military. Though U.S. officials emphasized that none of the current package was for military aid, there was no effort to rule that out for the future. Russia has accused the United States of delivering arms on the U.S. warships that have docked in Georgian ports with humanitarian supplies.

Rice said that $570 million of the funds will be made available in the remaining months of the Bush administration, though Congress will have to approve $200 million of that. That also leaves a sizable portion — $430 million — up to the budgeting discretion of next year's Congress and the new president.

But Bush feels confident in that area, as both the Democratic and Republican presidential candidates, Barack Obama and John McCain, have expressed strong support for Georgia's embattled government and Bush's approach to Russia's invasion.

On trade, Bush said the United States would negotiate a deal to provide preferential access to Georgian exports. The president said his commerce secretary would dispatch a trade mission to Georgia in the coming weeks.



:fight:

xLIBREx
09-04-2008, 02:46 AM
Load up the money cannon and fire!

Trish
09-04-2008, 02:47 AM
Well that's going to put a knot in Putin's colon.

Drocket
09-04-2008, 02:51 AM
Well that's going to put a knot in Putin's colon.

Why? Just means more stuff for them to steal in the next invasion...

Trish
09-04-2008, 02:58 AM
Why? Just means more stuff for them to steal in the next invasion...

Yeah, but he really hoped he'd scared us off along with the rest of the world.

Milton Bradley
09-04-2008, 03:20 AM
Why? Just means more stuff for them to steal in the next invasion...


Indeed, or some fancy new infrastructure to blow up.


This is yet more evidence that Republicans don't really have an issue with wealth redistribution, they just don't like where the Democrats invest.

bishop
09-04-2008, 03:31 AM
Load up the money cannon and fire!

ain't that the truth..

americans have all sorts of issues they're dealing with and our traitor rulers feel that doling out deficit spending to georgia is a higher priority..

River
09-04-2008, 03:41 AM
What gets me here is what Ive been complaining about for ages....


Why are we sending money to Georgia when Georgia has the money to pay McCain foreigh policy advisor and lobbyist Randy Scheuneman $290,000, and it doesnt stop there.


Scheuneman's firm Orion, has been paid nearly $800,000 dollars on top of that ?

What do you think they got for that ?


Certainly there are getting what they paid, plus, for what ?


What pray tell, have they paid for from the American government if McCain takes office ?



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/12/AR2008081202932.html

dayslacker
09-04-2008, 03:50 AM
There goes our hard-earned money. But then, Georgia needs assistance. But this is too much. If this will do good and that every cent will be appropriately used, then ok.

Milton Bradley
09-04-2008, 03:54 AM
There goes our hard-earned money. But then, Georgia needs assistance. But this is too much. If this will do good and that every cent will be appropriately used, then ok.


No, it just plain wrong no matter what. My government was NEVER empowered to use tax dollars in this manor. It's criminal.

micfranklin
09-04-2008, 03:57 AM
And spending continues to go awry....

xLIBREx
09-04-2008, 03:59 AM
There goes our hard-earned money. But then, Georgia needs assistance. But this is too much. If this will do good and that every cent will be appropriately used, then ok.

Since when has the burden of policing the entire world been the responsibility of the U.S. taxpayer? We spend $1,000,000,000,000 (trillion) a year maintaining our empire. We are currently devaluing our currency at an unprecedented rate to do this. It's unsustainable and history teaches us it will probably be our downfall.

Americans need to wake the fuck up. There is not an endless supply of wealth for us to continue down this road.

apdst
09-04-2008, 05:03 AM
Was it a bad idea to spend several billion on Afghanistan back in the 80's? Probably not, huh?

xLIBREx
09-04-2008, 05:38 AM
Was it a bad idea to spend several billion on Afghanistan back in the 80's? Probably not, huh?

It was a great idea! So great we ended up with Osama Bin Laden. How much more "blowack" can we take?

apdst
09-04-2008, 05:45 AM
It was a great idea! So great we ended up with Osama Bin Laden. How much more "blowack" can we take?

Let's see, we stopped the Soviet invasion of the Middle East, their primary objective being the seizing of the Straits of Hormuz, thereby controlling the flow of oil to the entire world. Not to mention we stopped the slaughter of millions of Afghans. So, let's weigh this out: Soviets control the flow of oil to the entire world...UBL launches a few terror attacks. Geeeeee, I think the, "blowback", is definitely the lesser of two evils.

In the words of the great Charlie Wilson: "we won the war, but we fucked up the end game".

xLIBREx
09-04-2008, 06:00 AM
Let's see, we stopped the Soviet invasion of the Middle East, their primary objective being the seizing of the Straits of Hormuz, thereby controlling the flow of oil to the entire world. Not to mention we stopped the slaughter of millions of Afghans. So, let's weigh this out: Soviets control the flow of oil to the entire world...UBL launches a few terror attacks. Geeeeee, I think the, "blowback", is definitely the lesser of two evils.

In the words of the great Charlie Wilson: "we won the war, but we fucked up the end game".

What difference would it have made if we had been tapping our own oil? Looking at these events in isolation is playing checkers. Let's play chess instead.

We currently spend $1T a year trying to maintain our empire. It's unsustainable and history has shown us if we continue down this road it will be the end of us.

apdst
09-04-2008, 06:40 AM
What difference would it have made if we had been tapping our own oil?

If we were tapping our own oil, it would have made no difference. No difference until WW3 started and we had to choose a side. That's all the difference it would have made. Kinda like history repeating itself, huh?

xLIBREx
09-04-2008, 07:52 AM
If we were tapping our own oil, it would have made no difference. No difference until WW3 started and we had to choose a side.

Didn't take you long to hit the dramatics.

That's all the difference it would have made. Kinda like history repeating itself, huh?

You mean like America getting involved with WWI which directly led to the rise of Hitler forcing us into WWII? Sounds great. Hey, I'm still waiting for your plan on how to pay for all of this without continuing to expand the money supply at such a fast rate the Fed stopped publishing M3 about 4 years ago. I'm all ears.

Milton Bradley
09-04-2008, 08:59 PM
In the words of the great Charlie Wilson: "we won the war, but we fucked up the end game".


Yeah, and I bet you formed you ill concieved opinion about that after watching the fictionalized account of Charlie's Story in television, correct?

micfranklin
09-04-2008, 09:47 PM
Was it a bad idea to spend several billion on Afghanistan back in the 80's? Probably not, huh?

Not really, but I couldn't help but notice it's 2008 and we're not endlessly rich.

Osborn F. Enready
09-04-2008, 11:30 PM
River said:
What pray tell, have they paid for from the American government if McCain takes office ?

Come on River, Obama is in the same boat as McCain on foreign aid, israel support, UN support, CFR MEMBER.....

You guys are kidding yourself if you think there is a difference here between them.....

apdst
09-04-2008, 11:47 PM
Yeah, and I bet you formed you ill concieved opinion about that after watching the fictionalized account of Charlie's Story in television, correct?

Actually, I read the book before the movie came out.

Not really, but I couldn't help but notice it's 2008 and we're not endlessly rich.

No more, nor less than we were in the 80's.

River
09-05-2008, 02:26 AM
Come on River, Obama is in the same boat as McCain on foreign aid, israel support, UN support, CFR MEMBER.....

You guys are kidding yourself if you think there is a difference here between them.....

You didnt read my post very well did you ?




Just what WAS Randy Schenemann, McCains foreign policy advisor at the time, paid for ?

What did Schenemann promise the Georgians for those payments that total over a million dollars ?

And why the hell should we pay the Georgians anything if they already have that kind of money to pay for Washington Lobbyists?

Osborn F. Enready
09-05-2008, 04:47 PM
We should be kicking THEM ALL out of office River.....

Both parties are conspiring here to allocate taxpayers and US dollars to foreign nations based on the flawed old concept of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend".......

This is how blowback is created.

River
09-05-2008, 04:53 PM
Thats twice you have dodged my question.

Bush has already set the stage for giving more money to the Georgians, I just want to know what the Georgians were or thought they were paying for from Randy Schenemen and HOW does it relate to the current crisis we are seeing in Georgia.


In my opinion, there's a link in here somewhere.


Also, do you think we should be sending aide, when they obviously have enough money to pay for "consultants".

Osborn F. Enready
09-05-2008, 04:54 PM
I can almost ASSURE you there is a link River, no denying it......

I am saying that BOTH PARTIES likely have blood on their hands here....this isn't a partisan issue, its a criminal use of US funds issue.....

River
09-05-2008, 05:00 PM
Still dodging the Schenemen thing ?


Since you want to involve both parties on this, what benefit was given to the democrats when that money was paid to Scheneman and his firm ?


Schenemen was McCain's foreign policy advisor at the time this was happening. Can you be MORE specific with your answer ? Other then both parties are in cahoots :question:



(PS I know I spell schenemens name wrong...I'm just tired of having to look it up every time.)

Osborn F. Enready
09-05-2008, 09:25 PM
River said:
Still dodging the Schenemen thing ?

What do you mean dodging??!? I have no stake in this?

I am betting you are RIGHT on the Schenemen thing......as I am also saying pursue that investigation to your hearts content, posting your results as you find them....

River said:
Since you want to involve both parties on this, what benefit was given to the democrats when that money was paid to Scheneman and his firm ?

LOL.....not every single act benefits both parties and that wasn't what I was trying to alledge, they just use the same tactics against one another. Dig, dig, dig, follow the money, the thread of corruption completely wraps around both parties.

River said:
Schenemen was McCain's foreign policy advisor at the time this was happening. Can you be MORE specific with your answer ? Other then both parties are in cahoots

I am saying this is one of how many hundred investigations of corruption from both sides of the aisle... why is anyone suprised by this anymore??

Milton Bradley
09-05-2008, 09:41 PM
LOL.....not every single act benefits both parties and that wasn't what I was trying to alledge, they just use the same tactics against one another. Dig, dig, dig, follow the money, the thread of corruption completely wraps around both parties.


I am saying this is one of how many hundred investigations of corruption from both sides of the aisle... why is anyone suprised by this anymore??


Yep, like I was saying in the other thread, this guy will be MCCain's Ahmed Chalaby. ( Bush's man in Iraq feeding him false info to take us to war. )