Russian Propagandists are Hard at Work Spinning Invasion as America's Fault 2008

[RiversideGator]

If by debate you mean agree with you then I do not debate.  If by debate you mean present an alternative set of ideas bolstered by facts, then I debate you quite well thank you.

BTW, I did not correct your language.  I corrected your misstatements of fact.  There is a big difference between the two.

[RiversideGator]

You have not presented a single verifiable fact on this thread or many others in weeks.

Just your endless personal attacks and evasions.

When you can come to a debate prepared to learn from others and to be wrong, it will be worth debating you.  In the meantime its just an exercise of you posting nonsense and trying to semanticize your way into sounding like youve made a point.

I am not the one making wild accusations without a shred of evidence.  Bring some proof next time.

[RiversideGator]

River, READ THE POSTS and inform yourself.

I did read the posts in question several times.  They contained utter nonsense.  Repeatedly telling me to read to the posts is not the same thing as actually posting evidence of what you claim.

Be able to tell the difference between a reposting, an original posting, news, opinion and fact.

Check.  I am able to do this.

Don't bore everyone with your endless explosions of gas.

Who is a "bore" is a matter of subjective opinion.  In any case, I doubt I "bore everyone".

If you disagree with someone, post why and give reasons.

Check.  I have done this.  Please follow this rule also instead of cursing and calling names when you get challenged on a point.

Allow room for others to make their points and present additional facts, argument or data.

I have been begging you to post facts and date but all I get is argument.  Why is this?

You will find more people willing to post on these threads if you do.

Check.  Lots of people participate now.

[uptowngirl]

Sorry boys, you are both guilty....and BTW, I counted there are more posts bashing Bush, McCain, and Rove than Obama, so any partisan slamming is not coming from the few republicans on this forum.

I say open something up for us independents/libertarians.... we are much more even tempered and have not had anyone in office to tear up... 

[Midway ®]

So, let me see if I get this straight...the EEEVVILLL Bush, Cheney, Rove et al, in order to distract people from Great Depression II, decide to go all "Wag the Dog," and cause a war in a country that 75% of the US couldn't identify on a map, but not before manipulating the market to bring down commodity prices to give their nefarious acts cover?

How many far-left cliches can we pack into one summary? I'm just astounded than any normal thinking person could actually see this and say "hey...that makes sense." I mean...ok, this could be an advance plot summary of the next David Baldacci book. At least then we could treat it as it comes off...utter fiction.

Same question from the other thread...do you actually believe what you post, or do you just like to stir the pot?

Please define a "normal thinking person". I don't know what that is, exactly. Do you mean a normal, thinking person, or a "normal-thinking" person?

Would you classify the president of Georgia as a "normal thinking person"? If so, why would he implicitly attack a country that could step on him like a cockroach? Just asking. Because if he's not a normal thinking person, that might explain everything. But I'd love to hear an explanation that makes sense, and you sound like the guy who can provide it, so, go forth, be fruitful and multiply.

[civil42806]

"here were not that many forces. The Georgians began an air assault on South Osettia, thinking (incredibly) that their good buddy Uncle Sam would be standing right behind them. Because this is what was being whispered to them by McCain's campaign adviser (Scheunemann, who is a lobbyist for Georgia) and Rove. Well, as he found out, uncle was standing behind him, way behind him.

You also have to understand that South Osettia considered itself to be part of Russia. so much so that Russia even issued all passports for South Osettia, so you would either have to be crazy to launch an attack against them, or be sure that the big dog is right behind you.

And by the way, true to form, McCain raised the issue of the Georgia-Russia conflict in his VFW speech today, right on schedule.  the only loser in this is poor Mikhail Shakashvili who learned an expensive lesson indeed."


Actually no you don't have to think that theres a big dog behind you.  You could actually  think that as a soverign country you have the right to maintain your territorial integrity.  I don't care how many forces there were you have to have a plan and a standby order to accomplish this in short order.  A brigade or division or army simply does not move out on a whim.  As far as whether this fight is worth it to georgia, I think they should cut there losses and let the provinces go.  Then after the new russian empires complaints are settled apply for nato membership.  If I 'm the ukraine, my ambassador is immediatly asking for Nato membership.

[Midway ®]

Everything which transpired over the last week has been about one issue, and one issue only: the Ukraine. Russia will never let the Ukraine join NATO. Not now, especially as they have the power and the means and quite clearly the will to thwart its accession.

Why is Ukraine important? Other than the key points Ian makes there is one other key point that must be made. Had Charles XII, or Napoleon or Hitler had a Western friendly country with borders less than a few hundred kilometers from Moscow their invasions would have ended in a drastically different fashion. It's called 'strategic depth' and the Russians will never give up the Ukraine for that reason. If you think nations change, well they do, but not nearly as fast as you think. And for the Russians the Mongols, the Swedes, the French and the Germans are still very, very real in their collective memory.

We are at a very dangerous point right now. The US is over-extended and to some extent paralyzed by the election that is upcoming. The next 12 months are the perfect time frame, as Ian notes, for Russia to make it very clear that it will not tolerate a Ukraine in NATO.

It won't happen, and if the West persists, Europe will have some damn cold winters ahead and maybe even a fighting war on its hands.

Stay out of the Ukraine. America has its red-lines; the Israelis have theirs, and so do the Russians. We'd be wise to remember that in all our flag waving jingoistic glory.

http://agonist.org/sean_paul_kelley/20080813/its_all_about_the_ukraine

[civil42806]

o you are proposing that the Georgians were acting on the principles of Soveriegnty when they launched measures against South Ossettia

South Ossettia was nominally part of georgia after the break up of the USSR.  However they have had almost no control over the area.  Russia was actually issuing passports for the citizens.  There is a great article on slate .com about South Ossteia, if you want to search for it.  Myself I think that the attempt by Georgia to reassert control was a mistake.  They should simply have let the provinces go, they are majority Russian with little Georgian sypmathies.  However the nasty habit of a greater power to accuse a minor adjoining power of abusing the greater powers ethnic minority has a long history.  Right now I'm sure the Ukraine has concerns about the crimea, 1.  its a major russian port, the only one with access to the Med.  2. The crimea has a majority russian population.  So I wouldn't be surprised to start hearing the same complaints from the russian government.

[civil42806]

I hate to agree with you Stephen but I'm afraid you are. 

[Midway ®]

o you are proposing that the Georgians were acting on the principles of Soveriegnty when they launched measures against South Ossettia

South Ossettia was nominally part of georgia after the break up of the USSR.  However they have had almost no control over the area.  Russia was actually issuing passports for the citizens.  There is a great article on slate .com about South Ossteia, if you want to search for it.  Myself I think that the attempt by Georgia to reassert control was a mistake.  They should simply have let the provinces go, they are majority Russian with little Georgian sypmathies.  However the nasty habit of a greater power to accuse a minor adjoining power of abusing the greater powers ethnic minority has a long history.  Right now I'm sure the Ukraine has concerns about the crimea, 1.  its a major russian port, the only one with access to the Med.  2. The crimea has a majority russian population.  So I wouldn't be surprised to start hearing the same complaints from the russian government.

Thanks for quoting me, but next time give attribution, ok?

[civil42806]

Not a clue who you are sorry, but thats my opinion

[civil42806]

Sorry Stephen, didn't quote him in my response.  I'm well aware of the quote option.  my response was all my own.  If Midway and I agree, well good for us

[civil42806]

your correct there Stephen.  I was disturbed by the response by the action of Poland signing an agreement to position antiballistic system to there nation.  Don't have enough knowledge to say whether they will work or not.  But Poland is a member of NATO,  we have a mutual defense agreement, so this shouldn't be controversial.  Yet we have people saying publicly we may have to reconsider this agreement.  That has to shake the confidence of our new eastern europe allies

[Midway ®]

Loud Voice, Tiny StickTrying to make sense of Condoleezza Rice's latest statement.
By Fred Kaplan
Posted Wednesday, Aug. 20, 2008, at 5:39 PM ET

Condoleezza Rice has said many strange things as secretary of state, but few stranger than this remark at an Aug. 18 press conference onboard her plane en route to Brussels, Belgium:

    Russia is a state that is unfortunately using the one tool that it has always used … when it wishes to deliver a message, and that's its military power. That's not the way to deal in the 21st century.

It would have been mere hypocrisy if Rice had said, as President Bush did in the wake of the assault on Georgia, that invading a sovereign country is "unacceptable in the 21st century." It would have been too clever by at least half had she repeated U.N. Ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad's protest that the "days of overthrowing leaders by military means in Europeâ€"those days are gone." (It took Jon Stewart to italicize the phrasing's loophole, which implies that coups in other regions may proceed as usual.)

But for America's top diplomat to say that "military power" is no way to deal or deliver messages in the 21st century is simply perplexing. Military power has always been used for these purposes and, alas, always will be. That is, in part, what military power is for. This is International Relations 101.

Rice, who has a Ph.D. in international relations, surely knows this. And the Russians, Georgians, Iraqis, Iranians, Afghans, Pakistanis, Israelis, Lebanese, Iranians, Syrians, North Koreansâ€"all the world leaders whose armed forces have (or have been) shot, strafed, or bombed (or have issued or received threats of such violence in recent years)â€"know that she knows this, too.

And that's the problem. Bush and most of his top officials have now reached the point, if they haven't raced past it long ago, where nobody can afford to believe a single thing they say.

Fro the rest of this article:
http://www.slate.com/id/2198216/

[RiversideGator]

The Russians are definitely not in NATO and they are demonstrating now why we need a missile defense system.  The Democrats of course oppose this reasonable and necessary step to defend America's cities.  What does it matter if we have mass transit care of Obama if we are vaporized?