Small nation pays price for being friend of the West
Rocky Mountain News
Published August 12, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
In November 2003, rose-wielding Georgians packed into Tbilisi's Freedom Square and ousted former Soviet Foreign Minister Eduard Shevardnadze from the presidency in a bloodless revolution.
Today Georgia runs red not with the petals of roses, but with the blood of warfare. And that pro-Western joie de vivre is as good as putting a target on the nation's back.
The rebellion of Ossetians in Georgia began shortly after that country broke away from Russia following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Russia - home to the North Ossetia-Alania region - easily picked sides. Not only that, its troops there have been recognized by the international community as peacekeepers ever since.
These days, it's much more than geography that has Russia acting as if it's already annexed South Ossetia and Georgia's other breakaway region, Abkhazia. Georgia has blossomed into a successful post-Soviet state with ambitions to join NATO and a distaste for the type of corruption that has marred other post-USSR transitions. U.S.-educated President Mikheil Saakashvili likes to point out that no former Soviet country has done more to embrace democracy and integration with the West than Georgia, and this is what irks Russia to no end.
Russia's return to authoritarian rule only reinforces Saakashvili's claim.
"It is clear that Russia's current leadership is bent on restoring a neocolonial form of control over the entire space once governed by Moscow," Saakashvili wrote in Monday's Wall Street Journal. And with continued attacks into Georgian territory despite Saakashvili's pledge to cease fire (he obviously misjudged the reaction to Georgia's incursion into Ossetia last week to stop separatist attacks), Moscow is obviously relishing this opportunity.
After all, a "peacekeeper" keeps conflict at bay in the assigned territory. A "peacekeeper" doesn't launch an offensive on its neighbor from multiple fronts, pushing toward the nation's capital like the imperial Russia of old in an all-consuming land grab, firing on retreating troops.
To call Russia, which has plied the separatists with everything from Russian citizenship to cash - and, alleges Georgia, weapons - the region's "peacekeeper" is bewildering.
The question of South Ossetia should have been solved in a meeting room, not on a battlefield, as the formation of an entirely independent Ossetian homeland would result in mass displacement of the territory's Georgian residents.
Militarily, there's not much the West can do, but that doesn't mean the United States has to meekly accept Russia's conduct. The U.S. and its allies should push their resolution on the conflict - even if watered down by European nations concerned about jilting a key energy source - at the U.N. Security Council, calling for an immediate cease-fire. Of course, since Russia and its partner in veto power, China, will see to it that no condemnation passes, this action will be largely symbolic.
Meanwhile, Russia's status in organizations like the G-8, where it has been given a position disproportionate to its actual place in the world economy, should be reviewed. The threat of detaching Russia from the world banking system, for example, would certainly give Russians pause because they don't trust their own banks and government with their money.
Long-term, Europe should make it a priority to reduce its exposure to Russian energy blackmail.
In a Sunday Security Council meeting, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Zalmay Khalilzad said that Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told Condoleezza Rice that the democratically elected "Saakashvili must go."
In fact, it is the Russian troops who have been fanning out through Georgia who must go, as well as the "peacekeepers" in South Ossetia.
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Featured
-
Holiday movies
Check out our movie page to read reviews and see your holiday options.
-
Holiday Lights
Is your house the jolliest on the block? Submit your holiday lights display.
-
Mount Crushmore
Which four Broncos greats should be immortalized on Mount Crushmore? Vote here.
-
Broncos-Jets Action
Visit our photo galleries for some hard-hitting action photos from Sunday's game.
-
Bronco Dean's rant
Listen to Bronco Dean's postgame rant on the Jets.
-
Rocky Multimedia
The news comes alive in our videos and slide shows. Catch up on what's happening today.
-
Stein's View
Editorial cartoons by Ed Stein
-
Holiday Gift Guide
Looking to get a jump-start on the holiday shopping season?
-
The Rocky @ 150 Years
Read the Rocky's coverage of Colorado's cannibal, Alfred Packer, in 1886.
August 12, 2008
3 a.m.
Suggest removal
TaylorMade writes:
It pains me how bias the American media, my media, is being in this whole thing. Obviously Russia has siezed on this chance to expand its influence and punish a regional rival, but your article paints Georgia as an (almost) innocent victim when the truth of the matter is that they invaded South Ossetia full force and took the capital killing, by their own, obviously flawed, estimates, 100 innocent civilizians. In truth of course the number is higher, if not the 2000 the Russians/South Ossetians are claiming. You make one scant reference to this important fact:
"he obviously misjudged the reaction to Georgia's incursion into Ossetia last week to stop separatist attacks"
Yes, SO is technically a part of Georgia, but its been de-facto autonomous for 15 years and, its no secret, armed and supported by the Russians. Georgia knew all this and still chose to stir up the hornets nest. Georgia is OUR client in the region, armed by us and our allies, so we're in some way responsible for its actions. I hear all kinds of very erudite (and of course, correct) explications of Russia's schemes in the region, but what about our schemes? Aren't we in fact trying to pick off countries in Russia's near-abroad and turn them to our side (ukraine, missles in poland, etc)? This is Great Power competition in the classic mold, its definitely NOT the one-sided aggression you paint it as.
August 12, 2008
6:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
Mike_In_Hartsel writes:
TaylorMade says it all. Geogia started it. And we're telling Russia to back off?
August 12, 2008
8:03 a.m.
Suggest removal
gs writes:
The South Ossetians made a pact with the devil and now their province has been destroyed. I still wonder what their complaint was and do they feel they got justice. And if anyone responds please go into the history of the conflict pre Soviet Union. From looking at a map the South Ossetians had no business obtaining independance as the area is contiguous to the rest of Georgia. And, as long as the Russians withdraw, Georgia hasn't lost that much. I feel sorry for the South Ossetians but in fact they asked for it.
August 12, 2008
8:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
Truth writes:
I'm a conservative, and I sincerely hope that Bush, Cheney, and the rest of the national government shut up about this and mind their own business. This is a sectional dispute that the US has no business getting involved in. It's time the rest of the world learned how to take care of their own problems, and it's time we stayed out and let them.
In fact, I admire the Russians in that once they decide to use force, they do it and do it right. None of this "Go fight the war, but be nice about it" BS. I believe I heard this from a Marine: "The only unfair fight is one that we lose".
August 12, 2008
8:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
AngelontheSidelines writes:
Georgia made their own pact with the devil(Bush), and Americans will end up paying with their blood.
August 12, 2008
8:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
OneCreek writes:
Georgia is receiving its just desserts for dancing the Tango with the U.S., NATO, and Israel. The "West" (U.S.) should have disbanded N.A.T.O. when the Soviet Union collapsed, as its "Mission" was "Accomplished". George the First promised the Russian Federation that N.A.T.O. would not move eastward. He and all his successor have been liars.
Lies, upon lies, upon more lies. And then staring in 1991, "The Harvard Group" and Friedman's "Chicago Boys", along with the help of the I.M.F. and the World Bank, pillaged the Russian economy, creating mafia-connected Oligarchs and impoverishing all but the new wealthy elite. Violating our "promise", N.A.T.O. continued eastward, gobbling up former Soviet Satellites, while the C.I.A. and the Mossad engaged in political subterfuge in all of them as well, installing tinpot dictators posing as "reformers" who did nothing but our bidding.
It is the good old U.S.A., on its way to financial and moral bankruptcy, who has encircled Russia as well as involve itself in the politics of what has to be considered the legitimate Russian sphere of influence. What do you expect after the bellicosity the U.S. has displayed from Gulf War I on, for the Russians to play dead? After our naked lying that was sold to a gullible public to allow the Empire to invade Iraq? Our saber-rattling over a non-existent nuclear weapons program in Iran? Are you completely deaf, dumb, and blind?
It must be that the Russians are "better read" than the ignorant jingoist who penned this sophomoric screed. Dear author, go grab a copy of Zbignew Brzezinski's "The Grand Chessboard" if you wish to actually understand the U.S. plan for the region. I'm certain the Russian leadership has read it, just as they have no doubt read the neocon "Creed" published by "The Project for the New American Century". Try wading through Chalmer's Johnson's latest trilogy on our "Empire" for just a bit of enlightenment. You just might figure out what the Russians and the rest of the world have figured out - that our 800 military bases in over 130 countries are there to dominate the world, not co-exist with it. It is to be a world run by us, on our terms.
Fortunately, Francis Fukuyama's "End of History" has not yet come to pass, and much of the rest of the world has decided that the future isn't going to be a McDonald's "Happy Meal" delivered from the belly of a B-52. To hell with Georgia and to hell with our forward projection of Imperial Power. As Pat Buchanan wrote, the choice is "A Republic, Not an Empire". I choose the "Republic", while you obviously demand an expansion of a bankrupt Empire.
August 12, 2008
9:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
dakar writes:
taylormade does NOT have it right. The fact that Georgia isn't innocent doesn't give Russia the right to actively invade and bomb. Georgia is a pro-American democracy and does have some importance in that region. If the US wants states to open their governments and become pro American, then the US must stand by them. The US and Europe need to punish Russia to let them know such actions will not be tolerated before Russia rolls their tanks into other places.
August 12, 2008
10:25 a.m.
Suggest removal
fatheromalley writes:
Georgia a democracy. Russia a communist tyranny masquerading as a democracy.. Hmmm . which side to choose?
And we have our own "plans". wow.. Freedom.. how arrogant of us to wish the world free of tyranny and we might even have new friends.. Oh but we don't "deserve" other free nations as allies..
We've been arrogant in our freedom and we must destroy ourselves in an orgy of self sacrifice.. we've got it, and the rest of the world wants it and we have to give it up.. bwahahahahah
I get it. America bad, Russia good.. there is a moral equivalency between a democracy of representative government and communism/socialism?
Give me a break..
www.numbersusa.org
www.jihadwatch.org
www.votesmart.org
www.petitionproject.org
www.fairtax.org
and of course www.fatheromalley.com where you can find the click throughs to each of these..
Love to all,
Father O'Malley
August 12, 2008
10:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
OneCreek writes:
Dakar - Wake up and smell the coffee! Iraq was innocent, and we invaded, bombed, and destroyed the entire county, twice. In 1991, Bush I's Ambassador April Glaspie flat-out told Hussein the U.S. would not oppose an invasion of Kuwait. And you say that Georgia can kill Russian peacekeepers and bomb cities without the Russians responding? Talk about being lost down the old rabbit hole!
The U.S. doesn't want "open governments", they want genuflecting toadies. And this Columbia and George Washington University educated lawyer who is currently the President of Georgia is nothing but a heavy-handed thug who has outlawed and restricted opposition parties and muzzled the press. Try reading - "the mind is a terrible thing to waste".
The U.S. and Europe are supposed to "punish Russia"? How laughable is this? The Russians hold boatloads of worthless U.S. paper. How about if they just dump them on the market and watch our economic ills worsen? Europe is dependent on Russian oil and natural gas. Winter is coming there, bright spark. Are you going to punish the Russians by freezing yourselves to death?
"We" have no leverage anywhere anymore, except the point of a gun. Funny - the Russians have money, oil, natural gas, and guns. We have no money, sell nothing essential except the engines of death, and make our deals with guns. We don't negotiate and we don't buy; we invade and then steal. The "Empire" has no clothes. We are naked in front of the world; an obese, overbearing, arrogant, cholesterol-stuffed soy-fed Hog who believes in its own self-righteousness, as it staggers around the globe like some psychotic rapist drunk on its own power. No longer the "City on the Hill", though its ignorant population is still entranced by such hallucinations, the U.S. calls for "restraint" by others while it runs its own global butcher shop 24 hours a day. Treason, treachery and torture - R - U.S.
Bankrupt in every possible way. Heal thyself, America!
August 12, 2008
11:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
vendari01 writes:
From what I've been reading here and elsewhere, the United States is an evil empire that sells nothing but guns and hate, and silences all who oppose it. Yet I'm reading those opinions, which suggests that the authors have not been sent off for "reeducation", as yet. I also seem to remember some massive- and continuing- shipments of wheat, while practically every warlord equips his private army with AKs! This country has many faults, including corruption and imperailism. Try not to forget, however, the number of people who were tortured and who died under the regimes of Hitler's Germany, Stalin's Soviet Union, Mao's China, Pol Pot's Khampuchia, and those who are dying, right now, in the Sudan. We live well, and have the freedom and luxury time that allows us to complain about it all.
August 12, 2008
11:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
mikeyg writes:
"The more things change, the more they stay the same."
Nothing could be more true about this conflict. Soviet, er, Russian aggression met with a shrug by the world community as it murders thousands and imprisons millions. Soviet, er, Russian apologists in America who make excuses for the Soviets, er, Russians that seek to justify the atrocities by blaming...America.
To my friends who are too young to remember the USSR and the state of world tensions at the time, this type of stuff was the status quo. Both Soviet aggression and American apologists. Contrary to the myth they print in history books the USA was not united in confronting and containing the Soviet menace. Radical leftists (most often found in the Democratic party) ALWAYS blamed America for being too confrontational with the Soviets and too morally bankrupt to challenge the Soviets.
Their fears came to a head with the election of Ronald Reagan, a man who promised to take the USSR head on. He was despised and pilloried on university campuses, in European streets, by the mainstream media and by Democrat partisans for it. He was a "war-monger" in their world view, the Soviets merely convenient scapegoats for him to shovel money to the "military-industrial complex".
Turns out he was right to confront and destroy them. Today, a former KGB master who romanticizes the USSR is busy recreating that monstrosity. And today's American leftists are behaving as they and their kindred spirits did decades ago. The history books were rewritten to portray the leftists as though they were united in the fight against the USSR. Putting themselves on the side of the victors meant they didn't have to learn any lessons. So when one asks, "when will they ever learn?" the answer is "when the history books finally get it right".
August 12, 2008
11:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
OneCreek writes:
Fr. O'Malley - You claim the U.S. is a "democracy"? Wrong bucko! It was designed to be a representative REPUBLIC. It has morphed into a "Warfare-Welfare State" that mirrors Mussolini's description of Fascism, which he correctly referred to as "Corporatism" - the merging of Big Business and Government. Good God "Father", the 1928 U.S. Army manual even referred to "democracy" as "mob rule".
"Democracy" flowers when the public finally figures out they can vote money into their own wallet from the public purse. Congratulations, oh "religious one". Is that not "Coveting thy neighbors goods", "Father"?
Democracy in America? What we have here is the opposite of what De Toqueville wrote about in the early 1830's. Two entrenched parties who do everything they can to restrict ballot access to any and all competition, and to maintain their respective hold on lobbying monies and power. What did St. Augustine say about Pride, Envy, Wrath, Sloth, Avarice, Gluttony, and Lust, thy priestly one? These are the main characteristics of our political parties, our economy, our foreign policy, and most unsettling, the majority of our citizenry. Republican or Democrat - its all the same.
Father O'Malley, how many tyrants has the U.S. installed or propped up since the end of WWII? How about a longer examination, like since the end of the "Spanish-American War"? Did "Black Jack" Pershing kill enough Catholic Philippinos to your liking while "democracy" was spread? And that Ferdinand Marcos - there was a true believer in "Democracy". He and Imelda sure got the consumer thing down though. Oops! There's St. Augustine again! The Somoza's? The Shah?
And our latest experiment in "Shock and Awe" democracy, Iraq? Hey "Father", did you ever bother to read and understand the "Just War Doctrine"? Guess not, huh? The Vatican stated clearly, well ahead of our invasion of lies, that hostile action against Iraq DID NOT MEET the standards! We now have that lovely website "jihad Watch" to peruse because, well, "we" have given Muslims another million or so reason for jihad.
Reagan was right when he called the Soviet Union an "Evil Empire". And good riddance to it. But as I argued earlier, we pillaged the place for a decade plus after the collapse, and they well remember it. Now, it's payback time. We have spent ourselves morally, ethically, and financially into a hole we will not escape from. Our business and political elites of both parties have sold our manufacturing overseas for short-term profits and political gain, praising "globalization" as our balance of payments and national debt has skyrocketed. "We" now live off the credit of others, and are soon to experience the social and economic shocks promised in Deuteronomy. We sold our birthright for a bowl of pottage, and the Piper is coming to collect on the tune we chose. We're headed for a fall...
August 12, 2008
12:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
mikeyg writes:
OneCreek, you're a Libertarian I can tell. I have libertarian sympathies, but part company with the party because so many of them (and apparently you are one) have zero concept of practical and pragmatic devices used to accomplish a better goal than remaining "pure" allows to happen.
I take most issue with your (and most other L's) characterization of American foreign policy. Yes, we propped up some nasty characters in other nations after WWII. We had this little thing called the Cold War where our enemy embarked on an expansionist strategy to gobble up every nation they could around the world. They infiltrated democracies and nations of strategic importance with revolutionaries, gave them military and economic support and toppled freely elected governments (Georgia today?).
When democracies attempt to deal with foreign supported revolutions using courts and law enforcement techniques they will fail. In order to prevent the entire world around the US from becoming an extension of the USSR we had to prop up strongmen who cut corners on individual liberties. It would have been absurd to expect small countries to remain free from Soviet designs without our help, and without a form of martial law being imposed by our allies in those small nations. Just because the USSR used people from the region they were after didn't mean the nations weren't under attack by a foreign superpower. And martial law is often necessary in war to protect a nation from destruction from within.
I don't blame the US one bit for allying with Marcos, the Shah, Somoza, Babtista, Pinochet or any of the strong men we needed to fight the much larger menace of the USSR with. In fact, we're still paying a heavy price for pulling the rug from under the Shah of Iran and Cuba's Baptista instead of supporting them when they were under attack from elements hostile to the US. We were much smarter in how we let Pinochet and Marcos go, since the elements that replaced them were friendly to the US.
Utopian libertarianism cannot be achieved with a wave of the magic wand. Some evil is worse than other evil. When leftist Americans portray the US as the evil without compare in the world they display how ignorant and spoiled rotten they have become. Libertarians should know better than to align with socialist/communist group think.
August 12, 2008
3:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
Marshdale writes:
Puti is a good man. I know, cause I looked him in the eye. (the whole time Puti is wondering who this idiot is).
August 12, 2008
3:41 p.m.
Suggest removal
OneCreek writes:
Since when does finding lying, murderous, deceitful behavior make one "anti-American"? I was under the impression that such behavior was virtuous, a moral code which we as a nation and people were to abide by. Is such behavior not what the "God Bless America" crowd upholds, or is their plea for our Lord's blessing completely vacuous in substance?
A war not Constitutionally declared by Congress is illegal. Lying and "manufacturing" intelligence is treasonous, and a "war crime". Invading a country that is of no threat to these United States is illegal and immoral. Is it not ironic that what some of you argue is perfectly alright (though immoral and illegal) for the United States to do, you then turn around and castigate the Russians for? Talk about confused paramoralisms?
From the Presidency of James Monroe on, rightly or wrongly, his so named Doctrine of hemispheric hegemony has philosophically underwritten U.S. intervention from Mexico to Tierra del Fuego, whether for the advancement of U.S. based corporations or to interdict both real and presumed Soviet expansionism. Nicaragua in the eighties come to mind?
So, what is "good" for the United States is not allowable for Russia. We have the U.S. "securing" oil supplies from the Caspian region as well as in the Occident, and in the process turning historic Russian allies into U.S. funded and backed Oligarchies right on their border. Strange.
Everything Bush has done since taking office has been an unmitigated disaster. His "Commanding" allowed the circumstance of the 9-11 attacks to be so spectacularly successful. Right here on our own soil."Mission Accomplished"! He has spent more money expanding government than any President since L.B.J.! I love these "small government" conservatives! Medicare expansion, "No Child Left Behind", etc, etc... And all those "No Bid" contracts Cheney's Halliburton got, and they even relocated to Dubai so they don't have to pay U.S. taxes.
Bush is nothing but a man, not the country. And Bush isn't much of a man at that. It doesn't take much of a man to order others to do the fighting. The guy was a "Cheerleader" at Annover. I love my country, but I have no respect for liars and fools, nor boorish drunks.
You had best pray that the confidence you brim with isn't as bankrupt as this country and that of the intellect of the current executive branch. The Chinese, the Russians, and the Iranians are not going to stand for what we have been doing the last seven years.
Just as likely as your crazed imaginings of a successful strike against Iran (not a threat to the U.S., again...) with minimal response, is the brilliant flash of ten megaton devices over United States cities. This isn't some board game as Brzezinski referred to it as, nor is it fun on your X-Box. Like Coca-Cola, "It's the real thing". Got that fallout shelter ready, hero? This time maybe your cheerleading hero will bring the wars home for us. God help us all!
August 12, 2008
5:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
mikeyg writes:
Hey, I gave OneCreek the benefit of the doubt when I suspected him of being a Libertarian. I did so because of his comments about ending the welfare state and controlling the national debt. But his latest rant went on about the corporate states of America are not libertarian by any stretch. He is an anarchist. He hates his government.
He has delusional fantasies about what this country is and has always been about. He got stuck on the first part of Churchill's quote, "democracy is the worst form of government ever devised...except for all the others." Or other variations, like "capitalism is the worst form of economics ever devised...except for all the others." And so on.
Just like the radical leftist socialists like MoveOn, DailyKos, Barack Obama think Marxism will work, if implemented as purely as Karl Marx envisioned (forget about exterminating anyone who disagrees, such trivialities when remaking society), so do the anarchists with right-wing backgrounds like OneCreek think that pure, direct democracy (as opposed to the constitutional republic the USA is), isolationism, protectionism and the destruction of any business that becomes too successful will work.
If the USA had isolated itself from the Central Powers of WWI, the Axis Powers of WWII or the Soviet Bloc of the Cold War we would have been strangled and destroyed by regimes hostile to our values. Only our projection of strength and support for allies keeps us safe at home. If we're not abroad there are plenty of nasty players on the world scene who will be happy to take our place. And despite the oceans on our coasts as 9/11 showed us we are not safe within our borders from a handful of wackos, imagine if we were surrounded by the entire world controlled by an enemy like Hitler, Stalin, Khomeini, now Putin. God forbid.
OneCreek: a case of where the extreme right meets the extreme left.
August 12, 2008
5:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
OneCreek writes:
A "Western-Style republic"? A George Soros installed oppressive dictator is more like it. Opposition parties have been virtually outlawed, the press has been muzzled, and his family and pals have been awarded position and place. Further, El Presidente has built himself a palace more like the butcher Ceseascu than a "democratically elected leader. his purse and ego profit from his position. "Western-Style!" Where do you get this tripe - The New York Times? Try reading a bit.
And cite where I "whined" about tossing commies out of the western hemisphere! Good luck, because you can't find a citation to support your accusation! The argument was pretty clear - If the U.S. can dictate who the hell is in its neighborhood, it is duplicitous to believe the Russians haven't the same right. Or perhaps neither should have such a "right". The U.S., with the C.I.A. and "World Government Loving" George Soros installed that clown in office. He was a damn lawyer here in the U.S., and all of a sudden ends up back home riding the Royal Carriage. What a damn coincidence!
Two tours in Vietnam in 70' and 71' is where I served, and "serving" gives me no more and no less "right" to voice my opinion than anyone else. "Hating my country" you say?
Mr. Kassjander, cite for us exactly what Iraq had to do with 9-11. Cite what Iran had to do with 9-11. Have you, you who profess to love this country so much while accusing me of the opposite ever bothered to read the Constitution of this country? Is not the Constitution supposed to be the "Law of the Land"? If you love this country as you claim, should you not love, respect, and obey the law of the land? Do not our elected officials swear to uphold said law? Please explain why you believe ignoring the law by public officials is acceptable.
Mr. Kassjander, actions have consequences. Apparently you believe lying, deception, and murder are acceptable actions. I do not. I do not wish the innocent citizens of this country to pay dear consequence for the rash immoral behavior of those elected who swore to uphold the "Law of the Land" and ignore it, or by the use of "Signing Statements", putting themselves above the law. Republican or Democrat, I do not care.
I cannot see how incorporating the moral behavior abroad we used to exhibit before we chose Empire over a Republic is unpatriotic. It is grossly unfortunate that you consider morality a traitorous characteristic. Such simply demonstrates the lowly and pathetic state of affairs we have reached in this land. And as Ron White says, "You can't fix stupid!"
August 12, 2008
6:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
OneCreek writes:
And to all of you lovers of Empire - do you appreciate the debt burden that has come with it? This is "patriotic" and responsible? How, with the use of your imported Chinese calculators, are the collective "we" ever going to retire this debt? There is the real threat to this country, the day the rest of the world dumps our currency and debt. Welcome to the bread lines, "patriots"!
You refer to "successful corporations. Is it Wal-Mart, paying wages so low that 80% of their employees qualify for medicaid? So the taxpayer forks over for Wal-mart employees healthcare? Is that success? That's the "American Way"?
Since I am an advocate of a "Free Market" as long as the competition is not supported by competing governments, how can you fine gentlemen, so free with spurious accusations, advocate "no bid contracts" being doled out by a government which is supposed to be an advocate of competition? You are supporting fascism, while I support a system that used to be "American". Competition brings the best products at the best price, or have we tossed that axiom out with the bathwater, just like the Constitution? Believe me, if you outlaw or prohibit my competition, I too will be wildly successful. That is what is now passes for a successful American enterprise? Monopoly? Great!
Direct democracy would be disastrous. mikeyg wrote that we are a "Constitutional Republic", which we were. I advocate a return to it, not the continuation of the extra-constitutional socialist programs we have institutionalized here, nor the absurd level of military spending and its ill-consequences which result abroad. You need wars to feed the Defense industry. Eisenhower (R), who knew a little about war, warned us of such.
Try reading Pat Buchanan's new book on WWII. You might gain some intellectual maturity in the process, and be able to elevate your thinking skills above your juvenile name calling. And boy's, the "Mission" isn't "Accomplished". Nice photo op, and that's it. The killing just keeps on going.............
August 12, 2008
6:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
mikeyg writes:
OneCreek, you advocate a return to something that never was. Manifest Destiny, as much as we wring our hands in regret over the plight of the Indians, served this nation well in becoming the most prosperous, diverse, secure, integrated nation that has ever existed. We've ended up contributing more to the world as a result of M. Destiny then we, or the conglomeration of these lands would have without the policy.
The Monroe Doctrine has served this nation well in ensuring the safety and security of the American people and all the peoples of the Americas for that matter. Preventing European powers from carrying out wars of aggression and expansion that would bring them to our doorsteps has allowed generation after generation of American to live without fear of artillery shells or aircraft bombardment from hostile nations.
These are damn good outcomes as a result of policies that you seem to hold contemptuous. Yet you, and every other American are afforded the freedom to be the crybabies that you are as you chastise the USA for taking steps you consider distasteful, but gave you the prosperity and freedom to state, and even care about these issues.
Yes, we have engaged in other areas of the globe to protect US interests. YOUR interests. How much do you like $4 gas? Take away American protection of oil supplies and try $20 gas, $300 fill-ups, $400/wk food bills for a couple. I happen to believe we should maintain our quality of life, and if securing our energy needs abroad while we drill for new energy sources at home and develop new technologies for future needs is a good thing, despite the cost.
To compare our military actions with the actions of the Soviets, er Russians is obscene. We removed a dictator who supported terrorists around the world (harbored members of Al Qaida, paid Palestinian murder-by-suicide bombers $20k for killing Israeli's (and Americans) and did everything we could to minimize civilian casualties. In the rare instance we missed and killed civilians we were roundly condemned by the world. The Soviets, er, Russians just launched an attack where they TARGETED civilians to send them a message and the world isn't saying boo, or are like you and saying they're justified. The Soviets never cared about killing civilians in any military action, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, wherever. We hand-wring over us killing civilians accidentally, they tell everyone to deal with it and get over it when they target civilians. The comparison you make, the moral equivalence argument is obscene.
August 12, 2008
8:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
OneCreek writes:
Manifest Destiny created "diversity" and "integration"? Wow! Which history book did you read that in? Please share with us!
And please demonstrate with exact quotes rather than facile hyperbole, where I argued that the Monroe Doctrine was wrongheaded, or to quote you, "contemptuous". That sir, you shall not find. Keeping European powers out of this hemisphere was a well thought and considered policy, as I so stated.
Exactly what sir, are U.S. interests? Perhaps you should peruse General Smedley Butler's "War is a Racket", and then try to convince me that the arguments he posits are in either mine or the country's interests. What the good General argued when he wrote his book is exponentially worse today than when he penned it.
You refer to myself and other Americans as "crybabies", when in truth it appears that it is you who emotionally react to quite moral and legitimate criticisms of questionable actions by both our Nation's leaders and our off-shoring and outsourcing corporate leadership. Where is your patriotism, sir? At Wal-Mart?
You reference U.S. "protection" of oil supplies, yet fail to explain how the U.S. is accomplishing this feat. Do we also "protect" the oil supplies to China, Japan, Australia, Brazil, etc? Or did you mean "securing" supplies by invading a country that was no threat to us? Do you not find it odd that gasoline was $2.00 a gallon before we invaded Iraq, and now that the "Mission Accomplished" delusion has occurred, it has risen to well over $4.00 per gallon? Odd that "protection" should cause such a peculiar economic phenomenon, think?
Perhaps our sychophantic support of the Israeli State may have something to do with this as well...
You then slip off to the specious canard of Saddam harboring members of al Qaeda, an absolute lie. He hated them. Just because Cheney repeated the lie ad nauseum does not make it truth. No evidence whatsoever. Period. Was Saddam a nice man? Aside from writing love stories in his dotage, no. But again, your lack of understanding the law of the Constitution is appalling. Where does the document demand that the U.S. is to engage in quixotic quests to rid the world of evil? It doesn't, and our founders said to stay the hell out of such foolish crusades. I agree with their wisdom, not your youthful conjecture.
Obscene comparisons? Should we simply forget the carpet bombing of German cities, particularly Dresden, as well as laying waste to two Japanese cities with nuclear weapons, months after the Japanese had been suing for peace. Yes, they sued for peace from March of 1945 on. That sir, is what an obscenity is. That is obscene.
Perhaps a few more years and a few hundred more books, and we could have a real conversation. Keep your "obscenities" and delusions to yourself, lad.
August 12, 2008
9:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
commoncents writes:
I wonder why there is no response to actions in Africa that have caused far more death and destruction than this conflict? My bad, there is an oil pipeline in Georgia. America is a fool for oil and should keep her mouth shut as it is becoming harder to listen to the hypocritical bull.
August 12, 2008
10 p.m.
Suggest removal
mikeyg writes:
OneCreek, good grief, those little black helicopters are coming for YOU!
You try to portray your knowledge of history as though you know something, but changing facts to suit your paranoia doesn't qualify for history. Nice fiction writer you could be, though. Maybe you could be a ghost writer for one of Oliver Stone's "historical" flicks.
War is war. In actuality the Russians have got it right in not giving a rat's behind about civilians being in the path of their bombs. To defeat an enemy you have to defeat the will of the citizenry to continue to fight. The U.S. once upon a time knew that. If we hadn't destroyed Dresden, Hiroshima and Nagasaki we would have lost tens of millions more of our soldiers in an extended, bloody war, who because they lived became our parents, our grandparents and our great-grandparents. Maybe YOU (or me) would not have ever existed as a result. I'm, for one, am glad I'm here
If we had been more ruthless in Iraq and Afghanistan we would have made our stay much shorter and with much lower loss of American life and the lives of our allies, the only lives I really give a hoot about.
But your comment about the "sychophantic support of the Israeli State" says more about who you are and where you come from than all of the words you've typed: you are an anti-Semite. You hate Jews. You have no problem with Hitler, or Saddam, or Islamic Jihadists systematically murdering Jews. Concentration Camps? You probably think all the photos and were PhotoShopped and the testimonials were a big myth created by the "Jewish Lobby" and "Neo-Cons".
You share the international disregard of the "Never Again" mantra the world temporarily adopted after the Holocaust. Today murderous despots are free to exterminate their own people without consequence. Has happened in Iraq, the Balkans, Rwanda, Cambodia, Nicaragua, Sudan, countless spots on a map around the world. Where the U.S. and the world has intervened, as in Iraq and the Balkans, millions of people have been saved. Where the U.S. and the world has turned its head millions of people have been murdered.
You don't care if Islamic Jihadists unleash a "holy war" on our allies around the world. You wouldn't care until it was America against the Islamic world. That's a war we couldn't win. Thankfully, your kind of ignorance will never lead this nation, though Obama would be a step in that wrong direction.
August 13, 2008
7:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
OneCreek writes:
mikeyg,
Given your obvious support to the slaughtering of innocent civilians in cities and villages of non-military nature or importance, we now have a clear window to examine the nature of the depths of your soul. Psychopathy?
So when an "enemy", however created, is suing for peace, your answer is to obliterate tens of thousands and eventually millions, rather than to negotiate the end to the carnage. As we continued to "island hop" in the Pacific in 1945, all the Japanese wanted as a "condition" of surrender was to keep the Emperor.
We demanded an unconditional surrender. Fighting raged until another million or so perished, including many of our own, at our insistence. After surrender, we allowed them to keep the Emperor. Slaughter rather than negotiate. It is a matter of the nature of men's souls. "We had to destroy the village in order to save it." I've met you before.
Not surprisingly comes the taboo-enforcing labeling of me as an "anti-Semite" when the subject of Israel is raised. 800 pound gorilla in the room or not, we cannot discuss the matter. They aren't even Semetic, rather they are "Turko-Mongol genetically. Do you even know the difference between Askensazi Jews and those who are Sephardic?
Perhaps you believe that the Jewish Americans who have started "The J Street Project" to counter the influence of AIPAC are anti-Semetic as well, even though they are Jewish. They, as myself, simply question Israel's historic and current behavior and whether America's best interests lie in the giving of blind support regardless of Israeli behavior. Google their site.
Google Ha'aretz, one of Israel's leading dailies, and search for an article titled "Stalin's Jews". It was the Jew's in the Checka that led and coordinated the murder of 11 million Christian Ukrainians under half-Jewish Stalin, not a Hitler or a Pol Pot, nor any other of the worlds unsavory, seemingly soulless individuals. Marx, Engels, Lenin, Trotsky, et. al. - all Jewish. But are all Jew's Communists? Of course not, but why is it taboo to discuss the historical record? Or is committing a holocaust of Ukranian Christians acceptable, while a holocaust of German Jews is not? Another paramoralism.
Why is it that such topics can be openly discussed in an Israeli paper, but here in the land of the "First Amendment", it is a veritable sin to do so? The pejoritive "Anti-Semite" is drawn from the holster of vocabulary, and the discussion ends. How neatly Orwellian. Pejoritives are a tool of the uncultivated intellect, a weapon of the weak mind.
It is characteristic of arrogant thinking that you can maim and kill abroad with impunity, and never create the psychological environment for a backlash, "blowback" being the C.I.A. term for such. If you kill my parents, kill my children and my cousins, destroy my country and my culture, I will come to kill you. I do not care how I do it, but I will do it. There sir, is the reason for "jihad".
August 13, 2008
9:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
Hengist writes:
Way to go, OneCreek for your excellent response to the ZioCon Israeli-firster mikeyg who obviously advocates for the policies that have made the United States the most hated country in the world.
(But we're not doing anything wrong...they hate us for our freedoms, and our democracy)
August 13, 2008
9:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
OneCreek writes:
Hengist -
Thank you for you for your kindly praise regarding my commentary, and your accurate depiction of mikeyg regarding his callous disregard for human life as well as his ill-considered support of a foreign nation, clearly placed above the intelligently measured interest of his home country.
A "Patriot" he is not, at least of the United States.
August 13, 2008
12:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
mikeyg writes:
OneCreek, your pseudo-history psychobabble is laughable and pitiful. You try to justify your hatred of Jewish people with misinformation. Your one-man fan club showed up and you felt compelled to take a bow. Calling you anti-Semitic is not name-calling when it's true. And it's true in your case.
The "Never Again" mantra I described was not only to protect Jewish people, but all peoples from mass murder and extermination. Never Again means no more holocausts. Yet, the UN is littered with self-centered COWARDS like yourself who won't lift a finger to help prevent millions of people from being slaughtered in Rwanda, Sudan, Cambodia, the list goes on.
You even rewrite history to assert that Japan tried to sue for peace five months before their unconditional surrender, as if the Allies should have accepted their 'conditional' surrender then. Your ignorance is matched by your stupidity on that one. Japan's leaders, culture and behavior were barbaric at the time. To leave all those elements in place, which was one of their conditions would have been an affront to mankind and invited future conflicts.
"The slaughter of innocent civilians" is what you claim I support. Well, in warfare between nations and religious crusades the peoples of opposing sides will fight as long as they have the will to fight. If factory workers and farmers work to send supplies and provisions to their armies at the front without tasting extreme hardships at home they will continue to resupply their armies. When the burden becomes too great for civilians they will recall their armies. When the destruction around them becomes too great for civilians they will be emptied of any future ambition for military adventurism. That is what needed to happen in Japan and Germany, and honestly what needs to happen in the Middle East among the supporters of Islamic Jihadism.
Japan could not be left intact under their terms of surrender that you would have taken. They would have retained their Imperialist militaristic culture, and there would have been more wars between Japan and the US. And it could have been them who nuked us. For us to secure Japan with an unconditional surrender without the A-bomb would have meant millions upon millions of Americans would have died on Japanese soil, as would have millions upon millions of Japanese, probably more than the souls lost in Hiroshima and Nagasaki combined. Heck, the Japanese civilians threw themselves off cliffs on the islands we captured as we closed in on Japan.
You, OneCreek, are a pathetic loser. And a hater. You hate Jews, so let them die. You hate all that the USA has ever been and is today and only love some fantasy of what she should be according to you. Glad you are what's known as a raving lunatic in this society rather than mainstream. That little black helicopter....it's coming for YOU!
August 13, 2008
1:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
Hengist writes:
WoW! I hope American readers here are paying attention. There are foreign loyalists here, patrolling this forum, reporting anything critical of you-know-who. It was just demonstrated, that posters here can criticise any government in the world, EXCEPT you-know-who. I'm sure that OneCreeks' I.P. address was recorded and now he's being threatened...by a black U.A.V.
Too bad, Americans...we've lost our freedom of speech, our freedom from unreasonable searches and seizure, our freedom from illegal wiretapping, our right to Habaeus Corpus...it's all right here in front of you... We're doomed.
(I'm sure I'm next...the foreign internet enforcement monitors are going to send the black U.A.V. after me, too!)
August 13, 2008
3:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
Conservativeslayer writes:
How dare Russia invade the sovereign country of Georgia!!! Only the USA is allowed to do that kind of stuff.
August 13, 2008
4:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
mikeyg writes:
liberalpuke, you represent the leftovers of the Soviet apologists who always agreed with the USSR and complained about the US. Your drivel is not new, it is tired, old and discredited by history.
Hmmm, move to Russia, write a letter to the editor or post online your criticism of that nation and see if it ever gets published. And see how long you'll go without a knock on the door in the middle of the night before you disappear forever from all your neighbors.
You are blessed to live in a country like the USA that lets you spout your nonsense as often and wherever you want without fear. You're welcome.
August 13, 2008
5:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
OneCreek writes:
mikeyg -
Syndicated columnist Leonard Pitts wrote an opinion piece a couple of weeks ago titled "The Stupidification of America". I know he had to make the word up, but sometimes circumstances are so amazing they require additions to the accepted vocabulary.
Thank God Leonard did me the favor, for with his article and the description of his word therein, he described you to a 'T". I didn't have to ponder around to describe something worse than ignorant, something actually worse than stupid.
A "Stupidified" person, as Mr. Pitts argued, was well past ignorant, was factually stupid, and enjoyed the circumstance so much that they displayed an arrogant comfort about their situation. You should be proud of yourself. You are on the "cutting edge" of a new subspecies of human - Homo Erectus Stupidificated. It is a growing, "evolving" phenomena, as God would never create such a thing. A mutant.
It is a species that has just branched off from its genetic forebearers through some unexplained recessive mutation. No one knows what to do about it, because it adds to both multiculturalism and biological diversity at the same time. There are generalized fears that the mutation is becoming widespread, because "Stupidified" humans are now appearing in numbers exceeding Malthusian projections. Some fear the Apocalypse may be upon us because of "Stupidification". Look at John Hagee!
The "Stupidified" can barely reason, their ability to engage in critical thinking is extremely limited, and analysis is beyond their capability. I myself have noted the exponential growth of these creatures over the last decade, wondering if the fluoride in the water is the cause, or if the phenomena is simply evident of the collapse of the gene pool. We need to dissect one to figure this out before civilization is sacrificed due to their spread.
Anyway mikeyg, your last posting made it all too clear. You are a leader of a new breed; "The Stupidified". Congratulations! And again - THANK YOU LEONARD PITTS!
August 13, 2008
6:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
OneCreek writes:
mikeyg-
By the way, in regards to your mantra of "Never Again" and your suggestion of its universality, if it is intellectually within your capability, could you define exactly what European Jewry has done to the Palestinian people and their lands since the mid-1940's to the present?
Is is the commission of a "Holocaust"? Is it "Apartheit"?
Do we, as did Leonard Pitts regarding the word "Stupidification", need to conjure up a new mixture of consonants and vowels to describe this atrocity? What, pray tell, describes this horror, supposedly to happen, "Never Again"?
An answer please?
August 13, 2008
8:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
Conservativeslayer writes:
Paul Krugman wrote a great editorial last week about the GOP. Read it here http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/08/opi...
It's called the Party of Stupidity. Here's some highlights
"So the G.O.P. has found its issue for the 2008 election. For the next three months the party plans to keep chanting: “Drill here! Drill now! Drill here! Drill now! Four legs good, two legs bad!” O.K., I added that last part.
And the debate on energy policy has helped me find the words for something I’ve been thinking about for a while. Republicans, once hailed as the “party of ideas,” have become the party of stupid."
"What I mean, instead, is that know-nothingism — the insistence that there are simple, brute-force, instant-gratification answers to every problem, and that there’s something effeminate and weak about anyone who suggests otherwise — has become the core of Republican policy and political strategy. The party’s de facto slogan has become: “Real men don’t think things through.'"
"In any case, remember this the next time someone calls for an end to partisanship, for working together to solve the country’s problems. It’s not going to happen — not as long as one of America’s two great parties believes that when it comes to politics, stupidity is the best policy."
August 13, 2008
8:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
mikeyg writes:
Ah, the liberal-pukes turn out in pairs. OneDimBulbCreek, you're a waste of human DNA. I flush you every morning. If I saw you in person I'd spit in your face, you NAZI-loving repugnant thing. Your hatred of Jews is obvious to everyone, your kind brings murderers to power. Your kind will most definitely burn in hell, for you are not anywhere near the house of the Lord. Believe you me, if it were you and I, man to man, I would kill you without breaking a sweat or have a moment of remorse.
And limpwristedlayer, you're just a minion of MoveOn, DailyKos, only able to regurgitate talking points you get on your blogs and Air America. Nothing original in your head, just a mind-numb leftist lemming. I know you don't mind paying through the nose for gas because you're busy saving the planet with Pelosi, but to middle Americans who have to work for a living and can't afford Prius's or get to stay home cashing welfare checks like you, they'd rather drill for oil to help their pocket books. Oil will be the reason you D's will not win a presidency you think is locked up, and is why you won't win the Senate seat in Colorado you covet. Keep your head in the sand so when we see you with your rear in the air we see you for what you actually are.
August 13, 2008
11:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
OneCreek writes:
mikeyg,
I own and operate a ranch 11 miles outside of Cowdrey in North Park. I'd love to see your insulting little mug "face to face" as you put it. I'm as much a Nazi as the decent Judaist's who have begun the J Street project and the vast majority of American Jewry who want both the Iraq War to end and an equitable peace achieved between the Israelis and the Palestinians. Individuals such as yourself are the psychopaths analyzed so clearly by Professor Andrew Loboweski in his intellectual, erudite, and lengthly tome: "Political Ponerology - The Science of Evil Adjusted For Political Purposes".
You sir, are a psychopath, and one with very little intellect at that. Your statements in your last post and those preceeding it demonstrate you lack what makes the rest of us human - a conscience. You promote mass murder and then argue you would kill me and lack any "remorse". Your own words define you as a classical psychopath. It is your type that destroys, for it is all you know, all you can imagine. Creation and beauty are beyond your means.
You are even lower in biological order that the "Stupidified" Leonard Pitts described. You and yours are why this country, why this world, is morally and financially bankrupt. You are a product of a terrible genetic mutation, for without a conscience, you are other than human.
Thus, it is not surprising you lacked the ability to answer a single question posed you in prior posts. Confused, you lash out like the unintelligent and base creature that you are. You operate on savage instinct rather than cognitive reason and thought. You are simply, an animal.
And since you have lowered the level of discourse, does the "g" behind "mikey" stand for "gay"? The last sentence you wrote regarding Conservativeslayer has a weirdly homoerotic slant to it. You want his butt in the air? Are you a buddy of "Conservative" Minister Ted Haggard and his meth snorting lover? Do you hang around the airport restrooms at D.I.A. hoping "Conservative" Senator Larry Craig shows up? Is this just another one of your great frustrations that cause you to lash out so? You poor, poor, poor creature... Somewhere, mommy somehow loves you.
August 14, 2008
12:27 p.m.
Suggest removal
mikeyg writes:
OneDimBulbCreek, go hump your sheep instead of posting your hateful drivel here. The "questions" you've purported to ask all contain presumptions embedded in them that make them ridiculous and unworthy of discussion to confer legitimacy on them. You're a holocaust denier, a hater of Jews and advocate of mass-murder. The singular death of a bigoted psychopath like yourself in order to benefit all of mankind is a small price to pay. Do me, and the world the favor of taking your own life, you reprehensible, loathsome waste of DNA.
August 14, 2008
5:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
OneCreek writes:
Gay mikey g is still around? Mikey. That is such a cute name you gave yourself.
I was hoping you had done civilized people a favor and taken your own life. Darn. Oh well, you will eventually. You are so, so, sick.
August 14, 2008
9:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
mikeyg writes:
one dim bulb creek, I see you've taken a break from popping your zits in the mirror.
...suicide is painless...try it just this once, I've got a rusty razor blade for you.