When Pravda knows more about the reality in the 21st Century than you do, we are in a heap of trouble with you at the helm!!

Open your eyes America!

Mr. Bush, Enough!!

Someone give Brain From Planet Arous a cupie doll!

Thanks Patriot, although some people would like to use a Voodoo Doll on us. When I heard Ron Kuby and Ed Shultz repeating the White House propaganda that Russia started this conflict, I knew we were being hoodwinked. Then, the Savior, Obama, repeated the same BS that Bush and McCain was saying. The military-industrial complex is playing the Left like a fiddle, and this is the New Approach. The snarling, bellicose method of the Right Neocons isn’t working, so we are being set up for the Friendly Fascist. So, when you say Neocons fingerprints are all over this conflict, we should remember that Neocons are on the Left and The Right. The goal of the game is an insane confrontation of Russia. Now, if my memory serves me right, didn’t Russia kick out all of the Israeli lobbyists, and will not allow AIPAC anywhere near Moscow? Also, this “humanitarian” aid is a US military occupation of Georgia.

http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2008/08/us-following-brzezinskis-playbook-for.html

The United Nations threatened Iraq with invasion if they didn’t abide by resolutions. The U.S. was the only country willing to follow through on that.

Potfry, Iraq was abiding by UN resolutions. Failure-in-Chief Bush issued an ultimatum to Saddam Hussein to step down or face war. At that time, weapons inspectors were in Iraq and Iraq was actually abiding by UN resolutions. Of course, since they were and the inspectors weren’t finding WMDs, FiC Bush had to tell the insepctors to get out of the country, because he was coming in.

So please, quit peddling the BS that Hussein wasn’t abiding by resolutions. It was the US that didn’t.

Badger Says:
Russian Troops were ALREADY in Osetia. They were deployed as “Peace Keeping Forces” to protect Ethnic Russians living in the Breakaway province.

Funny how Russia has one perspective regarding breakaway provinces (Ossetia) completely contradictory to another one it’s still trying to peddle influence in (Kosovo).

Hmm, could Russia feel that threatened by NATO and a missile shield thereby causing a conflict? Real or cold in nature…

Stay tuned people.

(The best thing about this whole mess is that when it broke, I was in the airport lounge watching CNN. They interrupted the John Edwards fiasco to relay this story. Then they went back to uninterrupted John Edwards blahblahblah. Americans are truly stupid–Edwards trumps Russian ground invasion.)

had enough Says:

It was Georgia that attacked first.

Do you even understand the problem with your statement? Russia was and has been interfering in the political process. Russia is issuing passports to folks in South Ossetia–which is PART OF GEORGIA. Russia was moving arms and weapons in, and cash out trough smuggling and the black market.

Georgia moved in troops to defend it’s sovereign borders and citizens. Russia actually attacked first.

George Will said it best when he said that nobody knew of Sarajevo before WWI. His foresight as to what Ossetia might mean to another WW or Cold War shouldn’t be underestimated.

Throw in China’s chest-puffing over the Olympics and there is quite a bit of nationalistic pride oozing out of that region of the world. Nothing to be ignorant about ‘had enough’.

The United Nations threatened Iraq with invasion if they didn’t abide by resolutions. The U.S. was the only country willing to follow through on that.

Your long ago debunked and totally stupid rightwing talking point has no merit. What was threatened was SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES which werent necessarily an invasion and it was made clear in the text of the resolution that it would be the SECURITY COUNSELS decision WHAT those consequences were and WHEN they would be applies. Since we now KNOW that Iraq didnt have any WMDs I dont even know how they were violating any resolutions anyway. Do you ignorant wingnuts EVER think for yourselves or do you consider it a DUTY to just mindlessly repeat whatever your hivemind screechmonkey masters TELL you to believe? I mean you DO know you are pathetic dont you? Even your incredibly stupid talking point is a couple of years out of date. I guess to the REALLY ignorant wingnuts its a zombie meme. Nothing can drive a stake through its heart no matter how STUPID it is no matter how often debunked no matter how divorced from reality. You guys couldnt care LESS what is real or true, just rinse and repeat what you were TOLD to believe. Please go away and let the adults talk

He might be reading “Dune” right now, so he might have had to have written “Iraq” on his hand instead of saying that we needed to stay the course on “the desert planet Arrakis”. We might be looking at a TKO by Columbus Day if this keeps up.

In the 21st century, nations don’t invade other nations.

Then America’s continued occupation of Afghanistan, post INVASION, is what then? Care to parse our continued occupation of Iraq post INVASION to depose their leader, unlawfully?

… Oh I see. It’s exemptionalism, American style. And from the grave, Hitler hearts America.

.

PACIFISTS AND ALTERNATIVES. Peter Beinart and Kevin Drum are both concerned about the influence of crypto-pacifist opponents of the Afghan War on the Democratic Party. Atrios, speaking up for a popular-front, “no enemies on the left” mentality, essentially dodges the issue:

That’s ridiculous. The issue with that war and any other war isn’t simply whether it’s “justifiable.” And opposition to George Bush’s War in Afghanistan does not imply that someone was “flatly opposed to any use of American military power at all.” . . .

The point is that the right question is not “did 9/11 justify war” the right question is “was the way the Bush administration went to war, and all of its consequences, better than the next best option.” Unless we have a conversation about the next best option before the fact, and an honest accounting of the consequences after the fact, we can never actually know that. “Taliban bad, al Qaeda bad, therefore the only possibile course of action is the Bush/Rumsfeld battle plan, is rather stupid thinking.”

Fine, fine. Opposition to the Afghan War does not imply, as a matter of formal logic, that you would oppose the use of American military power under all circumstances. But if you, like I, spent the fall of 2001 in a place where anti-war sentiment ran high, listening to anti-war speeches and lectures and protests and teach-ins, reading anti-war op-eds in your school paper, speaking to anti-war people in your daily life and so forth, it was clear that most of the publicly offered rationales for opposing the war did, in fact, imply that the speaker or writer was opposed to any and all use of American military power. The most common line of criticism I heard was that any action that resulted in the deaths of Afghan civilians was an illegitimate form of collective punishment. There’s a certain logic to this position, but it’s the logic of pacifism and it’s not the basis of a viable national-security policy. Unless the Democratic Party and its advocates can say so, it’s not going to win any elections for the foreseeable future.

Atrios is trying to run opposition to the war together with the notion of criticizing some aspect of its conduct (”the only possibile course of action is the Bush/Rumsfeld battle plan”), but this is a dodge. Lots of people — almost everyone, I would say — think that Franklin Roosevelt’s conduct during World War II is open to some criticism on both moral and pragmatic grounds. That doesn’t mean the United States is full of World War II opponents. It probably paints with too broad a brush to say that every opponent of the Afghan War is a pacifist or someone who thinks that the whole thing was motivated by some nefarious natural-gas pipeline scheme, but the pacifists and the tinfoil hatters are very much real people, and liberals need to recognize that when these people become the public face of progressive politics — as Michael Moore did around the release of Fahrenheit 9/11 — that conservatives are the ones who reap the benefits.

–Matthew Yglesias

Did McCain forget in which century we invaded Iraq? Or maybe he just forgot which century he’s living in now.

http://progressiveworldreview.com