Think Progress

Romney condemns Russia’s ‘willingness to act militarily against a sovereign nation.’

On Hugh Hewitt’s radio show last night, former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney said that “the International Olympic Committee ought to revisit locating” the 2014 Olympics in Russia because of what “they’ve done in Georgia.” Ironically, the reason Romney gave for why the Games should be moved is because the “Russians have shown their willingness to act militarily against a sovereign nation“:

romneyolympics.jpgHEWITT: But I do want to ask you about the Olympics and your experience there, in terms of whether or not the Russians ought to get the Olympics in 2014 after what they’ve done in Georgia.

ROMNEY: Well, Hugh, my own view is as the Caucuses are a hot spot, and as Russians have shown their willingness to act militarily against a sovereign nation, that the International Olympic Committee ought to revisit locating the Games elsewhere.

Listen here:

Romney joins the list of conservatives who have criticized Russia’s actions, despite the Bush administration’s belligerent foreign policy. Last week, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) declared that “in the 21st century, nations don’t invade other nations.” Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Monday that military power is “not the way to deal in the 21st century.”

UPDATE: Our comments section is down. We’re trying to fix it. Comments are back.



73 Responses to “Romney condemns Russia’s ‘willingness to act militarily against a sovereign nation.’”

  1. Bob says:

    This is just the usual republican double standard. They obviously don’t consider the invasion (and subsequent occupation) of Iraq as violating the sovereinty of a nation. I guess it depends on how you define ’sovereign’. Romney’s just hoping for a VP pick, but it’s interesting that suddenly a nation’s sovereinty is most important and five years ago it didn’t mean anything.


  2. bgoldberg says:

    very interesting!


  3. larkohio says:

    OMFG! Do these people understand how hypocritical they sound? Are they idiots? Did we not invade both Iraq and Afganistan? So it is okay when we do it, but not when Russia does? The nerve of these people!


  4. shoeless says:

    Remember this headline from 2003?

    Romney condemns Bush’s ‘willingness to act militarily against a sovereign nation.’


  5. Briseadh na Faire says:

    Excuse me, but didn’t the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq occur in the 21st Century?


  6. Mr. Evil says:

    This is just laughable! These people are just insanely sick.


  7. dasm says:

    Republicans- trying to convince the world that their own military aggression, their killing of innocent civilians, their invasion of other countries… just never really happened. They truly think Americans, & the rest of the world, are so stupid as to believe their constant lying. Pathetic.


  8. stateofthedivision says:

    And don’t worry about those five aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf region, or the international flotilla ready to embargo Iran with the intent of regime change.

    Cheney-Barak plan on intervening militarily with Iran. I guess that makes them so old century.

    Israel wants quiet on as many fronts as possible before their surprise attack. The U.S. & Israel want Russia as occupied as possible with regional threats, thus Georgia & Poland. Condi did her part today, signing the missile defense deal with Poland. How many Russian troops will now move in that direction? Condoleeza likes sports. Head fake, anyone?


  9. upside99 says:

    Romney sounds just like McDepends now; ignore reality and create your own.

    Gotta REALLY suck to be a 23%er and have to swallow this load all the time.


  10. Uncle Ho says:

    pot, meet kettle.

    what arrogance.
    what chutzpah.
    what hypocrisy.
    what hubris.
    what double-standards.
    what total BS.

    What a PUTZ!

    What else is left to say about these asshats?


  11. DvlsAdvocat says:

    C’mon TP, whats the deal with the servers lately?


  12. Oval12345678 aka James K. Sayre says:

    My comments, which I failed to copy and thus save, were obliterated by some odd error message:

    ERROR
    The requested URL could not be retrieved

    While trying to retrieve the URL: http://thinkprogress.org/wp-comments-post.php

    The following error was encountered:

    * Zero Sized Reply

    Squid did not receive any data for this request.

    Your cache administrator is webmaster.
    Generated Wed, 20 Aug 2008 17:20:01 GMT by localhost (squid/3.0.PRE5)

    Does TP have a telephone number for posters to call into when this happens in future?

    Cheers.


  13. had enough says:

    Once again the republicans are exploiting an unfortunate situation, this time a very dangerous situation, one they may have helped create for political gain.

    Well, after all, the babies have to be saved never mind thousands may lose their life.


  14. jonny says:

    Max Factor Mitt demonstrates why the Gropin’ Old Perverts are stuck with 5th-choice McSame.


  15. ralph the wonder llama says:

    Leaving aside the low-hanging fruit of Republican hypocrisy on “invading a sovereign nation”, Romney sounds like he might agree that Jimmy Carter did the right thing in boycotting the Moscow Olympics in 1980 after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

    Could that be?


  16. MapleStreet says:

    With all these condemnations against military action, why, why, why, why, why is there not even one reporter to ask the obvious follow-up question: and how did you vote for Iraq and Afghanistan ?


  17. shoeless says:

    upside99 Says:

    Gotta REALLY suck to be a 23%er and have to swallow this load all the time.

    That’s bad enough. But they are also required to regurgitate the entire load on command.


  18. shoeless says:

  19. Fool Zero says:

    No doubt the Russians were afraid that Georgia might be looking to develop WMD, and didn’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.


  20. upside99 says:

    Shoeless,

    Now THAT is a sickening thought!


  21. Bilbo Hussein Baggins says:

    The hypocrisy of these people knows no bounds. The facts are that Georgia invaded it’s neighbor. Russia did not invade Georgia without provocation. That would be like Mexico invades Arizona and then we go after the people in Mexico that invaded Arizona. Would that make us invaders of Mexico.

    Someone really needs to ask those buffoons that question. I would love to hear their answer. Maybe one of our resident trolls can answer that one.


  22. Max-1 says:

    .

    Mittens says gloves are best!

    .


  23. MCMetal says:

    HEWITT: But I do want to ask you about the Olympics and your experience there, in terms of whether or not the Russians ought to get the Olympics in 2014 after what they’ve done in Georgia.

    ROMNEY: Well, Hugh, my own view is as the Caucuses are a hot spot, and as Russians have shown their willingness to act militarily against a sovereign nation, that the International Olympic Committee ought to revisit locating the Games elsewhere.

    Heckle and Jeckle

    Should the US then have even been allowed to compete during the present Olympics if you’re judging Russia by what has occurred between them and Georgia ?


  24. Sven Ortmann says:

    It’s indeed a double-standard, and Jon Stewart did a nice satire about it a few days ago.

    This is one of the many reasons why the respect for U.S.government and its opinions has hit the bottom long ago.

    I am active in online discussions on foreign policy and military topics since years, and the sad and terrible fact is that these forums are entirely dominated by right-wing hawkish Americans if the board language is English.
    It’s difficult to believe that not all Americans are braindead warmongers after such experiences – thinkprogress helps me a lot to see that there are others as well.


  25. Max-1 says:

    .

    O.K. I was a bit obscure…
    Romney says dog carriers are best stowed on the roof…

    .


  26. hivanh says:

    Pretty funny. As everyone has pointed out, it seems Ok when we do it, but everybody else is bad if they act that way? And Romney wants to be CEO? Call a brain surgeon.


  27. whirlaway says:

    When these guys make statements like this, they must be thinking that Americans are too damn stupid.

    And guess what, they’re right! How else can one explain Americans falling for the “Drill here, drill now” nonsense?!


  28. Max-1 says:

    .

    My obscurity got lost again…
    I mean to say, throwing stones in one’s glass house is NEVER a good idea.

    .


  29. RUCerious says:

    If Mittens is interested in the Veep slot, he’ll have to have his devotion tested more than just bashing the Russkies on this.
    Cindy would like to know how much service he’s willing to ‘pony’ up.?


  30. shoeless says:

    Fool Zero Says:
    ——————————————————————————–

    No doubt the Russians were afraid that Georgia might be looking to develop WMD, and didn’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.

    Before the invasion, Putin issued this statement:

    “The British government has learned that Mikheil Saakashvili recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.”


  31. Max-1 says:

    .

    Like all Loyal Republicans say,
    “Judge not… unless you’re a Republican.”

    … eh Daryll?

    .


  32. McWars says:

    What are your five sons gonna do about it, hunk?


  33. Buckie Boy says:

    Russians have shown their willingness to act militarily against a sovereign nation

    Americans have shown their willingness to act militarily against a sovereign nation

    Don’t these freaks have any idea of what they are saying?


  34. shoeless says:

    They are going to serve their country by campaigning for McCain.


  35. theswan says:

    Parrott! Oblivious to worldly matters. Bring him on mcsane.


  36. Max-1 says:

    .

    Romney suggests the Olympic Games should come to America, then?

    .


  37. Bobwurst says:

    ralph the wonder llama Says:
    ——————————————————————————–

    Leaving aside the low-hanging fruit of Republican hypocrisy on “invading a sovereign nation”, Romney sounds like he might agree that Jimmy Carter did the right thing in boycotting the Moscow Olympics in 1980 after the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan.

    Could that be?

    Stop it Ralph,
    You’re going to make a lot of neocon heads explode trying to talk their way around that one.


  38. Frosty Cupcake says:

    Republicans don’t do irony, apparently.


  39. shoeless says:

    No, it seems that if you don’t understand irony, you are doomed to a life of it.


  40. Keltoi at Night says:

    Bilbo Hussein Baggins Says:

    The hypocrisy of these people knows no bounds. The facts are that Georgia invaded it’s neighbor. Russia did not invade Georgia without provocation. That would be like Mexico invades Arizona and then we go after the people in Mexico that invaded Arizona. Would that make us invaders of Mexico.

    Bilbo, you do know that South Ossetia is a part of Georgia, not a “neighbor” right? Georgia invaded it the same way W.T. Sherman invaded…er…the other Georgia.

    Don’t get me wrong, it was a very stupid move by Georgia to brutalize Russian ethnic groups in its own territory – I am not sure what they thought Vlad-buddy was going to do about it, but his response seems pretty predictable.


  41. IgnoranceIsNotBliss says:

    IgnoranceIsNotBliss Says:
    ——————————————————————————–

    I’ve often wondered if these people were to ever shut up long enough to listen to the crap that comes out of their mouths if they would be able to hear just how hypocritical they all sound.

    I spoke to soon when I said this in the previous thread. Sigh, I should have known better.


  42. stewarjt says:

    People like Willard either think we are ignorant, go along, get along mush brains or they have no cop on at all.


  43. Buckie Boy says:

    Mittens must have his magical underware on too tight…how’s those “golden plates” doing Mittens?

    I really have to question the sanity of anyone who would believe the Mormon story, I mean, come on, it is so obviously made up by a lunatic…golden plates my butt.


  44. stewarjt says:

    Remember your convictions Willard when the US and/or Israel militarily attacks the sovereign nation of Iran.


  45. Game of Life says:

    repugs will continue their bs that Russia just up and invaded georgia for no reason.

    That’s right repugs make up shit to start another bs war.


  46. pete says:

    Tell you what Mitt. Why don’t you get your five boys to join up, go and get “bad guys”, and send them to your “double Guantanamo”? That should make the world safe.


  47. dbadass says:

    Can you imagine growing up with Stepford dad?


  48. dbadass says:

    Why do we continue to get these weird archaic LaRouche references? So I am quessing that Grenada shit was unacceptable what with the lack of any coalition of the coerced and all.


  49. tokin librul says:

    Some disconnected bidet calling itself “Nettles” Says: So Iraq was a sovereign nation pre-US invasion? Afghanistan sovereign? Sovereign means free. Look it up in the dictionary. Neither the people of Iraq or Afghanistan enjoyed the slightest hint of sovereignty in their respective oppressive regimes.

    Not to overly belabor the obvious, but “sovereign” does NOT mean “free”, dickweed. It means self-governing, as applied to states. Via Wiki:

    Sovereignty is the exclusive right to have control over an area of governance, people, or oneself. A sovereign is the supreme lawmaking authority. Enlightenment philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau, in Book III, Chapter III of his 1762 treatise Of the Social Contract, argued, “the growth of the State giving the trustees of public authority more and means to abuse their power, the more the Government has to have force to contain the people, the more force the Sovereign should have in turn in order to contain the Government,” with the understanding that the Sovereign is “a collective being” (Book II, Chapter I) resulting from “the general will” of the people, and that “what any man, whoever he may be, orders on his own, is not a law” (Book II, Chapter VI) – and furthermore predicated on the assumption that the people have an unbiased means by which to ascertain the general will. Thus the legal maxim, “there is no law without a sovereign.”

    A more formal distinction is whether the law is held to be sovereign, which constitutes a true state of law: the letter of the law (if constitutionally correct) is applicable and enforceable, even when against the political will of the nation, as long as not formally changed following the constitutional procedure. Strictly speaking, any deviation from this principle constitutes a revolution or a coup d’état, regardless of the intentions.

    In constitutional and international law, the concept also pertains to a government possessing full control over its own affairs within a territorial or geographical area or limit, and in certain context to various organs possessing legal jurisdiction in their own chief, rather than by mandate or under supervision. Determining whether a specific entity is sovereign is not an exact science, but often a matter of diplomatic dispute.


  50. ralph the wonder llama says:

    Great, now we got a troll arguing that it was okay for us to invade Iraq because it wasn’t “sovereign”.

    Sheesh.


  51. ralph the wonder llama says:

    Thanks, tokin. You took the effort to educate the troll. I admire that.

    I just figured anyone that stupid was either willfullly stupid, or beyond help. Kudos to you for your generous spirit.


  52. Keltoi at Night says:

    tokin librul Says:
    with the understanding that the Sovereign is “a collective being” (Book II, Chapter I) resulting from “the general will” of the people, and that “what any man, whoever he may be, orders on his own, is not a law”

    Whatever else he may have been, Saddam hardly constituted “the general will” of the Iraqi people. While it oversimplifies to say Sovereign means “free”, the Sovereignty of the Junta in Burma is at least open to debate when they deliberately kill their own people and kill still more when they forbid outside help to citizens in need.

    Not all Sovereignty is created equal, IMHO. Georgia is a democracy where the collective will of the people is represented. That is very different from Saddam’s Iraq.


  53. Paul W says:

    Romney joins the list of conservatives who have criticized Russia’s actions, despite the Bush administration’s belligerent foreign policy. Last week, Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) declared that “in the 21st century, nations don’t invade other nations.” Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said on Monday that military power is “not the way to deal in the 21st century.”

    One has to wonder if these morons actually listen to what they’re saying. How hypocritical to condemn Russia for invading a sovereign nation while in the midst of actively supporting our own invasion of a sovereign nation.

    http://progressiveworldreview.com


  54. Leftside Annie says:

    Gawd. He’s such a blithering idiot.


  55. ralph the wonder llama says:

    Keltoi at Night Says:
    tokin librul Says:
    with the understanding that the Sovereign is “a collective being” (Book II, Chapter I) resulting from “the general will” of the people, and that “what any man, whoever he may be, orders on his own, is not a law”

    Whatever else he may have been, Saddam hardly constituted “the general will” of the Iraqi people. While it oversimplifies to say Sovereign means “free”, the Sovereignty of the Junta in Burma is at least open to debate when they deliberately kill their own people and kill still more when they forbid outside help to citizens in need.

    Not all Sovereignty is created equal, IMHO. Georgia is a democracy where the collective will of the people is represented. That is very different from Saddam’s Iraq.

    No, Keltoi, it does not “oversimplify” it to say that “sovereign means free”. It misinterprets it.

    As does your implication that “sovereignty” requires “the general will of the people”. In an ideal sense that’s true, but in a practical sense it ignores the wide range of political structures and authorities across the globe.

    Iraq had a functioning state apparatus and was recognized by the nations of the world as a nation.

    You can try to justify the invasion of Iraq on many grounds (and the Right certainly done that) but absence of sovereignty is not one of them.


  56. ralph the wonder llama says:

    Let me clarify:

    when I said, “You can try to justify the invasion of Iraq on many grounds (and the Right certainly done that) but absence of sovereignty is not one of them” I should have written, “absence of sovereignty is one of the less realistic”.

    Because evidence is abundant that justifications every bit as outlandish as “absence of sovereignty” have been offered over the past five years. There seems to be no limit of outlandishness on that front.


  57. 666lattes says:

    sovereign = white


  58. Leftside Annie says:

    Keltoi – I expect stupid, irrelevant and factually incorrect arguments from trolls.

    I don’t expect that sort of ridiculous hair-splitting from you.

    Both Afghanistan AND Iraq were SOVEREIGN NATIONS when we invaded and occupied them – no matter what lies were used as justification for our invasion and occupation of either country.

    Period. End of story.


  59. Phenix says:

    Russia had more justification with Georgia than the U.S. had with Iraq. At least the Russians reacted to an action.

    There was another action that the Russians can us as justification to invade Poland. The threat to there national security posed by the U.S. missile system to be placed in Poland. Plus to stick it to US they will most likely stop the flow of oil through Georgia.

    This is an overseas example of the Republicans using fear to steer Poland into a mistake.


  60. WaltTheMan says:

    Leftside Annie Says:

    Keltoi – I expect stupid, irrelevant and factually incorrect arguments from trolls.

    I don’t expect that sort of ridiculous hair-splitting from you.

    Both Afghanistan AND Iraq were SOVEREIGN NATIONS when we invaded and occupied them – no matter what lies were used as justification for our invasion and occupation of either country.

    Period. End of story.

    In Rebuke, Afghanistan was a tribal society, not a nation when W entered the fray. There was no central government. The Taliban were actively reducing national treasure to rubble or trash. Local chieftains controlled every facet of life within their own tiny domains. Afghanistan was equal to what existed in Europe during the time of the Roman Empire. The problem is that once W had secured the basics, he went after his macho agenda of toppling Saddam. In the meantime, the situation in Afghanistan deteriorated to the point that our nation is at worst risk then it was on 9/10/01 and is bankrupt to boot.


  61. pete says:

    Is that the new low bar? That only pro-West Democracies are Truly Sovereign(TM)? Only pro-West Democracies are protected by international law? Even when they violate international law?

    I don’t think that would fly in an ethics course.


  62. Keltoi at Night says:

    Leftside Annie Says:

    Both Afghanistan AND Iraq were SOVEREIGN NATIONS when we invaded and occupied them – no matter what lies were used as justification for our invasion and occupation of either country.

    Period. End of story.

    In the case of Afghanistan, the UN approved that action, thus making the invasion “legal”. Although, giving the UN the power to determine who is sovereign and who is not is a bit scary.

    And Ralph, I was just reacting to Tokin’s use of Rousseau’s words regarding Sovereignty. Rousseau – again, IMHO – would not have thought of Saddam as fulfilling the Social Contract and would therefore not have regarded his regime as “Sovereign”.


  63. pete says:

    This is ridiculous. Such “logic” is nothing short of declaring open season on every oppressed person on Earth. Not to mention “victims” of socialism, communism, military rule, and any other form of government one would care to imagine. And such “logic” would DEMAND the invasion of Saudi Arabia and many other U.S. allies. It’s hard to imagine any sane person subscribing to such a notion.


  64. ralph the wonder llama says:

    Keltoi at Night Says:

    And Ralph, I was just reacting to Tokin’s use of Rousseau’s words regarding Sovereignty. Rousseau – again, IMHO – would not have thought of Saddam as fulfilling the Social Contract and would therefore not have regarded his regime as “Sovereign”.

    Perhaps you should have noted this limitation on your implication when you typed your comment. Nowhere in your post do you mention Rousseau. You appear to be criticizing tokin librul’s understanding of “sovereignty” as it applies to Iraq by invoking a specific phrase, rather than by considering the contemporary understanding of the term.

    Hence, Annie’s well-observed criticism of you and your “ridiculous hair splitting”.

    But how about we settle this by using the President’s definition of “sovereignty”, shall we?

    “Tribal sovereignty means just that; it’s sovereign. You’re a — you’ve been given sovereignty, and you’re viewed as a sovereign entity.”

    There! That clears it up, don’t it?


  65. pete says:

    For that matter. If the will of the governed is prerequisite to being a “sovereign nation”? The U.S, in light of the longstanding opposition to Bushco’s foreign policy, is no longer a sovereign nation. And we won’t be one again until our troops are coming home.


  66. sacopenapa says:

    Georgia’s government, backed with US’s financial and military support, was the agressor in this story. The rest is a LIE like WMD was!


  67. Chocolate Jesus says:

    Guys guys guys…your obviously not understanding the republican understanding of reality..they do not use words in thier ordinary definitions..Dictionaries are SO pre/9-11.
    Republicans speak using the Hipoctionary’s definition: i.e “sovereign” = “governments we like”.

    Noam Chomsky. Pick up a book by him. The man breaks it down clearly, plainly, and very objectively.

    Remember, we have to define words ourselves or the
    Websterrorists and thier fancy 5 dollar words will win, and then we wont have those 5 dollars to buy 10 rugs in Iraq. Hopefuly, since we’ve been bribing them with billions of dollars not to kill our soldiers anymore, we will get a discount and will hopefully get at least 20 rugs for 5 bucks.


  68. hussein toasterhead says:

    Keltoi at Night Says:

    Whatever else he may have been, Saddam hardly constituted “the general will” of the Iraqi people. While it oversimplifies to say Sovereign means “free”, the Sovereignty of the Junta in Burma is at least open to debate when they deliberately kill their own people and kill still more when they forbid outside help to citizens in need.

    August 20th, 2008 at 3:19 pm
    ______

    George W. Bush was elected by a little over 50 million American voters, out of a population of 300 million. Does 1/6th of the population constitute a “general will” sufficient for sovereignty?


  69. Brain From Planet Arous says:

    Uhhhhh…Obama, Biden, and the Democrats are going along with this monstrous lie also. It is a re-enactment of the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis. Then, and I remember it well, the USA set up ICBM Jupiter missiles in Turkey, armed with Nukes, aimed at Russia. Russia in turn set up missiles in Cuba, aimed at the USA. The US media, Democrats and Republicans were chanting the same “Evil Russia” tune. Same today. Georgia attacks South Ossetia, kills civilians and Russians, then Russia fights back. The US and Israel want Russia to be tied up while it considers a strike on Iran, as well as the Neocons of both the Left and the Right want a Cold War military budget. The difference between 1962 and now is we have an internet that can speed up data much faster than mimeographed books back then.

    I will repeat what was said earlier, with the addition of Israel:

    sacopenapa Says:

    Georgia’s government, backed with US’s financial and military support, was the aggressor in this story. The rest is a LIE like WMD was!


  70. ralph the wonder llama says:

    Don’t thank me, Nettles, thank your president.

    By the way, isn’t time for another oh-so-current “Lyndon Larouchebags” quip? I do so enjoy topical humor.


  71. shaun says:

    nice one ralph!! – posting that definition from bush clears things up 100%!! – i wonder if mitt,rice or in fact any right winger could explain what a sovereign nation is or what sovereignty means if asked the question – or, at least, give a more convincing performance that bush.
    and someone should put hewitt’s mind at rest that russia will definately not host the olympics in 2014 mainly because the games are scheduled for 2016.


  72. Brain From Planet Arous says:

    This article in Counterpunch sums up the situation clearly, with the exception that Democrats are going along with this Massive Lie, just as they did with 9/11 and WMDs:

    http://www.counterpunch.org/roberts08132008.html


  73. WaterMan says:

    Yo Mitt -

    Russia is protecting its pipelines.

    We have been targeting the oil in that region of the world for quite some time.

    I think Russia wants our hands out of their s-oil.

    Truly,
    Leslie, WaterMan



Jump to Top

About Think Progress | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy (off-site) | RSS | Donate
© 2005-2009 Center for American Progress Action Fund
View Most Popular

Advertisement

What We're About

Featured

image
Subscribe to the Progress Report



imageTopic Cloud


Visit Our Affiliated Sites

image image
Reports


Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.

Name:
Email:
Tip:
(required)


imageArchives


imageBlog Roll