Comments on The Crazy Goings On at the Discovery Institute

Just ask the Lobbyist for the country of Georgia that works for McSame, I'm sure he could tell you.

Mind you, he'll probably lie.

It's what they do.

How can the Neocons present a united front on the Georgia question when they're funded by lobbyists from both sides?

Annie, is explained (somewhat) here:

http://slog.thestranger.com/2007/03/my_shoe_award#c677988

Also, Google the following: "The Further Misadventures of Screwball Yuri Mamchur, Neo-Soviet Con Man"

COMMENT DELETED: Off-Topic/Spam

We'd rather not moderate your comments, but off-topic, gratuitously inflammatory, threatening, or otherwise inappropriate remarks may be removed, and repeat offenders may be banned from commenting. We never censor comments based on ideology. Thanks to all who add to the conversation on Slog.

The standard US media view (Georgia = freedom-loving victims, Russia = evil neo-Soviet warmongers looking to outdo Stalin) isn't accurate. Russia isn't exactly a fluffy bunny, but they do have an interest in keeping their neighbors from butchering the various enclaves in that very confusing region. Russia isn't taking over Georgia; they're bombing the shit out of them so they'll leave South Ossetia alone. Georgia's adventurism there was emboldened by Bush's reckless and stupid rhetoric, but Russia has ALWAYS maintained a military interest in the Caucasus and always will. The Serbian analogy isn't far off.

lets not forget the neo cons who love the freedom loving georgian president are pushing the view that georgia did nothing but act like a western nation. that is their ally in iraq that just got pimped slapped. and mccain and bush are looking stupid.

1)georgia invaded south osettia
2) georgia knew damn well putin would hit back
3) they (georgia)thought nato was going to bomb moscow

russia stopped short of taking the tiblisi which im sure they would have done in 3 days. is a way to show the europeans that they arent going to be pushed and a way for douchebag putin to say to georgia. "dont try this at home." there are some real good articles by liberal scholars on the true nature of that conflict and why the US media is buying the poor old georgia line put out by the neo cons.

here is a good editorial by a georgetown professor, who was interviewed by salon.cm and one of the better ones ive read and certainly doesnt let putin off the hook. im surprised that the stranger is buying the "mainstream" line. that is not to say that that nutso right wing institute has it right by defending the russians.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0811/p09s03-coop.html

Fnarf pretty much summed it up: "Russia isn't taking over Georgia; they're bombing the shit out of them so they'll leave South Ossetia alone."

It really doesn't take a genius to read any of the reports out there to deduce as much. And all bloody accounts from my friend's South Ossetian family would corroborate that. You can also read any basic history of the conflict between South Ossetia and Georgia to deduce the simple fact that all South Ossetia has ever wanted is independence, while all Georgia has wanted is to keep that from them.

And haven't we reached the point with Bush that we can assume that whatever he supports is wrong-headed at best? His backing of Geogia was the most obvious proof or Georgia's culpability yet.

Fnarf pretty much summed it up: "Russia isn't taking over Georgia; they're bombing the shit out of them so they'll leave South Ossetia alone."

It really doesn't take a genius to read any of the reports out there to deduce as much. And all bloody accounts from my friend's South Ossetian family would corroborate that. You can also read any basic history of the conflict between South Ossetia and Georgia to deduce the simple fact that all South Ossetia has ever wanted is independence, while all Georgia has wanted is to keep that from them.

And haven't we reached the point with Bush that we can assume that whatever he supports is wrong-headed at best? His backing of Geogia was the most obvious proof or Georgia's culpability yet.

Shit - sorry for the double post.

its not as cut and dried as the above posts suggest. the population of south ossetia is a mixed one with ethnic georgian villages mixed in the pop and ossetians outside the population. the present ossetian population settled there in the middle ages under the aegis of georgian kings.

its not as cut and dried as the above posts suggest. the population of south ossetia is a mixed one with ethnic georgian villages mixed in the pop and ossetians outside the population. the present ossetian population settled there in the middle ages under the aegis of georgian kings.

I hope my post isn't being understood as defending Putin. SeMe and jiberish are right; it's a complex issue. That's precisely Bush's and McCain's (and, sadly, Obama's to some extent) misbegotten reaction: it's simple, Georgia = heroes. But the fact is, Putin is ALWAYS going to take the strongman position in the area, just as every other Russian leader has before him. NATO's got nothing to say about it, and neither does the US.

The Neocons want to start a war, though. They always do. It's not going to happen; I'm sure the Joint Chiefs have been in touch with the president and "'shut up', he explained", as Ring Lardner put it.

Russia has repeatedly said they are unhappy with us constantly meddling in eastern europe with our weapons. Bush has ignored them. This is the result.

Annie

Nice work passing the test! One thing us perfessers like to do is make half-right assertions (propaganda can only be from a government!) to see if any of our studenti will call us on it, or if they will just write stuff down mindlessly. You're gonna kick ass at Chicago.