Slog: News & Arts

RSS icon Comments on Uh...

1

Well Said.

Posted by Bryce Beamish | August 11, 2008 4:19 PM
2

They're fucking blowhards. We're not going to war with anybody. We don't have a military anymore to go to war with. We encouraged Georgia to get uppity, and they foolishly took the bait and taunted the bear. If there's ANYONE on earth stupid enough to believe that the US means what it says, this should finally disabuse them. This is the most irresponsible administration in US history.

Posted by Fnarf | August 11, 2008 4:24 PM
3

Just so long as Costner DOESN'T put on the USPS jacket, I can live with the rest of this.

Posted by COMTE | August 11, 2008 4:26 PM
4

As usual, what Fnarf said. This is getting monotonous.

In damning transcript, ex-CIA official says Cheney likely ordered letter linking Hussein to 9/11 attacks.

A forged letter linking Saddam Hussein to the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks was ordered on White House stationery and probably came from the office of Vice President Dick Cheney, according to a new transcript of a conversation with the Central Intelligence Agency's former Deputy Chief of Clandestine Operations Robert Richer....

See the special 'contribution' made by my High Skool classmate Doug Feith (end of this page):
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/Tape_Top_CIA_officer_confesses_order_0808.html


Posted by Karlheinz Arschbomber | August 11, 2008 4:40 PM
5

We've been baiting the Russians since the mid-nineties. Kosovo, radar stations in the Ukraine, Afghanistan, saber-rattling against Iran, etc... etc...

What great friends we are to the Georgians! They help us fight in Iraq. They offer to join NATO. They give us a pipeline to the Black Sea.

We're very sorry, great friends. We're too over-extended to help you. We forgot about the other super-power. We'll be glad to sell you arms if you survive. Please protect our natural gas.

Posted by six shooter | August 11, 2008 4:52 PM
6

They're fucking blowhards. We're not going to war with anybody. We don't have a military anymore to go to war with. We encouraged *Chekoslavakia* to get uppity, and they foolishly took the bait and taunted the *swaskika*. If there's ANYONE on earth stupid enough to believe that the *French and English* mean what they say, this should finally disabuse them. This is the most irresponsible *treaty* in *European* history.

Posted by Neville Chamberlain, from someplace in hell | August 11, 2008 4:54 PM
7

Nicely constructed Godwin you've got there, Neville, but the analogy under your rhetorical flourish is weak.

Posted by Fnarf | August 11, 2008 4:58 PM
8

We signed no treaties.

We sent no missile base forward observers.

Besides, John McCain thinks Russia is attacking the US state of Georgia. You know, the one north of Florida, not the sovereign state south of the Russian Federation.

He'll scramble our prop propellor biplanes once he's Supreme Leader. And arm them with 50 pound bombs you drop over the side after a visual check through the goggles.

Posted by Will in Seattle | August 11, 2008 5:08 PM
9

So Georgia's actions attempting to retake South Ossetia had got to go down in history as one the biggest strategic miscalculations in history.

Posted by Giffy | August 11, 2008 5:08 PM
10

Actually, they did that after they got intel that the Russians had tank convoys on the way, blowing up the bridges so they couldn't take the direct route into Georgia.

But, yeah, their problem was they believed our Liar-in-Chief and the Vice Weasel, so they poked the bear.

Posted by Will in Seattle | August 11, 2008 5:11 PM
11

You're just so dang adorable when you stop writing about fisting and watersports and discuss grown up topics.

Posted by burgin99 | August 11, 2008 5:14 PM
12

Mr. Fnarf:

please explain.

I think one part where the analogy doesn't hold up is that England plus France had more power to stop Germany taking Czechoslocakia then the USA today has power to stop the Russians in Georgia.

So, yes, we shouldn't go in there with tanks or anything.

but at the same time to sit back and go "oh well, they taunted the bear, by having elections and shit, that's what they deserve" or to say "we can do nothing, ho hum let's just sit andd watch them take Armenia and the next one and the next one -- that would seem both stupid and morally indefensible.
We should do what we can. for starters this means testifying: Russia is not an aggressor. They are violating international law.

This means saying to Russia: "no WTO for you btw."

I'm sure there are other things we can do short of war.

What we shouldn't do is make excuses for aggression by shifting the blame onto the victims.

Posted by PC | August 11, 2008 5:16 PM
13

This should be front and center of the campaign. In a final act of incompetence and neglect of duty, they've now un-won the Cold War, bankrupted the winning sign and stood by while the loser rebuilds the Soviet Union. Unfuckingbelievable.

Posted by left coast | August 11, 2008 5:25 PM
14

georgia started the conflict by invading south ossetia in the hopes that they can do a quick strike and capture the break away republic, they killed russian peacekeepers and have acted pretty much the same way the serbs did in the kosovo. georgia is no poor old western democracy. yes putin is a douchebag, but lets be serious here, russia is not iraq and a war with them is nuclear war. georgia thought since it has troops in iraq that the us was gonna have their back. WRONG.

there is no difference between what russia is doing and what we did when we bomb the shit out of belgrade in order to make the serbs pull out of kosovo.

yes, the narrative is pretty, but georgia was the agressor. nothing to see here. the us is not about to bomb moscow. and georgia is already backing down after they were pimped slapped.

Posted by SeMe | August 11, 2008 5:31 PM
15

You're full of it, PC. For starters, Georgia didn't bring this on "by having elections". For seconds, the US doesn't get to decide who's in the WTO. For thirds, Russia is not reassembling the Soviet Union; they're not even reincorporating Georgia, just bombing them a little. And we have no say in the matter: no diplomatic strength, no position on the issues, no military options, no nothing. We have about as much influence over what Russia does as St. Kitts and Nevis does.

Posted by Fnarf | August 11, 2008 5:49 PM
16

It's about the oil pipelines people. And they tell us it's about something else...

Posted by Sargon Bighorn | August 11, 2008 6:28 PM
17

Today's Russians are a bunch of vodka drenched Boris and Buttskiheads who couldn't program a TI calculator not to mention a warhead.

They're good at few things: extortion, white slavery and spam viruses. We're still good at missiles and bombs because we kept our edge after 1987. Pick: America.

Posted by John Bailo | August 11, 2008 6:31 PM
18

Going to war with Russia would violate our current strategy of only attacking opponents who can't fight back and have no economic leverage. Russia is disqualified on both counts. (We can't attack China either, for similar reasons. Sorry, Taiwan.)

What Cheney is doing, however, is posturing. This will allow McCain to take up the drumbeat and appear to be a tough guy during the campaign when he's not really in a position to do anything about it. Threatening military action in order to appear to be tough and leader-y is in keeping with our current stance.

Actually engaging Russia would be insane. Enacting sanctions would risk driving the price of energy up in Europe (and worldwide) dramatically at a time when economies are already buckling under the strain of the current prices. So again, probably not going to happen. Unless the Bush administration really is part of some apocalyptic death cult, as many have speculated.

Posted by flamingbanjo | August 11, 2008 6:40 PM
19

Of course The Old Man is jumping on this: It's the script he knows - the same script he played for forty years until the USSR had to up and die on him.

Useless old fart. I never thought the Repubs would be dumb enough to nominate another old shit from the cold war. Will that schmaltz still sell? Stay tuned....

Posted by Catalina Vel-DuRay | August 11, 2008 7:22 PM
20

Methinks we just might want to consider going to War with Dick Cheney before going to war with the former Soviets.

BTW, 'The Road' was pretty good.

-Douglas Tooley
Lincoln, Tacoma

Posted by DLTooleu | August 11, 2008 7:39 PM
21

We're not going to war with Russia, no no no. Russia isn't some po-dunk Middle Eastern banana republic. If we go to war with Russia we will be entering a world of shit.

Posted by mnm | August 11, 2008 7:43 PM
22

PC @12 Wow.. you're mostly legible, and you almost make a point. A little more practice, and you might get good at this shit.

flamingbanjo @18 Word.... That's the best take I've seen so far.

Posted by drewl | August 11, 2008 10:24 PM
23

Why doesn't Russia just claim Georgia has "weapons of mass destruction"? I mean, it doesn't have to be true or anything, just claim it. France and Germany might still bitch, but it would (or at least should) shut up the US and Great Britain.

Posted by Epimetheus | August 11, 2008 11:27 PM
24

Savage-

Since when does your opinion count for shit? I remember when you were yelling that Iraq was a good idea. As far as I'm concerned, you're fucked because you cater to the moment. Grow some balls, get some respect, blah, blah, blah. The fact is that you supported the worst foreign policy move of our generation. And you should be held responsible for that. You are a fucking fake, a fucking fraud!!!

Posted by ss | August 11, 2008 11:49 PM
25

The US may have no specific call to action re: Russia, but the EU would just love to flex their NATO muscles a bit and mix it up with Putin.

Posted by laterite | August 12, 2008 12:23 AM
26

Oh, but Obama comes out with a "me too" statement instead of condemning Bush for his aggression. Same old, same old.

Posted by Vince | August 12, 2008 8:05 AM
27

War in Georgia? Dude, will this fuck up the Seahawks' game with the Falcons?

Posted by Toe Tag | August 12, 2008 9:15 AM
28

@6: See, that analogy would work if the German occuptation of the Sudetenland had been provoked by
(1) A Czech invasion of the Sudetenland which had been
(2) de facto independent since
(3) a civil war over a decade before, and
(4) the vast majority of the population of the Sudetenland had voted for union with Germany in a recent referendum.

Posted by christopher | August 12, 2008 11:08 AM

Comments Closed

Comments are closed on this post.