I love how you are able to take any situation and turn it into a Bush bashing party....
< hysterical, bullsh*t rant omitted >
....but the way you have of bringing him up when things have nothing to do with him, I'm sure you have some kind of conspiracy theory how he was involved. Instead of pointing the finger at Bush, how about we focus on the issue, and responsible world leader, at hand.
If this has nothing to do with him, why did he give a statement about it to the press? That's the ONLY remark I made about the administration and I wasn't even the first poster to remark about it in this thread.
You're telling me to focus on the issue and yet all you've contributed to this thread is a flame against me for expressing an idea that is contrary to your obviously sacred ideology. But, whatever. I'm not going to post any more ideas on politics or capitalism here because reading reactions like yours proves there's no worthwhile reason for me to do so.
Hopefully the thread can continue now.
Just_Jackie wrote:I love how you are able to take any situation and turn it into a Bush bashing party. Are you able to think about everything else besides how *evil* Bush and corporations are? What's your theory on how George W. Bush is responsible for Pearl Harbor? I was supposed to go visit a friend in Kansas for the time off between now and the beginning of the next semester. However, that got canceled and now I'm going to visit a friend in East Texas instead. Is that Bush's fault? What about Hiroshima? What was Bush's contribution to that? I mean, It happened almost a year before he was born, but the way you have of bringing him up when things have nothing to do with him, I'm sure you have some kind of conspiracy theory how he was involved. Instead of pointing the finger at Bush, how about we focus on the issue, and responsible world leader, at hand.
Nice strawman, Jackie.
No one's trying to blame the Ossetia war on George Bush. People are just pointing out that he has no credibility on the issue.
I think even the casual observer would find some hypocrisy in President Bush berating a country for invading another considering the events of the last 5 years. Do as I say, not as I do, eh Mr. Bush?
You read it! You can't unread it!
Confirmed by Georgia:
Killed: ~200 soldiers
Health Minister said 175 people died, mainly civilians
Confirmed by Russia:
Killed: 74 troops
4 aircraft lost
Unknown number of losses among the volunteers
South Ossetian/Abkhazian forces: Losses unknown.
Unknown civilian casualties (Russia initially claimed more than 2,000 civilians were killed in South Ossetia, which the Human Rights Watch investigators called "suspicious" and "very doubtful", citing hospital reports of 273 wounded and 44 dead.)
Considering Russia's penchant for not releasing real casualty figures for weeks afterwards, I guess it'll be around 100 dead. I'd venture a guess as to around 100 dead for the South Ossetians, then maybe another 30 for the Abkhazians. 50 for the Russian volunteers. I'd say a solid 250 for the Georgians- the Russians had air superiority.
But I'll also say this board was slightly dissapointing. Few people seemed to know about this until Bush spoke about it, and then it became about Bush and Bush only. The fact that this made Poland agree to the missile deal, which in turn made Russia threaten it with nukes, is a bigger deal. The fact that the Ukraine has forced Russian ships to seek permission to return to dock is a bigger deal. France brokered much of the EU peace deal. All of these interntional reactions were just as big and important, if not more so, than Bush's response. Go ahead and have international reaction, but make sure that it is international and not Bush-centric.
My point is that Bush is being slightly hypocritical, but I find people who use Bush as an excuse for Russia's actions even more hypocritical.
The repercussions this event has had on the former Soviet Bloc nations have been intriguing. It's clear Russia deeply resents countries that were once under it's sphere of influence deepening their ties to the west. The threats to target Eastern European countries that would host a potential anti-ballistic missile system by Russia are certainly provocative. It's as if Putin & company are trying to resurrect the Cold War at times.
But I don't think we're really heading that way. The Russian Federation simply doesn't have the infrastructure to do anything beyond kicking around small neighbors. The question becomes how many more Ossetia-type conflicts are possible in the next few years and how will the rest of the world respond.
You read it! You can't unread it!
On August 8 Russia thought it best to invade Georgia.
On 14 August of this year the US agreed to install Patriot missiles in Poland.
Attempts to isolate Russia by collecting the former states of the Soviet Union into NATO will only increase distrust between the US (& NATO) and Russia. The cold war is not over. As long as both sides have hundreds of nuclear warheads pointed at each other the old cold war is still with us!
With that in mind Putin is just pushing back the only way he knows how. Invade a former state of the Soviet Union and prove to the world how impotent NATO is! Will the West really go to war over Georgia? Will the US threaten war with Russia over Poland? What will we all do if Russia threatens to invade Poland over the missiles?
That is what I call a sticky situation!
AND, like it or not, President Bush is right in the middle.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 2 guests