Excellent analysis of Putin's moves in Georgia

[GG]

thanx, I fixed it also

 

Ralph Peters' segment is priceless.

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

Ralph Peters' segment is priceless.

ya, what about that part that he thinks Putin is the most effective leader in the world today... I kinda agree, but then he does things like the old school soviets, which are hard to give him kudos for

[GG]

ya, what about that part that he thinks Putin is the most effective leader in the world today... I kinda agree, but then he does things like the old school soviets, which are hard to give him kudos for

 

But that's precisely why he praises him. Putin's on the road to reconstitute the USSR without nary a peep from the west, in fact with a lot of funding from the west. Not to mention paint themselves as the victims to the gullibles of the world (including many in this thread)

 

That's why he's so effective.

[SD Jarhead]

Gentlemen thanks for sharing the link. Their analysis was very insightful. I'll be the first to admit that early on I had no idea about the politics of that region (specifically Georgia), but it was refreshing to hear discourse without all of the typical BS static we are used to these days. LtCol Peters does seem to know his schit and doesn't mince words.

 

Are we so complacent in this country and the West in general that this can go unchallenged?

 

Putin is a badazz. Can't disagree with the LtCol on that. He is a leader who is doing for Russia what Reagan did for the US back in 1980. He is energizing a country that had their tail essentially between their legs for quite some time and whipping up nationalistic furor.

 

Someone remind me of how much $$ in US securities Russia owns...

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

What do you fella's think of Krauthammer's analysis? GG? Bueller?

 

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...8081303365.html

I usually don't like this guy much, but that was a really good op-ed

[/dev/null]

I don't think Vlad the Invader will be too happy with this...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...refer=worldwide

[GG]

I don't think Vlad the Invader will be too happy with this...

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=206...refer=worldwide

 

To paraphrase one of the more enlightened posters here, what's the big deal, it's only Poland.

[SD Jarhead]

Here's a piece written by John Bolton that is a good read.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...r-the-West.html

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

Here's a piece written by John Bolton that is a good read.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/...r-the-West.html

I freaking hate John Bolton, but it was definitely a good read.

[GG]

I freaking hate John Bolton, but it was definitely a good read.

 

Why the hate? Because he had the temerity to call the UN out to be a club of weak-kneed lackeys?

[PastaJoe]

Why the hate? Because he had the temerity to call the UN out to be a club of weak-kneed lackeys?

 

Because he makes Dick Cheney seem like a pacifist.

 

 

A more objective view of the situation from conservative Pat Buchanan:

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/...ar_baiting.html

[In-A-Gadda-Levitre]

Why the hate? Because he had the temerity to call the UN out to be a club of weak-kneed lackeys?

he usually is just a loose cannon, talking schitt. He's just way too far right neocon for me. Having said that, I agreed with almost everything he wrote in that piece.

[PastaJoe]

WASHINGTON - The International Olympic Committee should punish Russia by moving the 2014 Winter Olympics out of Sochi, Russia, the co-chairs of the congressional House Georgia Caucus said.

 

Reps. Allyson Schwartz, D-Pa., and Bill Shuster, R-Pa., said in a joint statement they plan to file a resolution declaring that Russia’s movement of troops into Georgia on the eve of the Beijing Olympics makes it an unacceptable country to host the games.

 

“It is practically and financially untenable to hold the 2014 Winter Olympic Games less than 20 miles from a zone of conflict, particularly when the prospective host country has played a significant role in the escalation of that conflict,” according to a draft of the resolution.

 

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26223848/

 

The most suprising thing to me is that there's a House Georgia Caucus.

[GG]

Because he makes Dick Cheney seem like a pacifist.

 

 

A more objective view of the situation from conservative Pat Buchanan:

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/...ar_baiting.html

 

Objective because it agrees with your POV? Or objective because Buchanan demonstrates yet again his ignorance of a topic and thus becoming your soulmate?

[PastaJoe]

Objective because it agrees with your POV? Or objective because Buchanan demonstrates yet again his ignorance of a topic and thus becoming your soulmate?

 

He's able to put aside his preferences to present the facts. I disagree with many of his preferences on issues, but he always gives an objective analysis of the facts. The fact that everyone is just assuming Russia is the only party in the wrong shows a lack of understanding of how Russia would react when provoked by recent actions. Bolton takes his preconceptions and then tries to justify them with his slanted analysis.

[GG]

He's able to put aside his preferences to present the facts. I disagree with many of his preferences on issues, but he always gives an objective analysis of the facts. The fact that everyone is just assuming Russia is the only party in the wrong shows a lack of understanding of how Russia would react when provoked by recent actions. Bolton takes his preconceptions and then tries to justify them with his slanted analysis.

 

Ah no. Buchanan is as consistent as he's always been and he's far from objective, because like any political pundit on any side is not objective. In this case, he's also playing goosey with facts. How many times does it have to be explained to you that this did not start last week with Georgians suddenly entering Ossetia? Russia has been instigating this fight for years. If the problem was a sudden Georgian invasion, how in the world did Russia mobilize their troops from as far away as St Petersburg to launch a counterstrike within 48 hrs? What the hell was the Black Sea fleet doing with military maneuvers just weeks before? There's very good reason that many on the right bring up Neville Chamberlain this week. Of course, under Buchanan's view, the US should have stayed out of Europe in the '40s, as well. At least he's consistent.

 

Dear lord, open your eyes and think.

 

Yeah, we wouldn't be happy with Russian agents in Cuba, which we weren't. But the US is not Russia, and any comparison between the two on common ground indicates a mindset of lilliputian proportions.

[PastaJoe]

Ah no. Buchanan is as consistent as he's always been and he's far from objective, because like any political pundit on any side is not objective. In this case, he's also playing goosey with facts. How many times does it have to be explained to you that this did not start last week with Georgians suddenly entering Ossetia? Russia has been instigating this fight for years. If the problem was a sudden Georgian invasion, how in the world did Russia mobilize their troops from as far away as St Petersburg to launch a counterstrike within 48 hrs? What the hell was the Black Sea fleet doing with military maneuvers just weeks before? There's very good reason that many on the right bring up Neville Chamberlain this week. Of course, under Buchanan's view, the US should have stayed out of Europe in the '40s, as well. At least he's consistent.

 

Dear lord, open your eyes and think.

 

Yeah, we wouldn't be happy with Russian agents in Cuba, which we weren't. But the US is not Russia, and any comparison between the two on common ground indicates a mindset of lilliputian proportions.

 

We've been adding former Warsaw Pact countries to NATO, and want to include former Soviet states on Russia's border, and it's Russia that's the instigator? Give me a break. Sure Puti-Pu is a totalitarian in his soul, but Russians are historically paranoid, and going right up to their border is going to elicit a response. I understand that neo-cons would love nothing more than to start up another Cold War, and in some cases Hot Wars, to promote their agendas, but you should know better than to drink that Kool Aid again after Iraq.

[GG]

We've been adding former Warsaw Pact countries to NATO, and want to include former Soviet states on Russia's border, and it's Russia that's the instigator? Give me a break. Sure Puti-Pu is a totalitarian in his soul, but Russians are historically paranoid, and going right up to their border is going to elicit a response. I understand that neo-cons would love nothing more than to start up another Cold War, and in some cases Hot Wars, to promote their agendas, but you should know better than to drink that Kool Aid again after Iraq.

 

PT Barnum was right, the world will never run out of people like you. There's absolutely no problem anywhere, as long as it's not in my back yard. Never mind that the idiot two houses down may burn down the neighbor, which will burn down your house eventually.

 

No matter how often it's been shown that civilized world order cannot be maintained when a totalitarian regime occupies a seat of power in a major country, you seem content that today things are fine, and any problems can be fixed by simply reasoning with the other party because all they want is their vodka and a cigarette. That view would be ok, if you share the same set of standards, laws and principles. But when you don't, you'll be smacked around, and your choice is left to fight or to walk away.

 

But if you walk away, the problem will hit your doorstep. Not necessarily with an all out invasion, but with interference with commerce, economy and with other people that you do business with. So, if you are willing to throw all US multinational companies to the wolves and in turn destroy the US economy and that precious middle class tax base that you care about, then you can be cavalier about saying that what Russia does is of no strategic or economic interest to the US.

 

This again will turn into Europe stepping on its ass and running to the US for a rescue.

[meazza]

I like this writer. His views are always objective

 

http://www.economist.com/daily/kallery/dis...e=features_box4

[finknottle]

We've been adding former Warsaw Pact countries to NATO, and want to include former Soviet states on Russia's border, and it's Russia that's the instigator? Give me a break. Sure Puti-Pu is a totalitarian in his soul, but Russians are historically paranoid, and going right up to their border is going to elicit a response. I understand that neo-cons would love nothing more than to start up another Cold War, and in some cases Hot Wars, to promote their agendas, but you should know better than to drink that Kool Aid again after Iraq.

 

No, they've been trying to join. NATO has been pretty consistent going much slower than the former soviet states liked out of deference to Russia, disappointing Ukraine and - hold your hat! - Georgia during the last go round.