Shouldn't this site just be Conbushian Underground?

[theboss]

And yes I just made up a word.

I find it remarkable that no one seems to be viewing the Georgia situation through the prism of "What would a Democratic response be?"

Instaed, every discussion is on "How this makes Bush look" or "What is bad for Bush?"

Maybe I am the crazy one in that I don't view everything the prism of George Bush. But I do wonder about the future of this site once Bush is back in Crawford playing fetch with his dog. (What can I say? W likes chasing tennis balls).

Is it possible to separate anything in world or national politics from our lame duck leader?

[seemslikeadream]

1. no because he was behind the new and "improved" war AND THIS

[Bluebear]

2. (If you think he will spend a half hour at that prop of a pig farm once out of office....)

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

You don't think the Bush administration has something to do with this Georgia bullshit?

Wanna buy a bridge?

[rockymountaindem]

3. The answer to your last question is "apparently not"

All people need to know is that since Georgia has aligned itself with the US during Bush's term, they must be completely at fault. Well, it's either that or "this whole thing was cooked up by Rove to help McCain!", which is an embarrassingly silly sentiment.

[Bob Dobbs]

6. It is hardly that simplistic.

The "advice" of the US and israeli "trainers" is suspect to anyone conversant in realpolitic.

That they hoped gramps would get a bounce was just icing on the cake.

The real action is going down in the Straits of Hormuz, this is a head fake, and it's working.

[rockymountaindem]

22. See, this is what I'm talking about

The fact that the Georgians hired ex-soldiers from Israel to train their army and purchased a mere 200 million dollars of military equipment does not mean that the Israelis are giving the Georgians political advice or, if they are, have the influence to get the Georgians to do something of this magnitude. But, of course, every time one Israeli shows up plenty of people are content to presume that the Israelis are in total control of whatever the situation is.

Now the US, on the other hand, had no reason to spark war between Georgia and Russia. There is no way we could have become involved without risking a huge war with Russia, and without our direct support it would be obvious to anybody that Georgia would lose exactly as they have. Why would the US encourage our primary ally in the region to do something this self-defeating?

[Bob Dobbs]

39. Maybe you should look in the Straits of Hormuz?

Why would we do any of the cataclysmically insane things we have done for the past eight years?

And if you think israel is not deeply involved at all levels of this you are dreadfully naive.

Georgia was just the first move. There is more to come as the power elite sets up World War III.

[theboss]

41. Is there any scenario for World War III that does not leave Israel as an ember?

I've never understood this belief that Israel wants a huge, worldwide war...which would most likely be fought in Israel.

[Bob Dobbs]

43. WW III leaves the WORLD as an ember.

It's not israel, it's the elite that use israel to stir the pot.

They don't care about israel, they won't be there when the shit comes down.

We are talking about a very small group of string pullers that want to lose 5 or 6 billion of the useless breathers on the Earth.

This is eugenics on a world wide scale.

[seemslikeadream]

45. Tell them, then

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3803062

3803062, 2 items re: Israel and Georgia
Posted by ensho on Fri Aug-15-08 11:10 AM



http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1011720.html


Our friends in Georgia


Talking to official Israeli representatives in Georgia can be confusing. One moment they're bragging about their close ties with senior members of the local government "He's our man, he's been working with us for years," they say of a government minister and the next they're emphasizing that Israel does not support either side, and is trying to keep its head above the murky waters of the Caucasian swamp.

It can be said almost with certainty that Israel bet on the wrong horse here, and is trying to limit its damage which may turn out to be particularly serious as swiftly as possible.

Israel wanted to play a central role in Georgia. Ostensibly, this was a perfect opportunity. A pro-Western government that controls a central oil transport junction, with senior officials who are Jewish and were even educated in Israel, and an army thirsty for Israeli weapons and knowledge. On top of all that, our American ally was also a senior partner in the Georgian project.

Many diplomatic and business opportunities opened there, and battalions of former generals, diligent entrepreneurs and middlemen quickly swooped down on them. Now, as the Russian media, guided by the Putin government, is emphasizing Israel's contribution to "the Georgian aggression," the Israeli Foreign Ministry is suddenly quick to mention that it always has warned against the wholesale weapons export permits issued by the Defense Ministry. Our friend Mikheil Saakashvili, who was supposed to bring the two nations' partnership to new heights of cooperation, has now become a "crazy provocateur," who can blame only himself for playing into Vladimir Putin's hands. The West's impotence in the face of the Russian attack and the segmentation of a sovereign country, and the total lack of diplomatic sanctions, are even more prominent in the face of Israel's reaction.

Moscow does not recognize nuances. It is giving Israel a clear choice: Stand with Georgia, like the Bush administration, which condemned Russia and even flew Georgian soldiers home from Iraq, thus entering an open confrontation with the Kremlin or preserve far more important interests.
-snip-
----------------------------


and


http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1011298.html


Georgia president denies Israel halted military aid due to war


Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili denied on Wednesday night that Israel has suspended its military aid to the country. "I haven't heard anything about that, and I haven't had time to think about that issue for some days," he told Haaretz.

Saakashvili said he is aware of problems with supplying the pilotless drones that his army ordered from Israeli companies, but not of the stopping of any other shipments of military aid.

"The Israeli weapons have proved very effective," he said at a press conference at his office. When asked whether the Israeli arms played a role in the military successes he claimed the Georgian army had achieved, he joked: "Are you asking me as a representative of Elbit or of Israel Aerospace Industries?"

To a reporter's question about Jews who have fled the fighting and come to Israel, he said: "We have two Israeli cabinet ministers, one deals with war , and the other with negotiations , and that is the Israeli involvement here: Both war and peace are in the hands of Israeli Jews."
-long snip-
---------------------------


they have all gone mad - what is it? greed? male power tripping

[rockymountaindem]

69. Israel and Georgia are certainly on good terms

but to suggest that Georgia might have attacked Ossetia because Israel told them to is making a huge leap. Israel is famous for being the stereotypical super-realist state, and anybody (except the Georgians, apparently) could have figured out that making that incursion into Ossetia would provoke a response that the Georgian armed forces could not withstand. So first of all, it would not make sense for Israel to make that recommendation. Secondly, even if they had done so, Georgia is still an independent country and definitely not an Israeli puppet, and they would not be forced to do what Israel says. Lastly, just selling weapons to a country is not an endorsement of their foreign policy or a sign of political coordination.

As far as that remark by Saakashvili at the end of your snip there, what he said was just gauche and totally incorrect. Yakobashvili may be a Jew and a zionist, but that doesn't make him an Israeli or an agent of the Israeli government any more than Joe Lieberman, for all his support of Israel and advocacy of what he sees as pro-Israel policies, is a spokesman of the Israeli government.

[magellan]

64. Well, Poland has just signed onto the US missile defense shield program

Amazing what a little orchestrated fear-mongering will shake out of previously reluctant customers, isn't it?

[Turbineguy]

48. DING! DING! DING!

We have a winner!

Now you may proceed to the next level!

[seemslikeadream]

7. SILLY???

Do you know who gave this guy authority to conduct foreign affairs

[gatorboy]

4. Well, What should a Democratic response be?

You brought it up, give us your opinion.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

5. We should unite behind our president during these dark times.

Don't ask questions mid-stream.

[Bob Dobbs]

9. Yep, it worked in Iraq really great.

Support the war, any war, or die, liberal bitches.:sarcasm:

[theboss]

10. I don't think that's a good Democratic approach

Which is how we ended up in Iraq.

[Bob Dobbs]

23. Sorry, forgot to add the sarcasm indicator.

Nothing is obvious on the internets, evidently.

[theboss]

25. I got that it was sarcasm

But that's not what I am suggesting at all.

[theboss]

11. Is a foreign policy platform of "Bush is wrong" any better?

At some point, don't we need to figure out exactly what our relationship with Russia should be?

[seemslikeadream]

14. It wasn't that bad until georgie "the lesser" stepped in

[theboss]

15. Not disagreeing. But what should it be exactly?

That's a debate that interests me. Particulary with an election in a few weeks.

[seemslikeadream]

18. Well I know what it should not be

bullshit forgeign affairs con artists running around conducting our countries business illegally


LOGAN ACT look it up

[theboss]

20. Oh God. I was on that stupid Logan Act thread.

That's a law that John Birchers chirp about everytime a Democrat visits a country with bad human rights.

That's a non-starter and proof that no one in this country really understands separation of powers at all.

[seemslikeadream]

42. Oh I didn't see that but the FACT is that Rove Scheunemann and McCain

were conducting our country's business with NO authority

[theboss]

47. The only authority that they need is Bush's authority

The president has autonomy for foreign affairs. If he's okay with them meeting with people, it's fine.

That's the point of the Logan Act. The President can tell a busybody to stop negotiating.

Everyone seems to think Congress has some prosecutorial authority, because everyone - aside frome me - slept throught Civics.

[seemslikeadream]

49. and how do you know for sure they had georgie's approval?

[theboss]

50. He hasn't had them arrested

Or he doesn't care.

Indifference is tantamount to approval in this case.

[seemslikeadream]

58. I don't think so but I can agree to disagree on that

[theboss]

61. Who enforces that particular law then?

And why is it different than every other law?

[seemslikeadream]

65. No one is enforcing any laws right now, haven't you noticed?

[theboss]

66. In theory, who enforces that law

Clever response though.

[Bob Dobbs]

34. How about co-operative?

How about NOT BOMBING THEIR FREAKING ARMY BARRACKS?

That might be a start.

How about not "advising" other countries to attack them?

How about not being a billigerent, imperialist thug nation killing hundreds of thousands of civilians in wars for oil?

How about not allowing war criminal profiteers to run unchecked for eight freaking years?

How about not trying to start World War III?

I could get behind some of that.

Instead, we just shoved "free market capitalism" down their unprepared throats, destroying their economy and allowing the criminals to seize control of their country, just like US.

[roody]

51. This is a joke, right?

Not apparent, please use sarcasm tag.

[theboss]

8. I think there are a few principles that need to be in place

1. Acknowledgment of Russian power and influence.
2. Acknowledgment of Georgia's borders
3. Acknwoledgment of our right to protect our allies, including Poland and Ukraine.
4. The need for humanitarian aid to the region.

1. To honor number one, I would be willing to negotiate on authority in the disputed territories. If this means that they become part of Russia's sphere of influence or that they become independent, I would probably feel forced to accept that. I would not allow for annexation though. I think what I would seek is a return to the situation from a week ago and a promise from Georgia of no further aggression.

2. Russia has to withdraw back to within Russia and it has no say in who runs Georgia.

3. I fast-track getting the Ukraine into NATO. Like tomorrow. Under no circumstances do I let Russian expansionism go unchecked.

4. I get the UN and Red Cross in there tomorrow to clean up.

[seemslikeadream]

12. WHO ARE WE TO BE LECTURING THE WORLD??

We have lost all moral authority, maybe you hadn't heard?? TORTURE LIES ETC....

[theboss]

13. The most powerful country on earth?

I don't think it's a lecture so much as it is realpolitik.

PS "Moral authority" is a meaningless concept. You either have authority or you don't. Canada has all kinds of moraly authority and no one listens to them.

[seemslikeadream]

16. powerful will get you and all of us DEAD AS DOOR NAILS

[theboss]

17. So, how do we avoid that?

Thanks.

[seemslikeadream]

19. We have avoided it since 1968 very well

you just don't go around sticking Russia in the eye

[theboss]

21. So, our foreign policy should be "Let Russia do what it wants?"

That can't be right.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

26. You'd prefer "let Georgia do what it wants?"

[theboss]

29. I much prefer Georgia doing dumb things in its borders than Russia doing dumb things outside theirs

Georgia has acted idiotically. There's no getting around that.

But Russia's response to the idiocy is the issue.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

31. So you'd have let Georgia massacre ethnically distinct civilians.

Because it's their own business.

But when Russia puts a stop to it, the U.S. needs to somehow get involved. Because somehow that makes it our business.

OK, hoss.

:thumbsup:

[alcibiades_mystery]

37. It's the Milosevic Shuffle

Funny how that works for some people, init?

[theboss]

38. Not in favor of it (not that it's been proven anyway)....but....

I think that US foreign policy should be to avoid getting involved in civil wars/border disputes/ethnic disputes/etc. within the borders of sovereign nations. The only exceptions would be when it reaches the level of genocide or when it threatens the security of neighbors. And even then, I would tend to be cautious.

A large part of me still believes that Kosovo was a Serbian problem, not a US problem.

At the same time, I tend to support independence for these small enclaves.

I've never quite mastered my balance of both principles.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

52. It's not proven?

Ah, you're one of those.

[theboss]

53. I don't know what "those" are....

The proven part really goes to my belief that these types of internal conflicts have to be really really really bad before the US should get involved. I'm sure the Georgian Army killed people when it launched its attack.

I always think of that Eddie Izzard line about Pol Pot and Stalin. "They killed their own people and we are sort of fine with that." There's some sad truth there.

[JVS]

63. There is nothing dumb about what Russia did.

[BurtWorm]

27. The US has no credibility anymore.

We cannot lecture other countries on how to behave when we don't have control over our own country's behavior.

The first job of the next non-Republican president (since Republicans absolutely cannot be trusted), is to clean up the mess the Bushists made. Ignoring it and pretending everything is fine now that the grownups are back in charge is not going to work. It will only make things worse for the US if the next admin tries to play the old continuity game. No one wants US foreign policy to continue as it was. The system is broke. It needs to be fixed.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

46. The US never had any credibility with Russia.

Moral authority is irrelevant. It does, however, have influence.

[BurtWorm]

54. I'm talking about credibility with the world.

The US media may be ignoring the neo-cons' influence on US policy in Georgia, but the rest of the world is not. The rest of the world knows full well that the neocons think of Georgia as a pawn in the big chess game against Russia/former USSR.

We look ridiculous playing the dumb, outdated irrelevant games the Bushists are playing on our behalf.

[isentropic]

28. I don't understand your point #2. (The 2nd #2)

:shrug:

[theboss]

30. Typo. Thanks for catching that.

Russia has no say in who runs Georgia.

And yes, I recognize the hypocrisy in denying regime change. But it's national hypocrisy not my own. We shouldn't have done it in Iraq. And in a theboss administration, we won't do it anywhere else.

[JVS]

60. 5. Acknowledgment of Russia's right to protect its allies, the Abkhazians and Ossetians...

and to come down on genocidal activities at their borders.

[JVS]

59. Sit back and be peaceful

[alcibiades_mystery]

24. Oh bullshit

For six days on this site, we've seen the following series of arguments:

"If you don't buy the Georgian spin and immediately blame Russia, it is only because:

1. You simply want Bush to look bad, rather than thinking about the issue objectively
2. You are operating on a silly 'enemy of my enemy is my friend' model that makes you side with the Evil Putin."

Stop it. Maybe, just maybe, a lot of people are being measured in their response, and are not inclined to trust the statements from either side at this point; maybe people don't trust Mr. Saakashvili any more than they trust Mr. Putin; maybe people are trying to make sense of a region they know little about, and are not inclined to jump on the outrage or celebration train from ANY party (Russians, Georgians, South Ossetians, Republicans, or Democrats) until they have a better sense of what is going on.

The constant drumbeat of "if you're not on board with the Georgians, you're being childish" is getting stale and rank.

[theboss]

33. That's not my argument. You can favor the Russians if you want.

But if the logic is, "It makes Bush look bad" that's just as childish.

[alcibiades_mystery]

35. I don't favor the Russians

And I don't think anyone who does favor the Russians does so "because it makes Bush look bad."

Hence, it's bullshit.

[DU GrovelBot]

32. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v4.1
==================



This week is our third quarter 2008 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[Warpy]

36. Gee, maybe it's because most people here know

that we have no moral leg to stand on and that our military is stretched to the breaking point and that there is no appropriate response to the situation in Georgia beyond deploring war in general and useless wars in particular.

Our lame duck "leader" is still in office. I'm afraid his response to world affairs is still the important one because his is the one that counts.

This site will continue to respond to that.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

40. Unfortunately, the Democratic response will likely be similar to Bush's.

Bogeyman!!! EEEK!! Give more money to the Pentagon!! We must interfere to "protect our vital national interests" (aka - $$$$$$).

[dysfunctional press]

44. bush won't be going back to crawford- he's headed for an uber-wealthy area of dallas, iirc...

the pig farm was always nothing more than a campaign tool- and since it's no longer needed as a prop, it's going to be sold.

[Ganja Ninja]

55. What response do you expect from the Democrats?

They don't control the state department or the military. So other than hand wringing and and strong disapproval of both sides there isn't much the Democrats can do to help.

Democrats however can and should point out how Bush and the Republican's war mongering over the last 7 1/2 years has set the table for the current state of world affairs. I just don't understand why you seem to want everyone to pretend that the last 7 1/2 years didn't happen and why you discount the effect it's had on world events. Actions have consequences.

[theboss]

56. Of course, they have consequences

And, of course, the last 8 years have been a disaster.

But...I'm counting on being in charge come January.

And we need to figure out what to do with Russia.

[Ganja Ninja]

57. Well for one thing we could set an example that isn't reminiscent

of the Nazis. For another when the Russians raise issues that concern them such as NATO membership for their former satellites or the deployment of troops and weapons in places that could possibly threaten them we could listen to them instead of blowing them off like they don't matter.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

62. A sane response...

...might have been to use our support of Georgia to leverage a reasonable settlement out of them regarding the breakaway regions, and make that a precondition for *any* consideration of their membership in NATO. Maybe if we'd done that this whole disaster wouldn't have happened. But we'll never know, because our country is run by idiots.

[theboss]

67. Good answer

I like that. It makes sense.

[anonymous171]

68. No, because Bush has politicized every wing of the government.

[romulusnr]

70. i don't think we have the info to make a good decision

I suppose that's not very leader-ly, although probably a good leader would get to the bottom of what the hell is going on. It's still not clear to me who is more in the wrong or right (maybe no one). I suppose that would be an initial Dem position and it sure reminds me of some things O has said re thinking before acting.

Although ultimately I am a pro-self-determination person, and if S Ossetia wants to be part of Russia, they should be; if they want to be an independent or autonomous state, they should be.