Bush: Russia Is A Bully

[jankren]

Bush accuses Russia of 'bullying'



George Bush, the US president, has described Russia as "bullying" in its military operation in Georgia, while Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, has described the Russian operation as "disproportionate".
The comments came as Mikheil Saakashvili, Georgia's president, announced he had signed a Europeon Union-brokered ceasefire following talks with Condoleezza Rice, the US secretary of state, in Tbilisi.
The US president, speaking from the White House, said the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia must be respected.
The people in the former Soviet republic have chosen freedom and "we will not cast them aside," he said.
"Bullying and intimidation'' are not acceptable ways to conduct foreign policy the president said.
However, in a news conference on Friday with Merkel in the Russian resort town of Sochi, Dmitry Medvedev, the Russian president, said that Russia would respond to fresh attacks on its citizens in the same way as it did last week in Georgia.
"If someone continues to attack our citizens, our peacekeepers, then of course we will answer just as we did."

Medvedev also said that Georgia's two separatist regions were unlikely to ever be parts of the country again. "After what happened, it's unlikely Ossetians and Abkhazians will ever be able to live together with Georgia in one state," he said.
Russian troops drove Georgian forces out of both regions over the past week and Medvedev said Moscow would support whatever decision the separatists made about their status.
Merkel said some of Russia's actions in Georgia have been "unacceptable" and the presence of Russian troops there is "not sensible".
"I believe that the six-point plan must be realised immediately and the Russian troops should withdraw from Georgia proper," Merkel said.
In reference to what happens next, she said "the point of departure must
be the territorial integrity of Georgia."

International monitors

The two leaders also discussed a European Union initiative to send peace monitors to South Ossetia.
Medvedev said that Russia was not, in principle, against the idea of having international peacekeeping contingents in the separatist regions, but added that the problem is "that the Ossetians and Abkhazians themselves trust nobody except Russian peacekeepers".
Russian peacekeepers, he said, would guarantee the "will of the people" of the two regions.
He also said the US missile pact with Poland, signed on Thursday, bore out everything Russia had said about new defence systems in eastern Europe.
"This decision clearly demonstrates everything we have said recently," he said.
"The deployment of new anti-missile forces has as its aim the Russian Federation."

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/eu...335393924.html

Oh the irony ...

Pot, this is kettle. Kettle, this is pot.

[Ummon]

In a sense, possibly. Therefore, Russia has engaged in a wise race to establish who is blacker.

[Thanatos]

As if we haven't bullied the crap out of the Phillipines, Cuba, China, the Native American tribes, and all of Latin America...

We're in no position to criticize anyone.

[BoJaN]

As if we haven't bullied the crap out of the Phillipines, Cuba, China, the Native American tribes, and all of Latin America...

We're in no position to criticize anyone.

Don't forget Canad, we get bullied a little too.

[Ummon]

Yesterday I was very bad. So if someone hits me today, does it mean I have to let him do it?

[jankren]

Yesterday I was very bad. So if someone hits me today, does it mean I have to let him do it?

Russia is not 'hitting' USA.

Anyway, I personally hate what Russia is doing in Georgia. But seriously USA is in no position to preach in this conflict.

[James Cook]

I personally hate what Russia is doing in Georgia. But seriously USA is in no position to preach in this conflict.

Excatly, mate

But what can one expect, from a man who dosent have a clue, of what is
going on in his own god damm universe

Bush go and get your self drunk......!!!! Cheers

[Elrond]

Bush invaded two brutal dictatorships one of which was home to the organization which did 9/11 - its not the same as invading a democracy over break away states within that countries borders - Serbia was effectively a dictatorship by 1999 and had recently committed genocide on its neighbors - Georgia hasn't.

I dont really like bush but I think he is right on this issue - infact I hope he announces a military aid package to Georgia - wouldnt the Georgian army look good if every soldier had M16s and proper US training while its airforce had a few mothballed US jets?

The US is putting on enough pressure for Russia to pull out of Georgia proper and they know it hence why they are trying to destroy military equipment as fast as they can.

I also find that particularly funny - most of the Western arms were given to the special forces who will have retreated in a orderly fashion and will still have them. The Western equipment in the rest of the army would have been prioritized - they would have done their best to take it with them and would have left ex soviet stuff instead. So what the Russian army is doing is destroying a small amount of western equipment and allot of ex soviet stuff. When Georgia starts to reequip its army it wont be able to get ex soviet stuff (even if it wanted to) and will have to buy all of its arms from European or US companies or government (in the case of old kit), so basically by staying on in Georgia to destroy equipment they are a) damaging their repuation further and b) speeding up the process of the Georgian army replacing their ex soviet equipment.

[Војвода Драгутин Кесеровић]

: "No Russia! - That's a bad Russia!"

[Astaroth]

Bush invaded two brutal dictatorships one of which was home to the organization which did 9/11 - its not the same as invading a democracy over break away states within that countries borders - Serbia was effectively a dictatorship by 1999 and had recently committed genocide on its neighbors - Georgia hasn't.

I dont really like bush but I think he is right on this issue - infact I hope he announces a military aid package to Georgia - wouldnt the Georgian army look good if every soldier had M16s and proper US training while its airforce had a few mothballed US jets?

The US is putting on enough pressure for Russia to pull out of Georgia proper and they know it hence why they are trying to destroy military equipment as fast as they can.

I also find that particularly funny - most of the Western arms were given to the special forces who will have retreated in a orderly fashion and will still have them. The Western equipment in the rest of the army would have been prioritized - they would have done their best to take it with them and would have left ex soviet stuff instead. So what the Russian army is doing is destroying a small amount of western equipment and allot of ex soviet stuff. When Georgia starts to reequip its army it wont be able to get ex soviet stuff (even if it wanted to) and will have to buy all of its arms from European or US companies or government (in the case of old kit), so basically by staying on in Georgia to destroy equipment they are a) damaging their repuation further and b) speeding up the process of the Georgian army replacing their ex soviet equipment.

100% agree.

There is a massive difference between a democratic country with an elected leader and a dictatorship that commits genocide and/or is responsible for things like 9/11 (serbia, iraq, afgh.).

[Thule]

Serbia was effectively a dictatorship by 1999 and had recently committed genocide on its neighbors - Georgia hasn't.

Again.

is there any powerful nation that was never a bully towards smaller nations?

Correct.

[Ummon]

It is hitting a free country which it has no right to conquer, because Georgia has attacked a separatist province (first).

Since there is an international community, should they sit there and look as Georgia is conquered?

Or you mean that they should have defended Saddam's Iraq too?

Now, this argument is in some way tricky, although wrong. Bush did one very stupid thing in acting unilaterally in Iraq, because he posed the bases of the present predicament. On the other hand, Georgia didn't invade neighbours, nor host terrorists, nor gas its own people.

Therefore, yes, Bush is an idiot, but Georgia should not pay for this.

[jankren]

It is hitting a free country which it has no right to conquer, because Georgia has attacked a separatist province (first).

Since there is an international community, should they sit there and look as Georgia is conquered?

Or you mean that they should have defended Saddam's Iraq too?

Now, this argument is in some way tricky, although wrong. Bush did one very stupid thing in acting unilaterally in Iraq, because he posed the bases of the present predicament. On the other hand, Georgia didn't invade neighbours, nor host terrorists, nor gas its own people.

Therefore, yes, Bush is an idiot, but Georgia should not pay for this.

Nobody disagrees with what Bush said. Its like a thief tells a robber, "You are a stealer." Is the thief right? Yes. Is what he said ironic at the same time? Yes.

We unfortonatley are in no posiition to condemn russia, hoever we are in a position to support the Georgians as Much as possible.

I agree. USA should help Georgia in the war but just dont preach because it makes them laughable.

[Kiljan Arslan]

We unfortonatley are in no posiition to condemn russia, hoever we are in a position to support the Georgians as Much as possible.

[gambit]

"We're sick of these bullies, and if they dont straighten up; we're gonna give some serious noogies."

[Ummon]

Is Iraq under U.S. political control?

[jankren]

Is Iraq under U.S. political control?

You are naive if you dont think so.

[Ummon]

Really? Do they pick the governors, representatives, etc? When the U.S. will be retired, will Iraq be U.S. state?

This is misrepresenting democracy. A nation may certainly influence another nation, but that is not like annexing it.

[BoJaN]

Really? Do they pick the governors, representatives, etc? When the U.S. will be retired, will Iraq be U.S. state?

This is misrepresenting democracy. A nation may certainly influence another nation, but that is not like annexing it.

Really? Do they pick the governors, representatives, etc? When the U.S. will be retired, will Iraq be U.S. state?

U.S was perfectly fine with Saddam...while he was on their side.

This is misrepresenting democracy. A nation may certainly influence another nation, but that is not like annexing it.

And thats justifiable? Annexing a country is much riskier, because resistance is easier to understand. While having an outside government influence or controlled that same regions government makes it harder to differentiate between who's in charge.

Bottom line. Another country is making another country do things - even when they don't want to. Both sound like the same thing to me.

[Elrond]

Really? Do they pick the governors, representatives, etc? When the U.S. will be retired, will Iraq be U.S. state?

U.S was perfectly fine with Saddam...while he was on their side.

This is misrepresenting democracy. A nation may certainly influence another nation, but that is not like annexing it.

And thats justifiable? Annexing a country is much riskier, because resistance is easier to understand. While having an outside government influence or controlled that same regions government makes it harder to differentiate between who's in charge.

Bottom line. Another country is making another country do things - even when they don't want to. Both sound like the same thing to me.

The US can rely on Iraq to do some big things such as guarantee oil supply and to not support its enemies - the vast majority of stuff is entirely there choice. The reason why most Iraqi policy benefits the US is the same reason why UK policy tends to benefit the US - because its in both of their interests.

Iraqs a democracy they decide who leads them not the US - Iraq's situation dictates most of its policy not the US.

Its also worth pointing out that even if the US is a bully, two wrongs don't make a right.