U.S. Advises Allies Not To Border Russia

[one...two...tree 2,762]

WASHINGTON—Following Russia's controversial military excursions into neighboring Georgia, the Bush administration made its most direct commitment to the U.S.'s Eastern European allies to date by "strongly advising" those countries not to border Russia under any circumstance. "The United States stands by its allies, but will not be able to defend our friends in the region if they continue to share geographical lines with Russia," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said at a Monday press conference. "We also recommend that those nations who may not border Russia but were once a part of the USSR immediately cease and desist from having had that history with the Soviet Union." Rice later pledged financial aid to the victims of devastating flooding in the West African nation of Togo, effective upon the country first meeting the stipulation of removing itself from under water.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/08/25...vote/index.html

[Scott & Lai 12]

WASHINGTON—Following Russia's controversial military excursions into neighboring Georgia, the Bush administration made its most direct commitment to the U.S.'s Eastern European allies to date by "strongly advising" those countries not to border Russia under any circumstance. "The United States stands by its allies, but will not be able to defend our friends in the region if they continue to share geographical lines with Russia," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said at a Monday press conference. "We also recommend that those nations who may not border Russia but were once a part of the USSR immediately cease and desist from having had that history with the Soviet Union." Rice later pledged financial aid to the victims of devastating flooding in the West African nation of Togo, effective upon the country first meeting the stipulation of removing itself from under water.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/08/25...vote/index.html

Does that mean that our allies who share a border with Russia need to move their countries so they no longer are physically next to Russia?

[dalegg 143]

Now this is irresponsible journalism!

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Now this is irresponsible journalism!

I should have posted the link to Fox News...

[dalegg 143]

Now this is irresponsible journalism!

I should have posted the link to Fox News...

of course.

[alienlovechild 75]

What happened to daily BS posts about how the U.S. wants war with Russia through its proxies?

Blame the neocons and Israelis but Lenin forbid we question Mother Russia.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

What happened to daily BS posts about how the U.S. wants war with Russia through its proxies?

Blame the neocons and Israelis but Lenin forbid we question Mother Russia.

LOL... the original post was satire, stupid.

[alienlovechild 75]

Hard to tell the fakes from the real ones because most are nonsense unless you thought the article on neocons on Mauritania was legit.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Umm... asking countries to not border Russia ... and whether it's satire is "hard to tell"?

You're just an idiot.

[alienlovechild 75]

Kirchick may not be the most famous Neocon, but in one obscure column he encapsulated their key trait: arrogant predictions, based on total ignorance, which prove to be disastrously wrong. Iraq, of course, is the classic example. On May 7, 2007, Kirchick wrote a cheery, optimistic column called (believe it or not) "Hail Mauritania," in which he gushed that democracy had "bloomed" in this "remote corner of the Arab world" because they'd held "democratic elections." Then history supplied the punch line: Three months later, on Aug. 6, the Mauritanian army overthrew the winner of that glorious election, and democracy had suddenly un-bloomed. To date, Kirchick has not commented on that unexpected and irksome twist. Kirchick wasn't just unlucky in his prediction; it was absurd from the start. Nobody who knew anything about Mauritania could have imagined that simply because the local elite had cynically embraced the facade of American-style elections, the country would suddenly transform into a peaceful democracy. Only willful ignorance could sustain that notion. Obama is right; these people really are "proud to be ignorant." In fact, they're desperate to remain ignorant, especially about the fact that elections, in themselves, mean very little.

Fetishizing elections as good in themselves is a common Neocon fallacy. They're a long way from understanding what Iraq expert Nir Rosen meant when he warned after the 2006 elections in Iraq (another false dawn that had the Neocons crowing until their cheers were drowned out by IEDs going off) that "democracy is more than just a formal process, it is a culture." Pundits like Kirchick actually believe that by stepping into a polling booth, residents of an impoverished tribal country like Mauritania will be magically transformed into responsible citizens on the Western model. To maintain this illusion, one must be willfully ignorant -- though I suspect that took little effort on Kirchick's part. For example, in "Hail Mauritania," he identifies one candidate, Ahmed Ould Daddah, as "a prominent economist," but doesn't mention that Ahmed also happens to be the half-brother of Moktar Ould Daddah, the dictator who ruled Mauritania in pure authoritarian style from 1961 until he was ousted in a 1978 coup. Coups are in fact the standard method of changing administrations in Mauritania, and it is not at all clear that this bloodless coup was any less "democratic" than the grotesque, graft-fueled circus that is a U.S. presidential election. It was soon clear that to the Mauritanians, nothing untoward had occurred.

The BBC noted that two-thirds of the country's legislature quickly backed the coup, and another BBC report noted that the population took the coup "in its stride." With wonderful hubris, Kirchick insisted that "publicizing the good news out of Mauritania should be an urgent task of the State Department." I wonder if he feels the same way about me publicizing the fact that democracy, as he calls these farcical elections, lasted exactly three months. Of course, the real question with any Neocon writing about Mauritania is, why does he even pretend to care? To state the obvious: Nobody at the Weekly Standard cares about Mauritania, any more than they care about the Iraqis they've "helped" by killing hundreds of thousands of civilians and by destroying Iraq's infrastructure. Neocons don't give a damn about any of these people. They simply want all Muslims neutralized; it's all one to them whether it's done by democratizing them or destroying their countries. And Mauritania is so obscure it doesn't even need to be neutralized. It matters only because it offers another "hopeful sign" to be applied to Iraq, the real topic. Kirchick makes this very clear:

The Mauritanians' success -- notably, on their own terms and with little foreign intervention -- at establishing the basis of a democratic society in a country that formally outlawed slavery only in 1980, should serve as a challenge to those who claim that democracy is bound to fail in the Arab and Muslim world. Now Iraqis and others can look to the west coast of Africa for an example of Arab liberalism in action.

Of course, it's ridiculous to imagine that Iraqis would look to a backwater like Mauritania for inspiration; it would be like scolding a Parisian with, "Why can't you be more like Albania?" But the most bizarre and typical feature of Kirchick's argument is his faith, or pretended faith, in democratic forms: elections, laws, rules -- as if those rituals would magically transform any society that recites them. Thus, he seems to believe that because Mauritania outlawed slavery in 1980, slavery no longer exists there. If he'd done even a little research on the country, he'd realize that slavery has been officially outlawed there many times but continues to flourish. Sheer, shameless ignorance: that's what makes "Hail Mauritania!" such a strong contender. If Neocons risked learning anything about the countries they discuss, they might start to feel rudimentary empathy for the people subjected to their shock therapies. This toxic mix of ignorance and callousness is perfectly exemplified by the third nominee:

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

You can't recognize satire so you copy and paste irrelevant #######?

[dalegg 143]

In a related story, the Russian Government put their collective hands over their ears as George Bush spoke and together uttered "I can't hear you, I can't hear you"

"These regions are a part of Georgia, and the international community has repeatedly made clear that they will remain so," Bush said with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice at his side. "There's no room for debate on this matter."

Bush warns Russia not to take provinces

MOSCOW — Russia’s parliament voted unanimously Monday to urge recognition of the independence of Georgia’s two breakaway regions, a move likely to stoke further tensions between Moscow and the West.

Russia votes to recognize breakaway provinces

[alienlovechild 75]

You can't recognize satire so you copy and paste irrelevant #######?

It was least I could for a fellow idiot who has posted nothing but ####### for almost 3 years.

You're a cyber-legend, dude. Keep up the good work.

[almaty 19]

and you are a legend in your own mind ..

[alienlovechild 75]

and you are a legend in your own mind ..

Let us know when you've graduated beyond single sentence retorts.

I have.