Cheney: "So?"
McCain: "My friends, bla bla bla bla..."

Any way to get some of those Georgian "Irregulars" to pay a visit to the FAUX studios in NYC? I'm sure big, tough guys like o'reily and hannity would know how to handle them.

god, this whole thing is such a sham.

(lol @ My Friends, bla bla bla)

Yellow Elephant Safari @ 3:

Any way to get some of those Georgian "Irregulars" to pay a visit to the FAUX studios in NYC? I'm sure big, tough guys like o'reily and hannity would know how to handle them.

Billo would probably sexually harrass them and Hannity would probably try to brown beat them.

Send BillO over there to cover the story. They wouldn't DARE try shooting at HIM!

....although, we could always hope...

the last place i'm going to for information on this conflict is FOX......i'll refer to BBC worldservice,mosaic and Reuters for info.

Here is another video of a journalist being shot at, actually being grazed in the forearm.

Russian reporter shot

Do they have to keep repeating the word "humiliated" so many times? That won't win friends and influence people, guys.

The title on the post ... needs some commas...

Hello Hello Hellooooooooooo.

HELLO!

No not our guys you IMBECILES!

Faux News are such drama queens. They'll use any type of footage that contains heart pounding action. That's all they care about, sensationalism.

12 BrokenArrow Says: What a crock of shit. They never get anywhere first……….why the hell are they all Johnny on the spot now???

Oh, wait, maybe it’s because faux and the booosh company need a new war, and they are like all about Georgia right now.
========

Kind of remarkable that toward the end of the clip the Fox anchor goes on and on about the great background program Fox has been working on for months and months ..

.. for months and months???

How did they know?

it must have been wishful/visualization thinking i thought i saw hannity running his fat ass

This afternoon I saw a video on tv of some journalist, I believe they were from Turkey, but not sure. Last Sunday they were in their car in Georgia and someone began firing on them. You could hear them screaming as bullets came through their windshield. The translation of what they were saying was they were praying. You could see as the bullets just kept coming. One of them was shot in the head but he's going to be okay. The other one kept filming throughout the whole frightening event. There was nothing fake about this.

at the very end of the video the anchor says megyn has been working on this story for months .... why?

Chill@18: You "nailed it". Nothing but a FAKE at FAUX Noise. Purpose: To
advertise a "Sunday Special" supposedly they have been "working on" for several
months. Gotta say one good thing about that alleged reporter...he should be in
the Olympics since he is soooooo fast and can outrun a bullet..Wonder if he can
leap from high building also.

he's off message. he's supposed to demonize russia.

Now that is beyond absurd Fox News showing the American people Russian soldiers rounding up Georgians, but have failed to show American soldiers knocking down Iraqiis door and terrorizing the Iraqi people.

The Russian invasion
The defense missile system deal in Poland yesterday
The Ceasefire today

Follow the money. Follow the Defense contractors. Sure make you wonder

I was watching Fox yesterday when that came on. They played it later too, you kindof get the feeling Murdoch has decided that Bush is bad too.

WASHINGTON - Following a series of provocative attacks in its secessionist region of South Ossetia late last week, Georgia launched an all-out attempt to reestablish control in the tiny enclave. Russia then intervened by dropping bombs on Georgia to protect the South Ossetians, halt the growing tide of refugees flooding into southern Russia, and aid its own peacekeepers there.

Now, the story goes, Russia has at last found a way of undermining Georgia's Western aspirations, nipping the country's budding democracy, and countering American influence across Eurasia. But this view of events is simplistic.

American and European diplomats, who have rushed to the region to try to stop the conflict, would do well to consider the broader effects of this latest round of Caucasus bloodletting – and to seek perspectives on the conflict beyond the story of embattled democracy and cynical comparisons with the Prague Spring of 1968.

Russia illegally attacked Georgia and imperiled a small and feeble neighbor. But by dispatching his own ill-prepared military to resolve a secessionist dispute by force, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili has managed to lead his country down the path of a disastrous and ultimately self-defeating war.

Speaking on CNN, Mr. Saakashvili compared Russia's intervention in Georgia to the Soviet invasions of Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia in 1968, and Afghanistan in 1979. Russia has massively overreacted to the situation in Georgia. It has hit targets across Georgia, well beyond South Ossetia, and has killed both Georgian military personnel as well as civilians. The international community is right to condemn this illegal attack on an independent country and United Nations member.

But this is not a repeat of the Soviet Union's aggressive behavior of the last century. So far at least, Russia's aims have been clear: to oust Georgian forces from the territory of South Ossetia, one of two secessionist enclaves in Georgia, and to chasten a Saakashvili government that Russia perceives as hot-headed and unpredictable.

Regardless of the conflict's origins, the West must continue to act diplomatically to push Georgia and Russia back to the pre-attacks status quo. The United States should make it clear that Saakashvili has seriously miscalculated the meaning of his partnership with Washington, and that Georgia and Russia must step back before they do irreparable damage to their relations with the US, NATO, and the European Union.

The attack on South Ossetia, along with Russia's inexcusable reaction, have pushed both sides down the road toward all-out war – a war that could ignite a host of other territorial and ethnic disputes in the Caucasus as a whole.

The emerging narrative, echoing across editorial pages and on television news programs in the US, portrays Georgia as an embattled, pro-Western country struggling to secure its borders against a belligerent Russia. Since coming to power in a bloodless revolution in late 2003, Saakashvili has certainly steered a clear course toward the West.

The EU flag now flies alongside the Georgian one on major government buildings (even though Georgia is a long way from ever becoming a member of the EU). The Saakashvili government seeks Georgian membership in NATO, an aspiration strongly supported by the administration of George W. Bush. Oddly, before the conflict erupted on its own soil Georgia was the third-largest troop contributor in Iraq, a result of Saakashvili's desire to show absolute commitment to the US and, in the process, gain needed military training and equipment for the small Georgian Army.

Russia must be condemned for its unsanctioned intervention. But the war began as an ill-considered move by Georgia to retake South Ossetia by force. Saakashvili's larger goal was to lead his country into war as a form of calculated self-sacrifice, hoping that Russia's predictable overreaction would convince the West of exactly the narrative that many commentators have now taken up.

But regardless of its origins, the upsurge in violence has illustrated the volatile and sometimes deadly politics of the Caucasus, the Texas-size swath of mountains, hills, and plains separating the Black Sea from the Caspian.

Like the Balkans in the 1990s, the central problems of this region are about the dark politics of ethnic revival and territorial struggle. The region is home to scores of brewing border disputes and dreams of nationalist homelands.

In addition to South Ossetia, the region of Abkhazia has also maintained de facto independence for more than a decade. Located along Georgia's Black Sea coast, Abkhazia has called up volunteers to support the South Ossetian cause. Russia has now moved to aid the Abkhazians, who are concerned that Georgia's actions in South Ossetia were a dress rehearsal for an attack on them.

Farther afield, other secessionist entities and recognized governments in neighboring countries – from Nagorno-Karabakh to Chechnya – are eyeing the situation. The outcome of the Russo-Georgian struggle will determine whether these other disputes move toward peace or once again produce the barbaric warfare and streams of refugees that defined the Caucasus more than a decade ago.

For Georgia, this war has been a disastrous miscalculation. South Ossetia and Abkhazia are now completely lost. It is almost impossible to imagine a scenario under which these places – home to perhaps 200,000 people – would ever consent to coming back into a Georgian state they perceive as an aggressor.

Armed volunteers have already been flooding into South Ossetia from other parts of the Caucasus to fight against Georgian forces and help finally "liberate" the Ossetians from the Georgian yoke.

Despite welcome efforts to end the fighting, the Russo-Georgian war has created yet another generation of young men in the Caucasus whose worldviews are defined by violence, revenge, and nationalist zeal.

by Charles King is professor of international affairs in the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. He is the author of "The Ghost of Freedom: A History of The Caucasus."

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0811/p09s03-coop.html

Cheney: The Russian Forces are in their last throes

McLame: South Ossetia, is that close to Macon?

You gotta regard Faux News as the way the Pukes decided to "out-source" their propaganda arm, or at least a significant part of it. Faux News actively propogates the interests of the rulers, while the SCUM (SoCalledUnbiasedMedia) just passively and blandly stenographize, passing the State line along without comment or rebuttal. The Soviets eventually learned how to understand the world: look for the shortest stories, read between the lines, connect the dots. The were good at it. Murkins are bereft of that talent because they don't think they need it. Propaganda? No, no, no! There's no propaganda in the USofA...

Doggiebobo @ 35:

POP@26: Did the report you saw indicate exactly who was firing...Georgian or
Russian military?

I don't remember if they told who was firing, I was so mesmerized with what I was watching that if they told, I missed it.

For some of those witnessing the fighting in the Caucasus over the past few days, the narrative is straightforward and easy. The plucky republic of Georgia, with just a few million citizens, was attacked by its giant eastern neighbour, Russia. Add to this all the stereotypes of the cold war era, and you are presented with a truly David and Goliath interpretation – with all its accompanying connotations of good and evil. While this version of events is being written in much of the western media, the facts present a different picture.

Let me be absolutely clear. This is not a conflict of Russia’s making; this is not a conflict of Russia’s choosing. There are no winners from this conflict. Hours before the Georgian invasion, Russia had been working to secure a United Nations Security Council statement calling for a renunciation of force by both Georgia and South Ossetians. The statement that could have averted bloodshed was blocked by western countries.

Last Friday, after the world’s leaders had arrived at the Beijing Olympics, Georgian troops launched an all-out assault on the region of South Ossetia, which has enjoyed de facto independence for more than 16 years. The majority of the region’s population are Russian citizens. Under the terms of the 1992 agreement to which Georgia is a party, they are afforded protection by a small number of Russian peacekeeping soldiers. The ground and air attack resulted in the killing of peacekeepers and the death of an estimated 1,600 civilians, creating a humanitarian disaster and leading to an exodus of 30,000 refugees. The Georgian regime refused to allow a humanitarian corridor to be established and bombarded a humanitarian convoy. There is also clear evidence of atrocities having been committed – so serious and systematic that they constitute acts of genocide.

There can be little surprise, therefore, that Russia responded to this unprovoked assault on its citizens by launching a military incursion into South Ossetia. No country in the world would idly stand by as its citizens are killed and driven from their homes. Russia repeatedly warned Tbilisi that it would protect its citizens by force if necessary, and its actions are entirely consistent with international law, including article 51 of the UN charter on the right of self-defence.

I have no idea what bush and cheney are saying now, but I have a feeling they are laughing when they say it.

Bush's tone of voice this morning when he was admonishing Putin and Russia was frightening because the son of a bitch sounded like if Putin didn't behave, he was going to regret it. I would not put it past bush to threaten even more as time goes by. This is his what, third or fourth statement he's made and in each one he sounds more menacing.

Seems to me we got humanitarian aid to Georgia faster then we got aid to the victims of Katrina. Maybe we had more notice that this was coming than notice of Katrina hitting the US. Just wondering.

The Russians btw, have fired on BBC journalists. That sort of happens when you stand around in a war zone.

Some might consider it an argument not to wander around a conflict zone.

Drumas@46: A good, clear, concise explanation of the situation in Georgia, BUT
NOT the one 90 percent of the MSM is reporting. Russia invaded, according to
those in the W/H and media, without provocations. Just more of the distored/
deceitful and misleading stories that our fine media(NOT just Faux Noise) is laying
upon us...

(hussein)moondancer @ 54:

We're forming the "Little Billy Kristol Brigade". We will march to Tblisi with Bill and then push him into the DMZ much like the ending of Stalag 17. Then home again.

Gotta love it!

drumas @ 46:

Let me be absolutely clear. This is not a conflict of Russia’s making; this is not a conflict of Russia’s choosing. There are no winners from this conflict. Hours before the Georgian invasion, Russia had been working to secure a United Nations Security Council statement calling for a renunciation of force by both Georgia and South Ossetians. The statement that could have averted bloodshed was blocked by western countries.

Can you help me find a source for this?

What would Cheney and McCain say about people understandably infuriated over being... oh, let's say, invaded and bombed... and taking that frustration out by firing at the invaders? Umm.... I'd have to say they would categorize the action as "self-defense" or "combat for a just cause" - something Obama may have read about but can never understand not having been there.

It's fascinating, really. Journalists "sitting down with Russian forces" - the same forces that poured over the border with infantry, armor, and attack aircraft - are somehow amazed that they might come under fire by people defending their homeland. Did anyone stop to think that just maybe the defenders were firing at the journalists' tea party mates, rather than at the journalists themselves?

That would be the difference between liberals and conservatives. Conservatives like McCain understand that the defense of freedom and homeland requires, at times, action. Liberals sit down to chat with the invaders and are amazed at the results.

Think this one through @ 59:

What would Cheney and McCain say about people understandably infuriated over being... oh, let's say, invaded and bombed... and taking that frustration out by firing at the invaders? Umm.... I'd have to say they would categorize the action as "self-defense" or "combat for a just cause" - something Obama may have read about but can never understand not having been there.

It's fascinating, really. Journalists "sitting down with Russian forces" - the same forces that poured over the border with infantry, armor, and attack aircraft - are somehow amazed that they might come under fire by people defending their homeland. Did anyone stop to think that just maybe the defenders were firing at the journalists' tea party mates, rather than at the journalists themselves?

That would be the difference between liberals and conservatives. Conservatives like McCain understand that the defense of freedom and homeland requires, at times, action. Liberals sit down to chat with the invaders and are amazed at the results.

Since when has McIdiot ever defended freedom?

They were'nt firing on journalists, they were firing on Americans.
You'd think, having pissed off virtually everyone in the world, you'd be used to it by now.
You might want to order your kevlar vests, you know, the ones made in China.

Dr.Britney@64: Nope, not yet, but they did imply that it's probably Bill Clinton's
fault.

Doggiebobo @ 58:

POP@49: Speaking of hurricanes, I see that "Fay" is forming in the Carribean
and heading your direction..

We're watching and hoping it goes somewhere but not here. Hopefully it will die a quick death.

.

People do realize that the break away province of Ossetia was under the protection of Russian forces when Georgia attacked FIRST. Georgian forces have attacked hospitals, civilians and residences. Russia acted to protect not only their troops guarding South Ossetia, but the people.

Yet, FOXPRAVDA reporters are attacked by Georgian forces and still this PropagandaFox attempts to call Russia... "THE ANGRY GIANT".

And still I see on many "progressive" blogs that mimic that meme, RUSSIA ATTACKS GEORGIA.

.

DemocracyNow! http://www.democracynow.org/2008/8/15/russia_georgia_conflict_fueled_by_...

"On Tuesday, a Russian cluster bomb strike in the town of Gori killed at least eight civilians including the Dutch journalist Stan Storimans. An Israeli journalist was seriously wounded in the same attack. Human Rights Watch said this is the first known use of cluster munitions since Israel’s attack on Lebanon in 2006."

Also,

"AMY GOODMAN: Michael Klare, I wanted to ask you about John McCain’s adviser, the controversy around Randy Scheunemann, part owner of the lobbying firm Orion Strategies, the Washington Post revealing Scheunemann briefed McCain before an April phone call with Georgian President Saakashvili, the same day Orion signed a $200,000 contract to advise Saakashvili’s government. Scheunemann then helped McCain draft a strong statement of support for Georgia. And Saakashvili has been talking directly to McCain, I mean, speaking through the press to McCain.

MICHAEL KLARE: Yes. It’s my impression that neoconservative circles in Washington have been egging Saakashvili on, have been telling him that he had much stronger support in Washington for this move, for this attack he made last week into South Ossetia, than he really did. I think, like so much else that’s happened in the past few years, there are really two foreign policy voices in Washington: the State Department voice of Condoleezza Rice and the Vice President’s Office and other elements around Dick Cheney that have a completely different foreign policy. And I wouldn’t be surprised if people around John McCain and Vice President Cheney weren’t telling Saakashvili that if he invaded South Ossetia, he would get much more support from the United States than in fact he did, and that this is what motivated him to provoke this clash, thinking that the US would come to his rescue. I have absolutely no evidence for that, but this kind of report that you just cited leads me to think that he went into South Ossetia last week with some sort of promises that never materialized."

Think this one through @ 74:

I'm not sure how you could interpret the comments above to imply that the journalists were liberals. Everyone knows that liberals never get that near a combat zone... Rather, the point was that liberals are still under the mistaken belief that frustrated hand-wringing and a fairly stern finger-wagging in the face of aggression will somehow deter it in the future. In contrast, conservatives understand that some actions on the part of aggressors mandate action.

By way of example, the blindingly inadequate response to the bombing of the Kolb by Billary deterred... oh wait, no it didn't. But then, he was sharing a cigar with a close acquaintance around then and had other things on his mind.

Fuck off, troll.

Embittered at 71 points out that South Ossetia was under the 'protection' of Russian forces...

True enough. But the argument that 'we conquered this territory by force a long time ago and systematically populated it with ethnic Russians so it's ours' is as specious an argument in the given scenario as it was when Americans conquered by force and populated the lands once belonging to the American Indians.

It was wrong and a shameful period in our own past. Why would we accept it as justification for armed aggression abroad?

Innuendo? Not at all. He banged her with a cigar. That was a flat-out statement of fact, not an implication.

Honestly, that was one of the rare things Bill did that the American people could actually agree with him on. I think most of us would rather ruin a perfectly good cigar with an unattractive intern than actually have to have sex with Hillary.

Think this one through @ 79:

Innuendo? Not at all. He banged her with a cigar. That was a flat-out statement of fact, not an implication.

Honestly, that was one of the rare things Bill did that the American people could actually agree with him on. I think most of us would rather ruin a perfectly good cigar with an unattractive intern than actually have to have sex with Hillary.

Clinton is not the subject of this thread. Again, get a life.

Hmm.... Better jump on doggiebobo. He brought him into way back at 67...

What would Cheney and McCain say to that? "Don't piss off the Georgians."

What would Obama say? "Get out of Georgia and move to Florida."

FOX NEWS SPECIAL REPORT:

"Join us for our in-depth special where we'll be showing how this conflict ties in to Bible prophecy about the end times..."

What would Obama say? Interesting question. Here's his statement:

"I strongly condemn the outbreak of violence in Georgia, and urge an immediate end to armed conflict. Now is the time for Georgia and Russia to show restraint, and to avoid an escalation to full scale war. Georgia's territorial integrity must be respected. All sides should enter into direct talks on behalf of stability in Georgia, and the United States, the United Nations Security Council, and the international community should fully support a peaceful resolution to this crisis."

Hmmm.... "Georgia's territorial integrity must be respected".... Wow. I hate to tell you guys, but that sounds an awful lot like the pro-Georgia, anti-Russia, getting-us-into-a-war, fanatical rhetoric that you're accusing McCain of. Maybe Obama really is trying to build a bi-partisan future - he's already saying the same things that McCain is, but you're just not as incensed by it coming from a different source.

So let me get this straight... Somehow the entire Russian armed response was orchestrated to point out what people already know - that McCain is more experienced in foreign policy matters.

That can't be right. Maybe you're saying that the Georgians were convinced to try and reclaim land originally theirs to coincide with the U.S. election, and...

No, that's just weird too. Especially when you throw in fascist media and mind-control and public brainwashing and...

You people can't be serious. Is the world that ominous, that you have to fabricate conspiracy theory at every turn of events around the world? And how do you keep up with all that's going on with all the tin-foil on your windows to protect you the secret government listening rays...?

Think this one through @ 77:

Embittered at 71 points out that South Ossetia was under the 'protection' of Russian forces...

True enough. But the argument that 'we conquered this territory by force a long time ago and systematically populated it with ethnic Russians so it's ours' is as specious an argument in the given scenario as it was when Americans conquered by force and populated the lands once belonging to the American Indians.

It was wrong and a shameful period in our own past. Why would we accept it as justification for armed aggression abroad?

IMO, I think who the territory belongs to is besides the point. As far as I know, even with 90% Russians, the Russian Federation has made no claims to the territory of south ossetia. The point as far I see is that 90% of the people in south ossetia are legally Russian citizens and they have legal obligations to defend them agaist criminal acts from other governments.

Suppose for example that US peace keepers in say Qurblackastan came under fire by the Qurblacky armed forces and they were shelling a summer camp full of US citizens. I think we'd be seeing a US military attack on Qurblackastan faster than we can say "qurblacky-style goulash".

If they were journalists, they weren't from Fox.

If they were from Fox, they weren't journalists.

Everyone knows Fox doesn't employ journalists.

Even the Georgians.

According to the non-mainstream news I've seen, it was Georgian troops that attacked South Ossentia first, see the links below. A few things to point out:
-US military and CIA have been training Georgian troops since 9/11
-There are pipeline implications in that region that Western countries want control over the Russians

Fox News censors 12 year-old American survivor of Georgia-Russia conflict

youtube link

And please go read the following: globalresearch.ca link

Drumas @47:
"The majority of the region’s population are Russian citizens. "

I agree with everything you said, except that this is a little misleading. (Correct, but misleading.) They were not Russian citizens until Russia gave them Russian passports. This was obviously meant to deter exactly this. Any aggression by the Georgian government against South Ossetia, which was now full of 'Russian citizens' as well as a handful of Russian peace keeping troops would give Russia no option but to intervene and protect Russians. It was a good idea, but unfortunately it didn't work, and the Georgian government called their bluff.

This is basically the flip side of the Kosovo war, this time with Russia cast in the role of the U.S., and the Georgians cast in the role of the Serbs.

'Think this one through' started out by blustering about Russian aggression in Georgia until somebody pointed out that it was started by Georgian aggression in South Ossetia, causing him to have to fall back on familiar cold war rhetoric about how the Georgian aggression is okay because it's a delayed response to the Soviets taking over Georgia and flooding it with Russians in the fist place. (An argument that's shaky for two reasons. First, because it's foolish to bring up Soviet expansionism as an excuse for Georgian aggression almost a CENTURY later, and second, because the people in question are not even ethnic Russians. They're Ossetians. True, the first thing they'd probably do if they were given independence is join Russia. But only to be reunited with the other Ossetians on the Russian side of the border.)

The bottom line is that the age of imperialism has left the age of democracy with a hell of a mess to clean up. It started with the liberation of Ireland from the British Empire, moved on to India, moved on to the liberation of the Balkans, the collapse of the Soviet empire, the invasion of Iraq, and now we're in to collapse of Soviet empire part II. This is a rerun of a really bad movie that we've all seen before, It's not going to stop any time soon! And it's always going to have the same ending.

There is only one way to deal with this situation, and stop this from happening in the future. The U.N. has to adopt a resolution recognizing the independence of any autonomous region in a country as a separate country once they've had a referendum/plebiscite showing majority support for independence. A vast majority of the South Ossetians voted for independence. If Georgia (and all members of the U.N.) had recognized this, none of this would have happened.

Pericles @99 categorizes historical claims to lands as 'cold war rhetoric' and calls for United Nations recognition of autonomous regions that vote for it.

Luckily, this resolution wasn't available in the 1880's, or the North American landscape would be significantly different.

Pericles @ 99:

Drumas @47:
"The majority of the region’s population are Russian citizens. "

I agree with everything you said, except that this is a little misleading. (Correct, but misleading.) They were not Russian citizens until Russia gave them Russian passports. This was obviously meant to deter exactly this. Any aggression by the Georgian government against South Ossetia, which was now full of 'Russian citizens' as well as a handful of Russian peace keeping troops would give Russia no option but to intervene and protect Russians. It was a good idea, but unfortunately it didn't work, and the Georgian government called their bluff.

South Ossetians wanted their 'Ossetian' ethnic group, they did not want to become citizens of Georgia. So joined Russia out of choice

Think this one through @ 100:

As to the 'censoring' of the 12-year old by the nasty evil Fox news...

1) The girl's last name is Kokoeva. Her aunt's name is Tedeeva. Both, by the way, are Russian surnames. Is it remotely possible that their perspective may be skewed by the fact the girl was there visiting her Russian family? Possibly.
2) Was it censoring to kick the soap-box out from under the aunt (incidentally, it was the aunt they cut away from, not the girl)? Or was it that they were trying to get the perspective of a kid caught in a very frightening scenario and the aunt proceeds to start into a speech about the root cause of the conflict?

I know. You all hate Fox. But at least don't sensationalize or blatantly fabricate while railing against them. Fox didn't 'censor a 12-year old'. They denied the aunt the ability to vent on TV.

They have Russian surnames because South Ossetia 90% Russian

*also censorship : The American-Ossetian girl, Amanda Kokoeva, after she stated that she was attacked by Georgian Forces and saved by the Russian Troops. This video also experienced multiple problems with the counters available on YouTube. The video rating and view count are not being updated and new comments are being deleted

They're conservatives of course they're running from combat. Still, Bush and Cheney ran faster than they did.

104 Think this one through Says
====================
One big SNORE.

Think this one through @ 91:

So let me get this straight... Somehow the entire Russian armed response was orchestrated to point out what people already know - that McCain is more experienced in foreign policy matters.

Bwahahaha! McBush cant keep his enemies straight, remember? The Iranians are training Al Qeada? And that is why we have to continue the debacle in Iraq. Or something.

McBush is clueless, and always has been, thats why he graduated 5th from the bottom of his class and readily admits he knows little about economics, his statements on foreign policy matters and his bluster about "100 years in Iraq" and that "there will be more wars, my friends" exposes this fraud, but unfortunately, John McCain gets a free pass from the press. That will likely never change.

Edwin Hussein, arugula lover @ 106:

If the Americans-in-charge (neocon scum) support Georgia, by learned and natural instinct, I think Russia must be in the right.

Call me crazy, but most of the world, outside the USA, agrees with me. If America supports it, it's wrong.

It's not a case of just assuming the opposite of the US stance is wrong (though that is likely a fair bet), the history vindicates Russia on this one, it's just the crap media in the US posturing and wanking off over themselves, and the people believing it, as usual.

, and the people believing it, as usual.

And that's the worst part of all of this and coverage of other conflicts in recent years...

embedded journeys in iraq....journeys in nam....and never once did we see that kind of bs until geraldo put himself in the middle of the action

that was the biggest buch of horseshit i have ever seen

and it was some fat guy with a pistol

But..I thought we were ALL Georgians now?

Dang!

Why do those Georgians have to be such lousy shots?

OK, so we have documented evidence of Georgian forces firing on journalists now but we're not supposed to believe they'd do this to other civilians because they're such freedom lovers?

Capt. Bat Hussein Guano @ 122:

In the end of the vid she mentions how they've been doing background EVEN BEFORE the outbreak of violence. Sounds like they wanted to have the official propaganda in the can before the attack encouraged by agents of the U.S. started up.

This tidbit starts at the 3:00 minute mark. They were doing background for months on this situation.

This is what happens when reporters get too used to reporting from the Green Zone and have to get footage from a real battlefield.

"They shot our Starbucks representative! You bastards!"

Jeon Ji-Yung @120 Says: I’m really trying to work up some sort of sympathy here for the reporters from Fox News. Without success.

To which I repost:

Jay Severin Has A Small Pen1s @ 70 Says: Okay. I’m gonna let you in on a little secret.

Don’t go into war zones unless you want to get shot at.

Kinda says it all doesn't it?

My god, how embarrassing to watch the liberals become apologists for Russias behavior in the Caucaus. Might as well cheer their butchering of the Chechens next. The russians are playing a classic imperialist game, support one tribe against the others. In this case its the Scythian/Ossetians against the Ingush, Chechens and Georgians.

How is that a good thing? In what universe? Hating Bush doesnt excuse everything.

And check out the Russians indiscrimitately strafing a bbc reporter in the middle of nowhere: http://news.videosift.com/video/BBC-Film-Crew-Under-Attack-Between-Russi...

"Spickle @ 113 says that the Russians are losing the propaganda war because they don’t know how to play the media game, then at 115 points to an HRW report that says the Russians are really helping (the ethnic Russians).

Sounds like they’re not completely unsavvy on how to handle the media.""""
-------------------

There are almost no ethnic russians in any of these places. The media calls them "russians" because russia gave them passports recently as a ploy. They don't speak Russian and are about as "russian" as the czechs.

Did they die? Hope so.

You know FOX could make a ton of money.
Send Shawn Hannity and Bill O over there
Make it a Pay Per View
I would pay to see that no editing allowed I wanna see in all it's glory.

bubba @ 129:

My god, how embarrassing to watch the liberals become apologists for Russias behavior in the Caucaus. Might as well cheer their butchering of the Chechens next. The russians are playing a classic imperialist game, support one tribe against the others. In this case its the Scythian/Ossetians against the Ingush, Chechens and Georgians.

How is that a good thing? In what universe? Hating Bush doesnt excuse everything.

And check out the Russians indiscrimitately strafing a bbc reporter in the middle of nowhere: http://news.videosift.com/video/BBC-Film-Crew-Under-Attack-Between-Russia-Georgia

I guess that there is no way to know if the pilot might have thought that maybe the camera man was holding a shoulder fired rocket luncher, Like the ones that shot down 6 or 12 other Russian fighters depending on whose reports you believe.
WAR ZONES are not film studio lots.

CMINCA @ 73:

An Israeli journalist was seriously wounded in the same attack. Human Rights Watch said this is the first known use of cluster munitions since Israel’s attack on Lebanon in 2006."

UNIFIL, the United Nations peace keeping force in southern Lebanon has been begging Israel for maps and charts of areas where they dropped cluster bombs so that UNIFIL could go in and clear them. Israel has refused such requests. All this despite the fact that the "ceasefire agreement" in 2006, which Israel agreed to sign, calls for just that, maps and charts to be given to UNIFIL.

So now, kids who venture off the beaten path and farmers working their fields in Lebanon can easily end up stepping on an unexploded bomb.

It's important to note that European countries have recently signed an agreement banning the use of cluster bombs in any future military conflicts. The use of cluster bombs is also illegal under international law. The U.S. refused to sign. Israel is not supposed to use cluster bombs as per the terms dictated by the U.S. when it sells them (gives them) to Israel. So, It could be argued that Israel was in breach of its agreement with the U.S. and in breach of international law. Alas, as usual, Congress held a hearing about Israel's use of the bombs, but did nothing.

Think this through, you need to take you own monikers advice.
You have no idea what you are talking about, here's what happened:

1) Georgia builds up it's military might with the help of the US.

2) Georgia, now feeling it's oats and supplied with US weaponry decides on a tactic:
a) Negotiate a ceasefire with S. Ossetia.
b) Abrogate that ceasefire.

3) As soon as the ceasefire is implemented Georgia attacks, invading S Ossetia.

4) S Ossetia asks for help from Russia, citing the murders of Russian peace keepers in S Ossetia.

5) Russia agrees to help and drives Georgia out of S Ossetia.

6) Russian troops ARE greeted with flowers and great happiness by the pro Russia S Ossetians.

7) Russia decides to make sure the new Georgian army is incapacitated for it's agression and continues far enough into Georgia to make it plain to Saakashvili that he should NOT have invaded S Ossetia.

8) The US and Georgian governments immediately start trying to rewrite the events in their favor and attempt to gain sympathy from an unsympathetic Europe.

9) You peeps in the US get propaganda and misinformation, and from what I am reading you believe it.

The Russians are righteous in their response, a response that is legal under the Geneva Conventions. The S Ossetians are VERY happy that Russia came in and ended this.
As for the Georgians, well, they invaded didn't they? They aren't supposed to be happy about getting stopped.

You really need to stop swallowing the Kool Aid your media feeds you. Not that a troll like you would ever do that.

Hmm... @ 141:

Stuff it with the spam, OK?

OOOPS!! My bad, you didn't cross post.
Sorry!

Valid points though, no one should call for the killing of anyone.
Barbaric behaviour that.

The BBC (via PBS last night) ran a clip of cinema verite by some Turkish journalists getting shot at by Russians in a car. Whole lot of screaming with bullets coming through the windshield. Couple of them got nicked but it could have been a lot worse and they had the piece of mind to lay the camera on the ground pointing toward their surrender.

Like Faux Noise is gong to have ANY truth to tell in that referenced story!