Quote from a_person:
My point is not that the US is obligated to do anything, my point is the hypocrisy. The US under Bush, or any other neocon for that matter, would never go to war for world peace and justice, they only go to war for lobbyist demands which is part profit and part religious ideology (your messiah will come to Israel soon, just keep the Arabs out!!!!). Although I think your IQ has to be at least 48 to get my message.
And other than being a boring anti-american rant what does it have to do with the situation in Georgia? What exactly do you want the US to do? I asked this question in my previous post and you failed to answer.
You don't find me boring, you follow me wherever I post and respond to my comments. Either you're actually afraid of my influence and feel you need to stop it, or you find me entertaining. Since this is a freaking internet debate and no one is really influential, it's gotta be the latter.
The US is powerless in this one, there's really not much they can do. Option one is giving Georgia the kind of support they give to other allies like Israel, by giving them all kinds of intelligence information, military supplies and additional continual resupplies throughout the war, and maybe even direct support. By choosing this option, the world would see that the US is consistent in ethics and loyal to allies. The big risk would be war with Russia which they clearly can't afford with troops already spread thin in Iraq and Afghanistan. Worst case scenario would be all-out war which the US probably would have won, but not without sustaining damages they might not be able to recover from. Option two is the path Bush seems to be taking, which is just sitting on their hands letting the Russians do whatever they feel like. When comparing this solution to other affairs the US has been involved in, it clearly shows a glowing hypocrisy. But at least the outcome will be better for the rest of the world - for now. The Russians are testing their limits. Who knows what they will do once they realize how powerful they actually are.
Quote from a_person:
They (not you, you don't represent the US), are not providing any military assistance
Since early 2002, the U.S. government has given a healthy amount of military aid to Georgia. When I last visited South Ossetia, Georgian troops manned a checkpoint outside Tskhinvali -- decked out in surplus U.S. Army uniforms and new body armor.
http://blog.wired.com/defense/2008/08/did-us-military.html
Your level of stupidity is amazing.
Quote from a_person:
nor any financial assistance
USAID has provided over $1 billion in humanitarian and development aid to Georgia since assistance began in 1992.
http://georgia.usembassy.gov/usaid2.html
You seem to have misunderstood. We're not talking about what the US has given anybody throughout history, of course they have given them some material and a couple of bucks. If they hadn't, Russia would probably not care about Georgia at all. That is not to say the conflict is the US' fault, it's simply one of the causes; Russia does not like US involvements at their doorsteps.
But no, we're talking about aid in this conflict, aid in winning the conflict that just started with Russia. No such aid has been given, and I highly doubt it will be given, because US bullets killing Russian soldiers would really aggravate the Russians, and the US does not want that.
When certain other allies of the US has been at war, the US has provided tons of weapons, ammunition resupplies, major financial aid, invaluable intel, endless diplomatic support in the UN, etc. on top of regular aid like what you have documented here.
Point is, while Georgia has received aid up until the war, there will be no more until Russia has won. Because when certain other US allies are in trouble, if the Washington politicians doesn't do everything in their power to help, they might lose their jobs. When Georgia is in trouble however, which is one of the most loyal allies the US has had lately, everybody is best served by leaving them to do their own fighting.
Quote from a_person:
as far as we know.
Who are "we" and why are you so ignorant? I presume you are still talking on behalf of the arab street you belong to, right?
The worst part is, you're calling me an arab like it's supposed to offend me or reduce my credibility. I've told you several times that a) I'm Scandinavian (Norwegian), and b) my background is irrelevant because I'm not asking for any free credibility. So why this obsession? Why do you feel the need to point it out all the time? You do know that I can prove who I am quite easily?
