Comments for Rice: Military power 'not the way to deal in the 21st century »
Posted By tehranchik 1 year, 3 months ago in NewsIt's hardly news that the U.S., like many countries, espouses standards that it routinely violates, but still, even in light of such routine hypocrisy, wouldn't you think that this , from Condoleezza Rice today, on an airplane to U.S. reporters while traveling to a NATO meeting, would be too brazen to utter: Russia is a state that is unfortunately using the one tool that it has always used whenever it wishes to deliver a message and that's its military power. That's not the way to deal in the 21st century. Whatever one's views are on the justifiability of each isolated instance, it's simply a fact that the U.S. invades, bombs, occupies, and interferes in the internal affairs of other countries far more than any other country on the planet. It's not even a close competition.
Read Full Story at salon.com »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 63
-
95%
tehranchik1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The complete quote from Rice: "Russia is a state that is unfortunately using the one tool that it has always used whenever it wishes to deliver a message and that's its military power. That's not the way to deal in the 21st century."
Reply
The words out of these people's mouths (rice, bush, cheney, rumsfeld, and many other politicians) bring me to the point of disbelief.
Maybe they should explain to Russia what it is that we've been doing for the last several years. Then explain it to me.
It's ok for us to ruin other countries---we are the country with a big fat halo over our head.
Russia on the other hand is the country with horns and a pitchfork
I get it now!.-
64%
hyperbola1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Unfortunately the problem is more than just the Bush administration, even if they have been much more blatant.
Reply
International Criminal Tribunal: The US lied about Yugoslavia
The former chief prosecutor of the International Criminal Tribunal for Yugoslavia in The Hague, Carla Del Ponte, this year published her memoir The Hunt: Me and War Criminals. There was no genocide in Kosovo. The "holocaust" was a lie. The Nato attack was fraudulent.
http://www.propeller.com/story/2008/08/18/international-criminal-tribunal-the-us-lied-about-yugoslavia/-
100%
AnteUp1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I followed the link, hyperbola. Say it ain't so! I will be checking my
Reply
library for Carla Del Ponte's book. If what she says is true?
Well, I feel like I did when I found out that we didn't involve our
forces in South Vietnam to protect the South Vietnamese.
That was a LONG time ago - but it makes you wonder how
many times we have been purposefully mislead. What will
happen when the media plays ball with policy makers is
that many people will tune out. We will be incapable of sighting
the truth of the matter and prejudge it all as B.S.
Thank you for the link.
-
-
100%
UnusualSuspect1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I mean...what's going on here?
Reply
Last week McCain said there's no reason to use military might in the 21st Century, and now Condi Rice is echoing the same thing?
Is this a new strategy of some sort, an attempt to play with our minds? Or have they just gotten religion, and see the error of their past ways?
Very odd... -
100%
vor1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Don't hate Condi. she knows her history, she has some common sense. Her fault is that she has walked the neocon line in this administration. But ask yourself? "Did she have any real choice?" The State Department is literally powerless with Cheney around. Powell lost that fight years ago and simply gave up in frustration. And even as National Security Advisor Condi was under the thumb of these thugs. I watched an interview with her several years back where she was defending their actions and you could see she was clearly forcing her words. Any real student of history knows what a folly we have made of the Middle East. That we have no real democracy in Iraq and that when we leave they will return to their old ways. Never forget that Iraq is a British creation that never has truly worked. Three separate states asked to work as one.
Reply
This is not an ignorant woman rather an oppressed one. Interesting that the few logical voices in this administration are being heard only at the end. Read Fareed Zakaria's excellent summation of the situation in Newsweek, ironically titled "What Bush Got Right". One of the most sensible treatises on the issue I have read on the subject. Concise and to the point. Bush was never the core of the problem. The rotten part lies and still resides around the VP's office. Is it possible they are losing just abit of sway? We can't ignore issues like Soviet intrusion (ignoring them won't make them go away) but we have to develop sane responses.-
-
-
100%
vor1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You both are not incorrect. Perhaps someday her memoirs will clear up why she stayed. Maybe she thought she could make a difference. For seven years she has not. A sad story all around. It's easy to see this is a sensitive subject.
Reply
I found myself nearly defending a member of this administration something I would never have thought possible. Again I would read Zakaria's view on this if you want to understand why I would adopt such a position. I realize it is not easy to understand. But to take a black/white view of these issues is as bad as the neocon way. There are many subtle hues to all of these questions.
Trust me I will not be voting for McCain. Obama is a thinker as hard as the Right tries to misrepresent him. He understands the complexities.
-
-
100%
AnteUp1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Powell didn't have to play. He was a commander in the military.
Reply
Who would have a better understanding of the REAL costs of war
to our troops - a General? Yeah - and you should NEVER lead
them into a war under false pretenses. But that is exactly what Powell was doing at the U.N. - presenting evidence he did not believe. But he sentenced all those Americans - men and women - boys and girls - plus thousands of Iraqis to the horrors of war. WHAT? Because he didn't want to make a fuss? He was not appointed to that Cabinet post because of loyalty to Bush, but supposedly because of his experience. I thought it was his expertise in affairs of State that counted - NOT his ability - or willingness - to PLAY politics.-
Neutral
vor1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Note that Powell has long said he was surprised to see the bio weapons info provided by Curveball re-inserted into his speech. What was he to do at that point? Of course he could have stopped and redacted what he had just said. That would have been a pretty incredible thing to do. But Powell was always a loyal soldier. I can't imagine having to live with that on my conscience as he must.
Reply
Like Condi I wonder if he will ever reveal his true feelings on the neocons. He has certainly hinted at his distate for their policies. I have real mixed feelings about the man. He could have changed history. But would anyone have really listened at that point? Don't forget that Bush's approval ratings were sky high at the time of the speech. The war drums had been sounded.-
100%
AnteUp1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
How can I say this - I would LIKE to have liked Powell.
Reply
See - even you used the term "loyal soldier" - LOYAL to whom?
At this point the best Powell could even hope to do is tell
it to the dead and wounded. He helped put a ball in motion
that continues to this day. Even in a just war, the price of
freedom is beyond belief for most who have not served
during a time of war. For those that survive and return to their
homes? It does not end - the memories last a lifetime.
I think Lawrence Wilkerson has written much under his own
name that is probably very close to what Powell thinks -
but Lawrence Wilkerson's statements didn't put a bow
on GW's gift of war in 2003 - it was Powell's. I agree and
for some reason almost feel sorry that he has so much
to deal with - but the bottom line is, he should have known
better. The importance of getting it right - BEFORE shock and
awe - cannot be overstated.-
-
100%
AnteUp1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I know. I really have thought about Powell's role in this a lot. He was aware - like none of us could be - of the type of people he was dealing with in the White House.
Reply
I've wondered if the desire to run for the office of the Presidency didn't play a part in his decisions. He IS a registered Republican.
How much support could he count on from the GOP if he publically bucked or embarrassed Bush? Even making waves could have been fatal to a career in politics that I feel he still regrets not reaching for.
Just the musings of a housewife - but I think he HAD potential.
I think he will live out his days regretting the decisions he made.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
93%
miklkit1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Bush, Rice, and McCain are all saying the same thing. Who is their puppeteer? They are acting just like businessmen. They have no morals or conscience, and don't know or care if they are lying. One would think they could remember Iraq and Somalia.
Reply -
-
-
92%
gamahuche1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Russia is a state that is unfortunately using the one tool that it has always used whenever it wishes to deliver a message and that's its military power. That's not the way to deal in the 21st century."
Reply
On her way to or from Poland to sign the deal to install a battery of US missiles aimed at Russia.-
10%
Georgia501 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You don't aim anti-missile batteries at ground targets. You aim them at incoming missiles.
Reply
If memory serves, it was a Democrat president who gave Russia the idea they had some say in Eastern Europe. That was his reward to Stalin for splitting Poland with Hitler and slaughtering unarmed Polish officers. You'll have to excuse us while we fix this historical wrong, and keep your Winnie The Pooh foreign policy on hold for the time being.
Too bad...Obama might have had a chance for the White House. Who knew Putin would cast the determining vote?
Oh...and just to **** in your cornflakes, Poland is free. We know how much that bothers you liberals. You'll just have to live it....you know...like the Poles do.-
-
100%
Natureboy1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Poland has gravitated towards fascism, so much that they were nearly sanctioned by the EU for it -
Reply
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/poland/1522202/Ghetto-survivor-warns-of-Polish-'fascism'.html -
90%
Charlson1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
And if Russia were to build missile batteries on Cuba for purely defensive reasons and aimed at missles in the air targeting Russia or countries it has treaties with, you'd be okay with that? Oh, I forgot, they tried that and we nipped that in the bud. And that was done by a democrat president, too.
Reply-
33%
Georgia501 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There's a huge difference b/t the installation of missiles for ostensibly defensive purposes and the installation of purely defensive missiles. Russia has never contemplated the installation of purely defensive missiles in Cuba, and I have absolutely no problem with them doing so. If they want to waste millions defending that wasteland...let 'em go for it.
Reply -
100%
AnteUp1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Precisely , Charlson. We would have to be in a world of hurt
Reply
if our intelligence agencies didn't know that when, and if, the
Poles yielded to our pressure on the missle shield - the
tensions with Russia might heighten.
Big surprise - the tormented dog bites back! We've been ratcheting
up the tensions in the Caucasus for years. But why did we pull
this particular stunt right now? Could our elections be playing
a part? Oh - they wouldn't be THAT devious - would they??
-
-
PsychoHosebeastComment removed: Spammer, Abusive
-
75%
vor1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Poland is free. We know how much that bothers you liberals."
Reply
Yes, this really keeps me awake at night. Will let you know how Poland really is in a few weeks.
So it is Roosevelt's fault that he trusted in a man who then showed no honor? You cons kill me. You seem to forget that Bush did the same with Putin.
To quote GW Bush on Putin from June 2001:
"I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straight forward and trustworthy and we had a very good dialogue. "
"I was able to get a sense of his soul."
"He's a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country and I appreciate very much the frank dialogue and that's the beginning of a very constructive relationship," Mr Bush said. "
Maybe that will send you back to your cave for awhile. -
100%
lbrtyordeath1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Stupid and irrelevant.
Reply
If memory serves, the face of both the Democratic and Republican parties has changed a LOT since the 1940's.
I doubt the conflict in Russia is going to rob Obama of his White House bid...
And as for your last two sentences....WTF? I'm not even going to bother trying to figure out what kind of point you're trying to make. RELEVANCE?
Stupid.
-
-
-
89%
AnteUp1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA [emphasis added, mine]:
Reply
".....every national politician must demonstrate their willingness, even EAGERNESS, to start wars.
Doesn't the idea that America is EAGER for war disturb the Right? This eagerness -
and I have HEARD it from BOTH sides - has nothing to do with defense or security.
Hey - we may not be goose-stepping but we ARE tromping around the globe inserting
ourselves and meddling in scores of countries. Getting rid of Guinea Worm or River
Blindness? Spreading Democracy where the least influential person is entitled to
just as much say in their government as the wealthiest and most powerful? NO.
We are TRYING to stir up trouble to advance an agenda that will facilitate the reins
of those countries being placed in the hands of the richest individuals and the most
powerful corporations.
WHAT does that have to do with Liberty - Freedom - Democracy?
I love Glenn Greenwald's columns - great submission, tehranchik! -
0%
TonyByron1 year, 3 months ago
-
-
88%
AnteUp1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Well TonyBryon ~
Reply
I would appreciate your perspective on what took place - Aug. 8th (?) that Thursday night when Georgian forces attacked inside South Ossetia.
That's plain and simple. I am not asking about Friday when Putin left the Olympics and Russian forces joined the conflict. What exactly was Georgia doing Thursday? What did they hope to accomplish? There were NO Russian troops outside the autonomous region of South Ossetia at that time - they had Peace Keepers inside South Ossetia - as did the South Ossetians and Georgia.
Come on - Georgia got this wild hair on Thursday and moved their troops and their tanks up to and into South Ossetia - Tell me PLEASE.
What was that all about?
And the "Devil (Russians) MADE them do it" -
won't work.-
PsychoHosebeastComment removed: Spammer, Abusive3 Replies
-
0%
TonyByron1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There is no doubt Georgia made a mistake in attacking the Russian-backed rebels in South Ossetia. They should have first appealed to the UN to revise the (Russian) peace-keeping force there. And keep in mind that S. Ossetia is part of Georgia, not Russia.
Reply
I believe president Saakashvili was provoked into an ill-advised crackdown on South Ossetian separatists by an upsurge in violence there that was backed by Russia. The Russians were obviously ready to invade Georgia as evidenced by the amount of troops and armor that immediately rolled across the border. I also believe Russia provoked the conflict as an excuse to invade and gain control of the oil and gas pipelines to further enhance its control of energy supplies.-
100%
AnteUp1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"made a mistake"?? - Georgia has been the recipient of billions
Reply
in military equipment and training from Uncle Sam for at least
as far back as 2002. Our involvement has been doing nothing but increasing since then. I watched a three-part Real News interview
with F. William Engdahl that said we have 1,000 special forces
and military advisors ON THE GROUND in Georgia.
(Plus, 1,000 Israeli military and private contractors who's
participation has been approved by their Foreign Ministry -
but I KNOW you don't want to hear about that.)
They were all perhaps taking a nap on Thursday night?
We KNEW what was going to happen and must have given
the nod to Saakashvili. If , on the other hand, we had NOT
wanted this conflict to occur...................it never would have
happened.
-
-
-
-
100%
AnteUp1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
No international scholar here - but yeah, I'll take a stab at it. Quit backing Russia into a very unfriendly corner and forcing them
Reply
to act defensively. Our actions are certainly not designed to calm the situation. Putin is a terrible leader - no friend to anyone, including
his own people.
But tell me - where is it you think the USA holds the moral high-ground these days?
KGB or CIA? There's enough "wet work" out there to keep the Dark Side busy for decades. It makes it a lot easier for us to confront the rogues of other nations if we have some semblence of the
nation we believed in and were proud of returned to us.
-
-
-
100%
TheNewsseeker1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Unfortunately, America does exactly what Mrs. Rice is accusing Russia of at the moment. How right she is, when she states that military intervention is not the politics of the 21th century.I hope, Mr. Bush and Mr. Mc Cain did listen! Naturally, it is worth every critique, how Russia behaved in Georgia, but what about Kuwait , Iraq and Afghanistan? The Caucasian conflict has shown to us Russia´s dark side, the fight against efforts of separation by all means, but if America had acted like "we do in the 21th century", the world would be better off now!
Reply-
25%
Georgia501 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If you want to draw a parallel between Putin and Bush, you must first establish that:
Reply
Russia/S. Ossetia/Georgia = Iraq
How about you liberals start with all the summary executions and rape rooms that must surely exist in Georgia if your parallel is to fly.
Then add to the bouquet with Georgia/al-Qaeda connections, like Saddam had.
For a bold finish, explain to us how the Georgian leader--like Saddam--was participating in international terror outside his borders.-
-
100%
lbrtyordeath1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It's been thoroughly debunked that Saddam hussein was not engaging in international terror.
Reply
Try using some facts that date after 2005.
You act like summary executions and rape rooms are the reason we went into Iraq?
What about the genocide that's been going on for YEARS in Africa?
Why aren't we there on our white horses slaying the evil-doers?
ANSWER: THERE ARE NO RESOURCES WORTH FIGHTING FOR THERE.
Chew on that one for a while.
-
-
-
0%
lloydm651 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Selective use of ones brain,I believe Clinton thought he was doing the right according to the info fed to him.See how that works,even though it was wrong the democrats lay claim to a great victory.There was massive amount of destruction,hospitals apartment complexes,power plants levaled.We have never permanently ocupied a country.We have set more people free around the world than any other country.I believe thats what stick in the craw of the ELITE media ,they consider themselves neutral.
Reply -
-
83%
allasam1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
... from Rice: "Russia is a state that is unfortunately using the one tool that it has always used whenever it wishes to deliver a message and that's its military power. That's not the way to deal in the 21st century."
Reply
Is this reptilian shape-shifter living on Earth? Is she in any way SANE? Does she know where the US is? Does the word Iraq mean anything to her?
... from McCain: "Countries don't invade countries in the 21st century."
and someone would consider actually voting for this old twit? He belongs in a home but NOT the White House.
just incredible! -
83%
cleare1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
the hypocrisy coming from the bush administration is giving me gastro-intestinal distress. this is truly a case of the pot calling the kettle black, or as a former boyfriend once said, " When you point a finger at someone, there are three fingers pointing back at you".
Reply
no doubt russia is aggressive. i'm half estonian and we have our own border issues with russia, but the US is every bit as culpable. pre-emptive warfare is a very bad idea, and i'm very worried about this game of "russian roulette" we're playing in poland.
i'm sick and tired of threats and posturing rather than negotiation, especially when you really haven't any realistic power to back up the threat. i'm fed up with "zip - flop", mine is bigger than yours, testosterone driven foreign policies.-
Neutral
TonyByron1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"i'm sick and tired of threats and posturing rather than negotiation,..."
Reply
Did Russia do any negotiations before invading Georgia? Please stop the stupid attempts to equate Russia with the US. The UN "negotiated" with Iraq for 12 years before a coalition of countries finally put an end to saddam's barbaric regime.-
100%
cleare1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
so according to you, if "they" do it, it's ok for us to do it???
Reply
the un negotiated and would have continued...finally to discover that iraq DID NOT have WMD. instead, we formed a policy of preemptive war and formed a coalition of "the willing"...which DID NOT negotiate with iraq.
i think you have a warped view of recent history.
-
-
83%
richsmith551 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
It is okay that we blow the hell out of Iraq looking for wepons of mass destruction but Rice tells Russia that military power is not the way to deal with problems in the 21st century. I have heard from military people coming back from Iraq that they expect to be sent to Iran for the next war. We need to stay home and mind our own business and take care of our elders and the people who had to fight to make this country free.
Reply-
-
-
100%
lbrtyordeath1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What do you think's going on in Darfur? Get real. You can talk about how bad Saddam was all you want, but when it comes down to it, deep down inside your little neo-con soul (if you haven't already sold it to Exxon) you know that we went to Iraq to protect our interests. Not to liberate a people.
Reply
It's a scary thing that our government can say "The war in Iraq? It's not for oil or a regional presence! It's to liberate those poor Iraqi people!" and some people actually buy it.
Sad.
-
-
100%
AnteUp1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
richsmith55 ~
Reply
They expect to be sent to Iran for the next war?
Well they had better be ready to don radiation protective suits.
I read that Bush met with Netanyahu at the King David Hotel when he visited Israel. Though the meeting was not covered by the press, Netanyahu gave Israeli Radio the gist of the meeting. He told Bush that Israel was going to NUKE Iran - and (according to Bibi) Bush was okay with that.
Not to worry THEN - ah, but NOW Benjamin Netanyahu is the front runner in
the Israeli contest for Prime Minister. Now.............I AM worried. NUKES??
If Iran had their thinking cap on - they'd place their CIVILIAN nuclear facilities
near their pipelines and refineries. That would assure some measure of
safety, at least from an air assault. Enemies would be forced to put boots
on the ground to force regime change and PRIVATIZE their resources.-
100%
AnteUp1 year, 3 months ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Plus - from Israeli newspapers I read speculation about the strike
Reply
being planned for December - how glorious for Hagee and Robertson
who have PRAYED for the bombing of Iran. What a Holiday Season!
A concern I have is that DECEMBER would mean the attack would
take place during that mysterious little time period I have fretted about
in previous posts - AFTER we elect our new President but BEFORE
he would be inaugurated (January '09).
-
-
-
loading ...
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.