2
POPSNuclear smackdown in New Europe
Medvedev also sees the war in South Ossetia as symptomatic of a larger and more deeply-rooted problem. Medvedev: “A barbaric aggression against South Ossetia and the global financial crisis – two very different problems which nevertheless have common traits and a common origin...A local reckless enterprise provoked a rise of tensions far behind the region’s borders, in the whole of Europe, in the whole world. It called into question the efficiency of international security institutions and practically destabilized the basics of the world order. The lessons of mistakes and crises of 2008 proved to all the responsible nations that it is the time to act, and it is necessary to radically reform the political and economic system." Medvedev is right. The present architecture for global security needs to be thoroughly revamped as does the global financial system. Unilateralism, preemption and the Bush Doctrine have only made the world a more dangerous place. So, too, Wall Street's disp
8
POPSThe End of International Law? "The military argument is that "you can only claim sovereignty if you enforce if," said Anthony Cordesman, a military analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "When you are dealing with states that do not maintain their sovereignty and become a defacto sanctuary, the only way you have to deal with them is this kind of operation," he said.
0
POPS“A Second 9/11″: An Integral Part of US Military Doctrine Seems to me such talk is only a sign of an act that would be known about in advance reminiscent of Pearl Harbor which strangely enough Paul Wolfawitz said was needed to happen to get us involved with this amazing want of oil in the MiddleEast thus 911.. Saying that our Govt. has sold us out and is in with both 911 and any attack thereafter.. If you think I'm wrong you better do some reading and make sense of what our govt. has done to prevent and investigate 911.
2
POPSThe 'unitary executive' question
"Bush's aggressive exercise of unilateral powers has attracted serious opposition. Unfortunately, too many imagine that the unitary executive doctrine and its kingly prerogatives will leave office with him. That hope is false. History teaches that presidents do not give up power -- both Democrats and Republicans have worked to keep it. And besides, hoping the next president will give back some powers means conceding that it is up to him to make that decision." "If people have found Bush's exercise of executive power alarming, they should not only begin questioning presidential candidates about it, they should make it clear to their congressional representatives that they want these excess powers checked. Barack Obama has already promised that he will continue using signing statements, though he will not act as if they have the force of law. Interestingly enough, John McCain has suggested he will end the practice. These slim indicators deserve more pressure and scrutiny."
4
POPSThe Debate: I Learn Something New Every Day Apparently 95% of us will need to sacrifice by enjoying Barack's tax cut and new health care plan but some will sacrifice by paying more in taxes. Raising taxes to battle a recession - well, you can't say Obama lacks for original ideas. THE OBAMA DOCTRINE: Obama asserts that America has a moral obligation to intervene with force in certain foreign circumstances and cites the Holocaust. His gist - if we could have intervened effectively to prevent the Holocaust we should have. Hmm - many have argued that the rail lines to Auschwitz were within range of US bombers yet Roosevelt did nothing. Both George Bush and George McGovern think Roosevelt erred - $79 BILLION: Obama was wrong about the Iraqi budget surplus at the last debate and he is still wrong.
7
POPSCould Palin possibly leave the ticket? Joan Walsh, editor of Salon Magazine online, makes some very wisely observant points about the Palin candidacy, and what a sickeningly cynical choice it was for McCain to pick her as his running-mate.
0
POPSSolid Praise of Ron Paul I am not a fan of Pat Buchannan. But he is right about Ron Paul. Few Republicans have had the courage to stand up for this man of honor and ideological honesty. We probably have not heard the last from Dr. Paul - we can only hope the younger generation will pick up th torch he is passing!
7
POPSThe Palin-Whatshisname Ticket "The same Republicans who attack Democrats for being too P.C. about race now howl about sexism with such abandon you half-expect Phyllis Schlafly and Carly Fiorina to stage a bra-burning. The same gang that once fueled Internet rumors and media feeding frenzies over the Clintons’ private lives now express pious outrage when the same fate befalls the Palins. But the ultimate hypocrisy is that these woebegone, frightened opponents of change, sworn enemies of race-based college-admission initiatives, are now demanding their own affirmative action program for white folks applying to the electoral college. They want the bar for admission to the White House to be placed so low that legitimate scrutiny and criticism of Palin’s qualifications, record and family values can all be placed off limits."
2
POPSThe Bush Doctrine: Preventive, Not Pre-emptive War While Krauthammer (neoconservative columnist) desperately covers for Palin in the aftermath of the ABC Gibson interview Robert Schlesinger gets it right. Palin and Gibson were both wrong, and Palin not even close. His playground analogy makes it clear and that the neocons have confused "pre-emptive war" with "preventive" demonstrates the difference between just and unjust war. For the record, Charles Gibson didn't get the Bush Doctrine right either. But at least, unlike Sarah Palin, he had an idea of what he was talking about (a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy for the last six years). Read the full article. Recall Ron Paul's excellent line in the republican debates about America's greatest moral problem: "We in the past have always declared war in the defense of our liberties or go to aid of somebody... But now we have accepted the principle of preemptive war — we have rejected the Just War theory of Christianity. [/q
2
POPSCharles Gibson's Gaffe Charles Krauthammer I was the first to use the term. In the cover essay of the June 4, 2001, issue of the Weekly Standard entitled, "The Bush Doctrine: ABM, Kyoto, and the New American Unilateralism," I suggested that the Bush administration policies of unilaterally withdrawing from the ABM treaty and rejecting the Kyoto protocol, together with others, amounted to a radical change in foreign policy that should be called the Bush Doctrine. Until Iraq. A year later, when the Iraq war was looming, Bush offered his major justification by enunciating a doctrine of preemptive war. This is the one Charlie Gibson thinks is the Bush doctrine. It's not. It's the third in a series and was superseded by the fourth and current definition of the Bush doctrine, the most sweeping formulation of the Bush approach to foreign policy and the one that most clearly and distinctively defines the Bush years.
0
POPSNewbie Knows Best? Palin gets a C+ for clarity in her answers and a B- for delivery. It's obvious political leaders rehearse before media interviews, it's just not supposed to come off as such. Overall, not bad for her first big-time hit.
1
POPSMore on The War in Georgia It should be clear by now, the EU slept at the wheel, US egged Saakashvili on, Russia responded with a vengeance. There is no just war, and never has been, never will be.
3
POPSI never thought I would see an anti-soldier veterans group comments from article. * Should have added (4.00 / 1) 'gathering of eagles' and now this offshoot 'eagles up' were formed mostly to continue the blantant Spitting on Kerry, Cleland, and Us 'Nam Vets that don't tow the bushy doctrine, most aren't conflict veterans, many aren't even veterans, though they'll wear colors, patches, etc.. Their main claims of support, if you visit their sites, is doing 'battle' with 'code pink' and crowing about it' mostly false bullshit, I've caught them on a number of times putting up crap of incidents with ''code pink' and 'pro peace' activists they're crowing about and I was witness to. And Boy do they Hate OIF and OEF soldiers that don't tow the same bushy doctrine, reason they're big supporters of VFF and the mercs!!!!!!
1
Pops
Newest Clips
Latest Comments
Most Pops
Print
Save
Turn on live update