Will Russia be kicked out of the G8?

[AngusThermopyle]

Condi Rice was and is a paper tiger with her soggy butt reaking of poo.

Could you supply a link or cite verifying this?

[August1991]

Seven of the world's leading industrialised nations have jointly condemned Russia's decision to recognise Georgia's breakaway regions.

Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the US and UK said Moscow's recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia violated Georgia's integrity and sovereignty.

Earlier, the UK's foreign secretary said Western countries should re-examine their relations with Russia.

David Miliband also warned Russia not to start a new Cold War.

Speaking during a visit to Ukraine, Mr Miliband said Moscow had not reconciled itself with the new map of the region and that the West should should look at ways to reduce its dependence on Russian oil and gas.

Russia said it was the last country that wanted a new Cold War.

BBC

It's impossible not to conclude that Russia just uninvited itself to the G8 (soon-to-be G7) in Italy next year. In the past, some might have argued against needlessly provoking Russia. Those arguments are now meaningless.

Sad. Putin started out with alot of goodwill based on Gorbachev and Yeltsin. In fact, Putin appears to be a vulgar, small-minded man. And Russia once again is in the thralls of a one-man show.

Edited August 28, 2008 by August1991

[PoliticalCitizen]

BBC

It's impossible not to conclude that Russia just uninvited itself to the G8 (soon-to-be G7) in Italy next year. In the past, some might have argued against needlessly provoking Russia. Those arguments are now meaningless.

Sad. Putin started out with alot of goodwill based on Gorbachev and Yeltsin. In fact, Putin appears to be a vulgar, small-minded man. And Russia once again is in the thralls of a one-man show.

Sad indeed. The whole NATO appears to be a one-man show. There were reports of US envoys that instructed countries - members of NATO on how it is correct to react to the Georgian conflict. Uncle Sam sais BARK!! - Bow, wow, wow... Why was Schroder replaced with Merkel? Why was Chirac replaced with Sarkozi? They dared having their own opinions, even barked up the wrong tree sometimes...

Russia, on the other hand, is not forcing any country to recognize Abkhazia or South Ossetia. They believe governments are intellingent enough to make their own decisions.

What's even sadder is that members of this forum - who are mostly thinking people - accept the polarization that your "free" press gives to anything it reports as natural.

Just think about it for a second...

Iraqi "INSURGENTS" (not fighters for the liberation of their homeland)

Palestinian "TERRORISTS" (not fighters for the liberation of their homeland)

Russian "AGGRESSION" (not defence of civilian citizens)

War on "TERROR" (not civilians, not local population, not DELIBERATE AGGRESSION AND CONTINUED OCCUPATION OF SOVEREIGN COUNTRIES")

Black and White...

[August1991]

Sad indeed. The whole NATO appears to be a one-man show.

Huh? NATO a one-man show?

Bush will be gone in January 2009.

But Putin will still be around, dictating and ensuring "Russian stability". Russia is now a one-man show. Russia's "stability" is based on the life of one man. It is pathetic that some Russians foolishly believe that Putin offers stability. Without Putin, is Russia unstable?

True stability is not based on one person. Stability means naturally returning to an equlilibrium despite a shock. Under Putin, Russia is once again unstable - and poor and weak.

When Yeltsin resigned and named Putin as president in 1999/2000, Putin's elderly father in St-Petersburg said that his son had become a Tsar. At the time, I understood an old man's statement. In fact, the father was prescient. His son has the ambition to bear the burden of the State. That's hardly a stable situation.

Edited August 29, 2008 by August1991

[PoliticalCitizen]

Huh? NATO a one-man show?

Bush will be gone in January 2009.

Not literally one man, and Bush Jr. less than anybody... but the collective brain behind his administration, making all the other NATO countries dance to its tune.

You and others keep saying "Bush will go" as if it changes anything. Absolutely nothing will change and things can only become worse if McCain wins. Whatever complications happen now can only play into Republicans' hand (We told you we're at war! We told you they're the enemy! Now you need us and our militaristic politics even more!)

But frankly, I'm not sure if Barak will have the desire, the gut or the possibility to really change things around. It started before Bush Jr., during Clinton time - that's when NATO bombed Serbia.

As Paul Wolfowitz said: "We've got to take the war to the enemy. We've got to keep surprising the enemy with things that they're not expecting." And of course, with this kind of foreign policy there will be more and more "enemies", and then more "terrorists" trying to defend their homeland.

But Putin will still be around, dictating and ensuring "Russian stability". Russia is now a one-man show. Russia's "stability" is based on the life of one man. It is pathetic that some Russians foolishly believe that Putin offers stability. Without Putin, is Russia unstable?

True stability is not based on one person. Stability means naturally returning to an equlilibrium despite a shock. Under Putin, Russia is once again unstable - and poor and weak.

When Yeltsin resigned and named Putin as president in 1999/2000, Putin's elderly father in St-Petersburg said that his son had become a Tsar. At the time, I understood an old man's statement. In fact, the father was prescient. His son has the ambition to bear the burden of the State. That's hardly a stable situation.

At least with Putin you know who exactly is running the country. He's not a puppet manipulated by shadowy figures linked to oil and weapons production. He's calling the shots. He's been running the country for over 8 years and so far - so good. Let's see where the recent escalation takes us...

Oh yeah - he's also not afraid to speak directly to Western media (as in give exclusive interviews), and speaks his mind.

He has not changed constitution like Lukashenko to stay President indefinitely, so at least he makes an honest effort to play by the "democratic" rules.

[bush_cheney2004]

At least with Putin you know who exactly is running the country. He's not a puppet manipulated by shadowy figures linked to oil and weapons production. He's calling the shots. He's been running the country for over 8 years and so far - so good. Let's see where the recent escalation takes us...

This makes a lot of sense...Russia needs a dictator to keep the trains on time...just like Benito.

No wonder Russia still sucks.

From Russia With Love or Where Smiles Go to Die

Edited August 29, 2008 by bush_cheney2004

[PoliticalCitizen]

This makes a lot of sense...Russia needs a dictator to keep the trains on time...just like Benito.

No wonder Russia still sucks.

From Russia With Love or Where Smiles Go to Die

Benito was a little kid compared to Stalin (who was referred to as "Father of Nations" and "Leader of World's Proletariat").

Russia sucks less than any post-USSR republic (with the exception of the Baltic states).

About smiles - it's actually pretty scary... nobody smiles...

[PoliticalCitizen]

As all of you may have read - so far Russia got a "slap on the wrist" from the EU summit.

Let's see what happens next...

[August1991]

Let's see what happens next...

What happens next? Russia becomes even more irrelevant.

"Russia's invasion of Georgia has achieved -- and will achieve -- no strategic objective," Rice said. "Russia's leaders will not accomplish their primary war aim of removing Georgia's government. And our strategic goal now is to make it clear to Russia's leaders that their choices are putting Russia on a one-way path to self-imposed isolation and international irrelevance."

The United States and Europe will stand up to Russia and not allow it to bully or threaten its neighbors, she said.

CNN

[PoliticalCitizen]

What happens next? Russia becomes even more irrelevant.

CNN

Wow...

A quote from RICE herself (the Great Prophet of Democracy, Defender of Truth and Justice and Bringer of Freedom)?

Then Russia is surely doomed...

[Topaz]

IF Russia is kicked out of the G8 for invading, what does that say about the US??? If the phrase "Can't ALL get along?" needs to be said it certainly does here.

[Rue]

At least part of Harper's absence in Bejing must relate to China's intereference in other countries affairs. Its just too bad he refuses to realize that what he's said is just as true about us, the US and Britain and France and the list goes on and on...Netherlands, Belgium, Spain, Italy...

No I do not think so. I think you over-analyze. The fact that Bush went to China or other world leaders did, does not automatically mean he had to. I think your entire analysis is predicated on something typically Canadian, because the Americans did it, we should have done it.

Bush went to the Olympics because he and his father have always been strong supporters of US Olympic sports teams. They no doubt combined it with some chitter chatter but no nothing substantial resulted from the US going to the olympics and the fact that Harper is not interested in cheap photo ops should be applauded.

Anyone who thinks showing up for a photo op is what it is about is being a but naive in my opinion.

Now you claimed Harper's criticism of China should apply to all the other countries you mentioned. That is interesting. Using that reasoning, since all countries of the world are guilty of interference as you suggest, this to you justifies not criticizing a country when it engages in human rights offences?

O.k. lets just stop criticizing everyone and welcome trade with everyone and get on with it.

Yes that is one approach. Remarkably whorish I would say. I call it the Paris Hilton doctrine. Sleep with anything that moves.

For me, I think his attempt to define a foreign policy based on something other then just profit is commendable. Funny when he does something highly idealistic like that, he's criticized by Chretien and leftists for being a Bush clone and yet they completely pretend they are unaware if he was a Bush clone he would have gone just like Bush. Which one is it? If he is a Bush clone why are they criticizing him for not doing what Bush did? Gee can we say inconsistent?

Give me a bib for my vomit please. when Jean Chretien lecturers Harper he should have gone to China and sucked up this is the Chretien who is now a lobbyist for Chinese business interests. Oh how credible. The same Chretien who blasts Harper for being a Bush clone is the one being the Bush clone not to mention a monumental hippocrate and he should wipe the mess from his mouth from his career practice before he lectures others on being appropriate. Someone tell Jean until that cold sore on his mouth heals, he looks ridiculous lecturing on divine essence.

I criticize many of the things Harper does with his economic policies and I can't stand his approach to the environment and I wish someone put some cement shoes on Jim Flaherty and dumped him in Lake Ontario, but I will not criticize him for being idealistic and trying to define a foreign policy approach that does not suck and blow about human rights and engage in hippocracy and selectivity as to who will be criticized and when.

He maintains the same approach for all countries which is more then I can say about the two faced suck abnd blowers in the Liberal, NDP and Green parties who suck and blow on foreign policy and take sides and support human rights offending nations when its convenient to them.

I say we should applaud non conformity and idealism when we see it regardless of whether its from the left or right - its a rare thing in politics when someone shows it and I am not someone who just will bad mouth it because the person who shows it is a Tory and everyone knows I am no Tory.

Yech I defended the Tories again but fair is fair. Harper has shown a consistent approach based on consistent, non selective equal application of a principal of fairness. If anyone thinks that will harm Canada because we are not sucking and blowing on China hard enough all I can say is go brush your teeth.

Now excuse me I have to wash my mouth out before I start talking about family values and put on a sweater vest.

I must say this for Harper. I have always felt he is nothing more then an up-dated Social Creditist. But unlike the Social Creditists, he doesn't support facist regimeslike the Social Creditists did and some of you want to with China which is nothing more then a totalitarian regime using the government as an organ to impose one set of views at the expense of all others.

Tell me will these same anti-Harper, leave China alone apologists lecture us its o.k. to prop Sudan's government and enable it to thrive and continue its genocide? Oh how progressive. Oh Jack, does the NDP want to support Tibet or more trade with China. How does Olivia feel? Better go ask her. Last time I looked she said flattering things about the Chinese government.

As for the Liberals, Mr. Ignatieff's foreign policy views are no different then Harper's. I am sure though Bob Rae would not agree. They can fight it out in a few weeks after Dion is exiled to Wawa, Ontario.

Edited September 19, 2008 by Rue

[PoliticalCitizen]

Medvedev's answer to (chiken-fried) Rice:

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/0...v.ap/index.html

[Topaz]

The following report shows that the US was training soldiers BEFORE the attack. It looks like Russia wasn't in the wrong. www.globalresearch.ca

[PoliticalCitizen]

The following report shows that the US was training soldiers BEFORE the attack. It looks like Russia wasn't in the wrong. www.globalresearch.ca

It looks like G8 will become G13 rather than G7:

http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/id...-29172820070827

[Brezhnev]

It looks like G8 will become G13 rather than G7:

http://in.reuters.com/article/worldNews/id...-29172820070827

If will be G "13" will appear SUPER G "?"))) can SUPER G7 or G8

Edited September 25, 2008 by Brezhnev

[Brezhnev]

Status G8? Does not exist!

G8 Does not exist as the international organisation! If Russia will exclude, it will not entail any consequences! G8 it is simply elite club!

From that that Russia consists in this club, at me personally in a pocket of money does not increase!

[Dr V]

[quote name='August1991' date='Aug 15 2008, 08:16 PM' post='329173'

As they say, one spends half one's life earning a good reputation and then the rest of one's life benefitting from it.

That reminds me of a distantly related saying: Копим крохами, просаживаем ворохами. I'm not saying it's more applicable in this case, though. In fact I hope it isn't

I think part of Putin's legacy is not caring what the rest of the world thinks of Russia. There's a healthy element to this kind of indifference - it gives a country the freedom to define its identity without looking over its shoulder all the time. But not even can be self-sufficient, although it's come a long way economically.

I'm not impressed with either Russia's or Georgia's behaviour in this war. Neither behaved honourably, and neither has moral superiority. How strange that these countries' shared Orthodox religion did nothing to stop the war or mitigate its vehemence. Or maybe not so strange?

[GostHacked]

IF Russia is kicked out of the G8 for invading, what does that say about the US??? If the phrase "Can't ALL get along?" needs to be said it certainly does here.

For everything I am seeing in the news it is back to refering to it as the G7. So eventhought it might not be official, people seem to be changing their letterheads.