Georgia: What a Difference a Gates Makes

You remember that tiresome evangelical favorite: "What would Jesus do?" Well, here's a version I'm glad I don't have to think about concerning the current Georgia crisis: What would Don do?

Following recent disturbing developments in the Caucasus, and after reading the statements from George Bush and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, how thankful I am that the latter is running defense policy and not his predecessor, Dapper Don Rumsfeld. For if Rumsfeld were still in that chair, there is little doubt that Dick Cheney would be the puppet master working the strings of policy. Who knows what mischief he would work in this tenuous, complex and extremely dangerous moment for U.S.-Russia relations.

As for the role Bush is playing -- does this make you feel more or less assured of his abilities?

Mr. Bush went to the headquarters of the Central Intelligence Agency ... for a briefing on the situation in Georgia. "Got a lot of folks, smart folks, analyzing the situation on the ground and, of course, briefing us on different possibilities that could develop in the area and the region," he said...

Does this give you the impression that in acknowledging there are "smart folks" analyzing the situation, he's excluding himself?

You'll remember that Bush infamously said after meeting Putin for the first time that he felt he could trust him because he'd looked into his eyes and "gotten a sense of his soul?" I wonder what, if anything, Bush is thinking about that stupid statement now.

When I read the following from Gates, which is an implicit rebuke of such nonsense, I thought: finally we have a defense secretary who has a head on his shoulders:

At the Pentagon, Mr. Gates was asked whether he trusted Mr. Putin anymore, and he paused before responding.

" 'Anymore' is an interesting add," he said. "I have never believed that one should make national security policy on the basis of trust. I think you make national security policy based on interests and on realities."

Thank God for realism. We've had seven disastrous years of fantasy, lies, and wishful thinking. If I were Barack Obama and I won the election I'd even consider asking Gates to remain in his post.

Comments

[tompoe]

09:10 PM on 08/15/2008

Gates demonstrates he is willing to do the bidding of Bush/Cheney, and Silverstein thinks that conduct deserves to be the standard Obama should use for his Secretary of Defense? Maybe Silverstein could enlighten his readers as to what he thinks about Gates' willingness to encourage the DOD to continue its' policy of obstructing veteran disability ratings. A policy that subjects hundreds of thousands of our troops to harm as they struggle to obtain help with their military injuries and disabilities. It used to be dismissed as a technology driven issue, but that nonsense was replaced in 2000 by the Bush/Cheney neoconservative raping and pillaging of our country. Gates bought into all of it, and continues to enable, if not expand it.

[Henry]

04:51 PM on 08/15/2008

Gates? CIA chieftan who presented DDR GDP/capital equal to that of the USA? The CIA is either propaganda machine or incompetents. I am sure it's probably both.

Do we like Hugo Chavez? Do they like Saakashvili? Who do you think the bigger corrupto is? How do we like rooskie defense shield missles in Cuba... or Venezuela for that matter? When you have mobsters and corporate slime-balls running the government what do you expect. Gates is a slimely as they come!

[Richard Silverstein]

08:50 PM on 08/15/2008

It's a matter of degree. Who's worse: Don Rumsfeld or Robert Gates? Calling Gates "slimy" seems going overboard.

[joanndarc]

10:24 AM on 08/16/2008

By your logic you would chose Hitler over Stalin, the later killed more people.
A crime is a crime and a question if it's "over the board" or not makes no sense. A criminal gang of Gates, CIA, Clintons is criminal no matter whichever is better.

[lisakaz2]

04:40 PM on 08/15/2008

Well, be very afraid of who McB--- could have in that role.