Been out of grade school long ?

The ignorance you display in your post doesn`t suggest so. Or just maybe you are a fascist.

Hard to tell the difference but either way you need to check out the real world & how it works. Displaying such clutivated ignorance does your image no good.

The Russians made their move in response to the Georgian attack on South Ossetia, which Russia was protecting with peacekeepers.

Georgia lost.

The naivete expressed by this statement is astonishing. Russia made its move against Georgia based on an overall assesment of the “West’s” ability and willingness to respond in anyway more than loud protests. Russia is flush with oil-generated money that has been poured into its military and it is seeking to reestablish a larger sphere of influence by re-absorbing its previous satellite countries. It does not want these current free states joining NATO where in theory NATO would be committed to coming to their defense. Given Western Europe’s inability to defend themselves (the exception being Great Britain), counting on anyone except the US to defend these newly established democratic states isn’t going to happen and Russia knows it. Whether it is Bush, McCain, or Obama, this philosophy will not change until or unless the current Russian regime changes which is highly unlikely until Putin himself dies of old age or political assasination. And quite frankly, given Obama’s response to the Georgian affair, first calling for Georgia to quit being antagonistic and sit down and talk it out with Russia and then asking for the UN Security Council to denounce Russia (apparently not knowing that Russia has a veto on the UN SC) doesn’t give me a whole lot of confidence that he could or would hold a firm line against further Russian re-expansion aggression. Then again, given Obama’s Socialist agenda, teaming up with the two largest Socialist/Communist Govt’s in Russia and China might actually lead to more “peaceful” relations and the US can really give Western Europe something to rail about against the US.

I found see some inferences to it:

http://www.space.com/news/spaceagencies/gorebush_spaceplatform_000720.html

“Walker said … Bush would spur commercial investment in space

Walker said Bush would look for ways to generate commercial growth in space transportation to put humans in space”

and

http://www.space.com/businesstechnology/business/aerospace_urges_changes_001213.html

“Texas Gov. George Bush has signaled that he would revive a body similar to the National Space Council, “

and

http://www.space.com/news/candidates_election_platforms.html

“The Bush campaign said it favors handing over responsibility for managing the ISS to a non-government entity.”

– Al

Shocker.

And the Columbia is testament for how well they backed up words with action. The last 8 years have been a floundering with lofty goals and platitudes backed up with too little funding and sound management.

But I guess when you’re spending $13B/month (the price tag of 5 Space Shuttles), it’s a bit hard to back up your words.

My mistake.