War in Georgia

A place to relocate messages and threads that should be deleted.
phylo_roadking
Patron
Posts: 8459
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:41 pm

Re: War in Georgia

Post by phylo_roadking » Wed Aug 27, 2008 5:08 am

It's not even clear that Georgia started it. There have been pretty strong arguements made that it was a set up by Russia.
The "ethnic cleansing" and population transfer that has been underway in South Osseatia since the second day of the fighting - accompanied by the recorded destruction of Georgian homes and villages behind fleeing Georgian civilians from South Ossetia means one result is now almost certain - X amount of time, a referendum in the "new" South Ossetia will vote to become part of Russia as a whole. This was always the intention of the South Ossetian separatists - they only wanted to be separate from GEORGIA. It's the Abkahazians want to be FULLY independent.

The events of the last three weeks has ensured there will be a "legal" pro-Russia voting majority in all internal politics in South Ossetia....because the Georgian poputation in the area have nowhere to return to, the population will be permanently displaced.

To plagarise - "Politics is WAR by another means!"
"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle." - Malcolm Reynolds

Uli
Enthusiast
Posts: 461
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:12 pm
Location: U.S.

Re: War in Georgia

Post by Uli » Wed Aug 27, 2008 9:01 am

lwd wrote:
Uli wrote:
sniper1shot wrote: ...No, they started this.....my point was that the Russians went overboard in their response.
In reality, the only genuine over-response to this situation [Georgia-Russia] came when neo-conservative American leaders calculatedly decided to politically upstage one another in this inane election year, in offering grandiose utterings like "...A new Cold War is at hand," "...Russia must be made to pay for her newfound imperialism!" and "...the free world is today endangered by Russia's 'aggression!'"
It's not even clear that Georgia started it. There have been pretty strong arguements made that it was a set up by Russia. Calling verbage of American politicians an over reaction while Russia violates the terms of a cease fire destroying property and usurping territiroy of another sovereign nation is hardlly reasonable.
Really? Those weren't Georgian missiles falling on South Ossetia on August 7?

Through the course of the past several days, lwd, U.S. leaders have alternately stated that Russian invasion of Georgia might well result in a full-scale resumption of the Cold War, that Russia will be severely punished for her actions, that the old 'imperialist nature of the Russian bear' has been revived, and that world war is now far more likely than before August 7.

Personally, I'd say that those words aren't only a gross over-reaction, they're deliberately provocative--particularly given that Georgia is at Russia's immediate border, America is thousands of miles distant, and yet American troops were inside Georgia even as the first Georgian rockets rained on South Ossetia.

The U.S. and NATO were caught with their hands in Georgia's cookie jar and Mother Russia just happened to be watching.

We win some and we lose some. The West this time should be big enough to admit that we came out on the short end of the stick, diplomatically, and leave it at that. The absence of Georgia as a potential NATO member isn't going to mean the end of the Western world. A full-scale nuclear war will, however.
Erwin Leibold 26.7.1942

Uli
Enthusiast
Posts: 461
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:12 pm
Location: U.S.

Re: War in Georgia

Post by Uli » Wed Aug 27, 2008 9:11 am

phylo_roadking wrote:
It's not even clear that Georgia started it. There have been pretty strong arguements made that it was a set up by Russia.
The "ethnic cleansing" and population transfer that has been underway in South Osseatia since the second day of the fighting - accompanied by the recorded destruction of Georgian homes and villages behind fleeing Georgian civilians from South Ossetia means one result is now almost certain - X amount of time, a referendum in the "new" South Ossetia will vote to become part of Russia as a whole. This was always the intention of the South Ossetian separatists - they only wanted to be separate from GEORGIA. It's the Abkahazians want to be FULLY independent.

The events of the last three weeks has ensured there will be a "legal" pro-Russia voting majority in all internal politics in South Ossetia....because the Georgian poputation in the area have nowhere to return to, the population will be permanently displaced.

To plagarise - "Politics is WAR by another means!"
Complicated picture, isn't it? All the more reason for NATO and the U.S. to play this one a little more safely than we already have. Anyone on this webpage willing to engage in nuclear world war in order to keep Georgia (God bless her beleaguered people) under our 'protective' wing?

Not me. I've seen enough of war to know that I don't want to see more of it. People who yearn for such conflict often do so only from the safety and warm comfort of their computer consoles and their newest computer wargames.

Remember what Rudi, HaEn, and Gerhard once said of war's ugliness--the mud, the blood, the stink, the pestilence, the want, the fear, the hunger, the misery? Remember what they've told us. We owe it to them to remember it. Our very survival hinges on that remembrance.
Erwin Leibold 26.7.1942

Annelie
Patron
Posts: 1317
Joined: Fri Sep 27, 2002 2:07 am
Location: North America

Re: War in Georgia

Post by Annelie » Wed Aug 27, 2008 9:28 am

Remember what Rudi, HaEn, and Gerhard once said of war's ugliness--the mud, the blood, the stink, the pestilence, the want, the fear, the hunger, the misery? Remember what they've told us. We owe it to them to remember it. Our very survival hinges on that remembrance.
Succinct but very true.
Annelie
________________________

User avatar
Andy H
Associate
Posts: 836
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2002 2:01 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: War in Georgia

Post by Andy H » Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:08 am

No sane person wants a war, let alone a nuclear tipped one but where do we draw the line in the sand when it comes to Russia coming to the aid of 'Russians' in now indep countries?

I dont advocate sending British troops to die in South Ossietia but I wonder if the Russians decide to aid 'Russians' within the Baltic States, what my attitude would be? Most if not all of the former Soviet Union regions contain sizeable Russian popn and all of these could become the new South Ossietia scenario

Regards
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.

And so as I patrol in the valley of the shadow of the tricolour I must fear evil, For I am but mortal and mortals can only die

User avatar
Paulus II
Patron
Posts: 1249
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 12:38 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Re: War in Georgia

Post by Paulus II » Wed Aug 27, 2008 10:48 am

Andy H wrote:Russia coming to the aid of 'Russians' in now indep countries?
There may be something else that is prompting Russia in the way that it has done in Georgia.
Russia is going through a major demographic crisis, population numbers are sinking quite dramatically. Even though the number of births has risen in the last year-and-a-half and the number of 'premature' deaths is going down, they may be starting to get afraid that very soon there will be not enough 'ethnic Russians' left in Russia proper to keep the balance with the ever rising number of Muslim inhabitants of Russia.
Maybe bringing the ethnic Russians that now reside outside Russia back into the fold could ward off that danger. In their eyes at least.

Not sure if any of this actually true but it can be found in some newspapers and such. It could tie nicely into the nationalistic surge that is going on in Russia though.

Yuri
Supporter
Posts: 98
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 4:55 am

Re: War in Georgia

Post by Yuri » Wed Aug 27, 2008 11:59 am

Andy H wrote:No sane person wants a war, let alone a nuclear tipped one but where do we draw the line in the sand when it comes to Russia coming to the aid of 'Russians' in now indep countries?

I dont advocate sending British troops to die in South Ossietia but I wonder if the Russians decide to aid 'Russians' within the Baltic States, what my attitude would be? Most if not all of the former Soviet Union regions contain sizeable Russian popn and all of these could become the new South Ossietia scenario

Regards
The western propagation not too clever and its "arguments" it is easy to break.
However, for this purpose at least it is necessary will learn to think own brains.
For example, nobody will challenge that fact, that Lithuania is the Baltic state.
However, I never heard that someone sometime in Russia "condemned" Lithuania for discrimination of Russian. Why? The answer is simple - in Lithuania there are no laws of ethnic Russian limiting the right.
On the other hand, in Russia voices of criticism to Latvia and Estonia from time to time are heard. Why? The answer is simple - there there are laws the discriminating rights of ethnic Russian.
That it is necessary to make that in Russia the criticism to the address of Latvia and Estonia has stopped?
On an example of Lithuania it is not difficult to draw a conclusion, that for this purpose the Great Britain, France, Germany and other "great democrats and dandy-roll human rights" have demanded from two tiny seminazi states to stop practice of discrimination of Russian. Only and only. As soon as seminazi modes in Latvia and Estonia will stop to create a disgrace the head will cease to be ill you concerning that "that to you to do, if Russian attack the Baltic states" as she is not ill you in this occasion concerning such Baltic state as Lithuania.

User avatar
Andy H
Associate
Posts: 836
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2002 2:01 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: War in Georgia

Post by Andy H » Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:03 pm

Hi Yuri

My post wasn't so much about why Russia would invade any of the Baltic States but more to do with what the 'West' would do if they did.

The West won't go to war over South Ossetia but would the average person in UK, Ger, Fra or the US go to war over the Baltics?

Regards
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.

And so as I patrol in the valley of the shadow of the tricolour I must fear evil, For I am but mortal and mortals can only die

Yuri
Supporter
Posts: 98
Joined: Sat Aug 23, 2008 4:55 am

Re: War in Georgia

Post by Yuri » Wed Aug 27, 2008 12:16 pm

Andy H wrote:Hi Yuri

My post wasn't so much about why Russia would invade any of the Baltic States but more to do with what the 'West' would do if they did.

The West won't go to war over South Ossetia but would the average person in UK, Ger, Fra or the US go to war over the Baltics?

Regards
Guys I offer stop to hammer in the head fabrications of the western propagation.
Russian normal people. Russian to strike then and on, when also who in the Baltic states or still somewhere will start to kill Russian as the received carte blanche from the West mentally unbalanced the Georgian’s Fuhrer has started to kill them in South Ossetia.

Uncle Joe
Enthusiast
Posts: 562
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2002 5:04 pm
Location: Eastern Finland

Re: War in Georgia

Post by Uncle Joe » Wed Aug 27, 2008 6:53 pm

Phylo, I find it utterly perverse that you constantly try to refer to UN resulition this and that when it is clear to everyone with decent intelligence that UN never has and never will pass a resolution that would undermine any significant US interests, let alone enforce such a resolution.

Angela Merkel revealed her double standards when she whined how an independent nation should be allowed to do what it wants (=Georgia to join NATO), yet the same whore has been very loud in demanding limits on the independence on Iran´s decisions.

phylo_roadking
Patron
Posts: 8459
Joined: Thu Apr 28, 2005 2:41 pm

Re: War in Georgia

Post by phylo_roadking » Wed Aug 27, 2008 7:24 pm

that UN never has and never will pass a resolution that would undermine any significant US interests, let alone enforce such a resolution.
Really???

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/no ... tednations

http://www.agoravox.com/article.php3?id_article=4950
The United States opposed the resolution, which was passed by a 29-11 vote.
Those took all of five seconds to find. The U.S. gets as rough a ride as anyone else. Especially by the Arabic states over its support for Israel etc. Look at its failure to get 1441 against Iraq passed, for example But because of its "democratic" stance, the US has to work by building voting majorities rather than outright vetoing - or be SEEN to :wink:
I find it utterly perverse that you constantly try to refer to UN resulition this and that when it is clear to everyone with decent intelligence that UN never has and never will pass a resolution that would undermine any significant US interests
That's only and exactly HALF the equation. The OTHER side is Russia should NOT have gone across INTO Georgia without it. US interests in the area are one thing - the legitimacy of Russia's actions are something else.
"Well, my days of not taking you seriously are certainly coming to a middle." - Malcolm Reynolds

User avatar
Andy H
Associate
Posts: 836
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2002 2:01 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: War in Georgia

Post by Andy H » Thu Aug 28, 2008 3:07 am

Yuri wrote:
Andy H wrote:Hi Yuri

My post wasn't so much about why Russia would invade any of the Baltic States but more to do with what the 'West' would do if they did.

The West won't go to war over South Ossetia but would the average person in UK, Ger, Fra or the US go to war over the Baltics?

Regards
Guys I offer stop to hammer in the head fabrications of the western propagation.
Russian normal people. Russian to strike then and on, when also who in the Baltic states or still somewhere will start to kill Russian as the received carte blanche from the West mentally unbalanced the Georgian’s Fuhrer has started to kill them in South Ossetia.
Yuri

There are certain elements within the UK that wish for my country to be 'stronger' with its dealings with Russia. Some of those 'stronger' tactics involve a military option. The latter is pure folly but wars start from such folly.

The perception of many is that Russia may use the same reasoning (right or wrong) that it has used in South Ossetia to regain former SU regions that are now Indep. The question has been raised that IF Russia did the same in regards to any of the Baltic States would the UK or NATO react in the same way as it has in regards to South Ossetia?

Regards
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.

And so as I patrol in the valley of the shadow of the tricolour I must fear evil, For I am but mortal and mortals can only die

lwd
Enthusiast
Posts: 475
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:35 am

Re: War in Georgia

Post by lwd » Thu Aug 28, 2008 6:14 am

Uli wrote:
lwd wrote: It's not even clear that Georgia started it. There have been pretty strong arguements made that it was a set up by Russia. Calling verbage of American politicians an over reaction while Russia violates the terms of a cease fire destroying property and usurping territiroy of another sovereign nation is hardlly reasonable.
Really? Those weren't Georgian missiles falling on South Ossetia on August 7?
....
That rather ignores the lead up to it. Especially when one considers the speed and magnitude of the Russian response it looks an awful lot like Georgia fell into a Russian trap.

Uli
Enthusiast
Posts: 461
Joined: Sat Jul 03, 2004 2:12 pm
Location: U.S.

Re: War in Georgia

Post by Uli » Fri Aug 29, 2008 1:18 am

lwd wrote:
Uli wrote:
lwd wrote: It's not even clear that Georgia started it. There have been pretty strong arguements made that it was a set up by Russia. Calling verbage of American politicians an over reaction while Russia violates the terms of a cease fire destroying property and usurping territiroy of another sovereign nation is hardlly reasonable.
Really? Those weren't Georgian missiles falling on South Ossetia on August 7?
....
That rather ignores the lead up to it. Especially when one considers the speed and magnitude of the Russian response it looks an awful lot like Georgia fell into a Russian trap.
There's obviously a great deal of lead-up to this whole story, though Russian military forces did little if nothing of their own to precipitate military violence until Georgian missiles fell on South Ossetia.

A leading British diplomat has of late been featured in international newspapers suggesting that the Russian invasion of Georgia reminds him only all-too-well of the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia forty years ago. Truth is, I was alive and well myself in 1968, and I'd today say that an attempt to compare or parallel the two moments is yet another Western move at subterfuge--in words, a half-hearted, philosophically-vacuous way in which to 'demonize' the Russians for their role in Georgia-- for outside the fact that in both instances Russian tanks ultimately rolled over foreign soil, there is little else tying these two historical events as one.

Making good use of "perestroika" and "glasnost," Western nations over the course of the past 19 years have effectively encircled Russia military and economically, and thereby isolated her--or at least likely given her people the further impression that indeed the West cannot be fully trusted. Western words and actions over the course of the past twenty days have perhaps effectively precluded the chance that Moscow can ever be enlisted as a full ally in the war on terror, and given the full nature of the yet-ongoing war with radical Islam, I'd say that we'll be in a much poorer position as such.
Erwin Leibold 26.7.1942

User avatar
Andy H
Associate
Posts: 836
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2002 2:01 am
Location: United Kingdom

Re: War in Georgia

Post by Andy H » Fri Aug 29, 2008 1:55 am

Western nations over the course of the past 19 years have effectively encircled Russia military and economically, and thereby isolated her--or at least likely given her people the further impression that indeed the West cannot be fully trusted
Russia has also given the impression that she cannot be trusted through her actions over the years, regarding the supply of energy to the 'West'.

Regards
You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up for something, sometime in your life.

And so as I patrol in the valley of the shadow of the tricolour I must fear evil, For I am but mortal and mortals can only die

Locked