Yuri wrote:Into my intentions does not enter to offend you. Absolutely is not present. However I am compelled to tell directly, that all that you here speak it nonsense. Thus I clearly understand, that you the person not the silly. All the matter is that you base your judgements about occurring events exclusively under messages of the western propagation. Differently your nonsense is a consequence of the massed influence on your brain of the western propagation.phylo_roadking wrote:And that is still happening - the Russian navy in the Ukraine? And did those rusting ships ever come home from Angola and Mozambique after the Cold War?Every country that Russia lands in they end up staying and occupying....Lithuania, Estonia, Latvia, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, etc....
Regarding the withdrawal - there have AT LAST been significant withdrawals in the last 48 hours - only five days late - BUT what's more important now is the ommissions. The Russians seem intent of creating a permanent security zone for themsleves ACROSS the South Ossetian border i.e. in Georgia...and there are places where there is as yet NO withdrawal. One of these is the port of Poti which is going to be a major issue. The Rusian position is that the French-brokered ceasefire allows them to...whereas the rest of the world's interpretation INCLUDING the French is that the "security zone" the ceasefire talked about was the joint security zone ALREADY in place inside South Ossetia, the one shared previously by Russia and Georgia.
First, why «after five days»? Whence you it took?
Secondly, safety zones are defined in 1992, that is sixteen years ago. And at the desire of the Georgian party. Difference of a present situation consists that before at these safety zones were present (along with Russian and Osset to peacemakers) as also the Georgian peacemakers. Now (as the Georgian peacemakers discredited, having opened shooting on Russian peacemakers) in safety zones the Georgian will not be.
Before to hurl serious charges towards Russian, you should study thoroughly the nature and history of conflicts in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Besides, for objectively judgement it is necessary to consider chronology of events strictly. If it not to observe, will be constantly trapped (differently, you constantly will look a fool).
Please, keep in mind, that Russian have possibility to know all (literally all), that writes in newspapers and shows on TV the western propagation about Russia. On the other hand, inhabitants of the western countries has no possibility to read and see how the Russian propagation shines these events. Differently, Russian see as shine events both parties whereas inhabitants of the western countries are deprived such possibility. Besides Russian have possibility to communicate with witnesses directly.
That is why, yours sincere indignation about "dishonesty" of Russian, for people informed simply ridiculously.
Very good points, Yuri. Praise be, it seems as if your arguments have finally bought the farm, Phylo and Sniper:
The Russians were merely defending their southern border with Georgia, and I'm with them on this one. You can call them untrustworthy until the cows come home, Sniper, but, as Hans noted, you'll similarly need to lay question to American and British dishonesty in countless wars and international conflicts through the centuries, if indeed you're genuinely attempting to be objective on this matter.
Once again, a basic starter course for the two here who can't seem to get their chronology in line:
The U.S. for years has been badgering numerous former Soviet republics and satellites to enter NATO, to entertain the idea of emplacing "defensive" missiles (and, of course, at least a minimal compliment of American 'technicians' and 'advisors' in order to help maintain them). Russia, still trying to rebuild in the wake of the Gorbachev years, has for nearly two decades undergone a tremendous degree of taunting from the West (in this case, the U.S--"We won the Cold War!" "Our way of life is best!! "Live like us or fail!!!" rah, rah, rah....)
I've long been a diehard American patriot, but not the kind that's so blind that I can't look to a former enemy with an outstretched hand. Instead of working to befriend Moscow in the wake of the "end" of the Cold War, we've merely continued to poke our finger in her eye by working to encircle Russia, as if the Cold War had never truly ended.
The Georgians, mistakenly sensing Russian weakness and foolishly believing they had Washington at their backs of late, brazenly attacked Ossetia and Abkhazia. Russia rightly intervened on her own terms. The U.S., with egg on our face, attempted threats, cajoling, gentle persuasion and humiliation in order to gain a quick Russian exit, and all to no avail. Instead, Moscow patiently mopped Georgia's floor as we impotently stood by, hand-cuffed by our over-extension in countries wielding no direct impact on our rise or fall. This is precisely what we get for our arrogance and our increasing adventurism in other peoples' business.
I say, chalk one up for the Russians here. The loss of Georgia will have no real bearing on the U.S., outside of a diplomatic black-eye, but it's good to finally see someone stand up to GW Bush and say, "We're here, and there's not but a damned little bit you can do about it."
Even today U.S. newspapers were reporting that the 'loss' of Georgia to the Russians imperils all of Eastern Europe, the Balkans, and the Baltic states. I say to Washington: "How so, precisely?"