Newsflash: Fighting in South Ossetia/Georgia

[james0246]

^Nothing has changed, none of America's words matter, this is just politics.

Though, I have to say that Obama and McCain lost a great deal of the international relations cred by choosing the American route. They both could have scored some major foreign policy points here, but instead they choose the easy way out that made them look semi-good in the American media, but ultimately foolish in the international medium.

[gabbytay]

Originally Posted by Zoned87

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/...acy/index.html

Who was right huh... it was ME, the person you people have been bashing non-stop

What is this "right" you've been talking about?? and have you been every right in your life?? or is it your 1st time.

Yeah bush is an @-hole for helping georgia and clearly he's planning a "justified" proxy war with russia.

[Xellos-_^]

[quote=Zoned87;1801552]http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/...acy/index.html

U.S. troops are moving into Georgia, although supposily only for "civilian relief efforts"

Administration officials told CNN that the United States and its European allies were considering kicking Russia out of the G-8, the group of the world's largest industrial economies, and other international organizations as punishment for its actions in Georgia. They also said Russia's relationship with NATO is also at risk.[quote]the fighting has already stop and there is a ceasefire in place. and only the US wants to kick Russia out of the G8 and other international groups. As for Russia's relationship with NATO. What relationship?

that is like threatening to stop being friends with someone you were never friends with in the first place.

Who was right huh... it was ME, the person you people have been bashing non-stop and calling a troll

this is a classic sign of troll behavior.

[gabbytay]

this is a classic sign of troll behavior.

lets just forget about him and add him to our ignore list shall we.

[tenken627]

Originally Posted by Zoned87

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/...acy/index.html

U.S. troops are moving into Georgia, although supposily only for "civilian relief efforts"

Administration officials told CNN that the United States and its European allies were considering kicking Russia out of the G-8, the group of the world's largest industrial economies, and other international organizations as punishment for its actions in Georgia. They also said Russia's relationship with NATO is also at risk.

Who was right huh... it was ME, the person you people have been bashing non-stop and calling a troll

Have you read the article?

The US is only sending humanitarian aid for civilians such as medicine and food, which they have done for many countries.



"But U.S. officials said they warned Saakashvili not to provoke Russia militarily by sending Georgian troops into South Ossetia and that they had ruled out any U.S. military action to defend Georgia."


This is the part of the article that you need to reread over and over again.

So wouldn't this article actually contradict your posts?

[Zoned87]

It is in general pretty close to what I wanted/predicted to happen (although not exact).

And I am not a troll for stating my opinions, just because they varry from yours does not make me a troll. I am not doing this to provoke anyone to be honest I do not care. Just because my opinion is not the popular one does not mean I will abandon it just because others do not agree with me or flame me for it.

[Papaya]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

Untrue. If Russia had been interested in annexing South Ossetia and Akhazia, they could have done so at any time since Putin took power. Instead, Russia's policy up until Kosovo declared independence was to treat post-World War II borders as inviolate. That's why it allowed the territories to stay in a legal limbo of de facto independence.

Afraid you're wrong here. Georgia has been a strategic power to the western powers with its oil pipelines. Russia, during Putin's rule, made it a national goal to be the cheapest supplier of oil to Western Europe and have since used it as a bargaining chip (see what happened when Ukraine joined NATO), so they're naturally unhappy when plans popped up for more pipeline development in Georgia.

Russia had been unable to make moves militarily because of the Chechen conflict, as Chechnya borders Georgia. That's one of the reasons they ended up issuing passports--so they could get an ideological hold on the area, as well as set up an excuse to invade Georgia ("to defend their citizens").

If Russia had been playing the role of peacekeeper or defender, this affair would've been over long ago. Instead, they've gone and kept pushing, and it's now clear that they want a regime change as well. There's no way they're giving back South Ossetia now, and the fact that they want to eventually install a pro-Russian leader that won't object to it speaks greatly of what they've had in mind.

Either way you look at it though, it was the Georgians who triggered the mess, but the Russians who are prolonging it.

[Ellaya_dw]

Originally Posted by Papaya

There's no way they're giving back South Ossetia now, and the fact that they want to eventually install a pro-Russian leader that won't object to it speaks greatly of what they've had in mind.

And pro-American leader now is better?


There was no invasion. Of course Saak is screaming about invasion and sees imaginary jets above him. But russian army is just destroed military objects on the border and back to the S. Osetia.

[karasuma]

Originally Posted by Ellaya_dw

And pro-American leader now is better?


There was no invasion. Of course Saak is screaming about invasion and sees imaginary jets above him. But russian army is just destroed military objects on the border and back to the S. Osetia.

That might be true and that might not be true. That is why US is putting "humanitarian aid" convey thru these town, road and ports.

If what Russia said is true, they either aren't there to start with or they will retreat so that US aid convey won't see that. On the other hand, US "aid" convey is not a fighting force.

So, the ball is back to Russia to see what they will do.

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by Zoned87

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/...acy/index.html

U.S. troops are moving into Georgia, although supposily only for "civilian relief efforts"

Administration officials told CNN that the United States and its European allies were considering kicking Russia out of the G-8, the group of the world's largest industrial economies, and other international organizations as punishment for its actions in Georgia. They also said Russia's relationship with NATO is also at risk.

The move to bring in humanitarian aid with troops is a bit confrontational, but it's not really that bad an idea. However the rhetoric that went with it looks like a terrible idea. What it seems to do is force Russia into a position where it will gain more by escalating its own responses, and that's the opposite of what diplomacy is supposed to accomplish unless one was trying to start a war. Even worse, the US is bluffing, and everyone knows that. Already, Russia has called that bluff with:

Originally Posted by the BBC

The Kremlin said the US must choose between partnership with Moscow, or with the Georgian leadership.

"At some time it will be necessary to choose between supporting this virtual project and [a] real partnership on questions which actually require collective action," said Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov.

I could barely contain myself when I heard that Bush made his decision after speaking with the French president and the Georgian president - the lack of mention of any Russian leaders was very telling in its petulence. The clumsiness of top-level American diplomacy never ceases to amaze me.

Originally Posted by Vexx

Russia has a pretty free hand at the moment in most of the former Soviet states given the constraints on Europe and the US. Kind of makes one want to visit the various state heads and smack them with a "DUH" mallet.

Thankfully, the European leaders, Sarkozy in particular, seem to have a much better idea of how to defuse this situation.

Originally Posted by Zoned87

And I am not a troll for stating my opinions, just because they varry from yours does not make me a troll. I am not doing this to provoke anyone to be honest I do not care. Just because my opinion is not the popular one does not mean I will abandon it just because others do not agree with me or flame me for it.

Look, there's nothing wrong with holding an unpopular opinion, and I'll be the first to help you if you're being harrassed. However, the way to show that you're not a troll is simply to write posts with more substance. Right now, you're not really being taken seriously because you repost information of questionable reliabilty, jump to unfounded conclusions, and grossly understate the consequences of a potential nuclear war. All these things betray your lack of understanding on the matters being discussed in this thread, so you'd do much better reading more and doing less crowing about how "right" you are.

Originally Posted by Papaya

Afraid you're wrong here. Georgia has been a strategic power to the western powers with its oil pipelines. Russia, during Putin's rule, made it a national goal to be the cheapest supplier of oil to Western Europe and have since used it as a bargaining chip (see what happened when Ukraine joined NATO), so they're naturally unhappy when plans popped up for more pipeline development in Georgia.

I'm not sure what your point is considering that my post was about Abkhazia and South Otessia rather than Georgia. While Russia probably isn't all that fond of Georgia's pipeline plans, it's the NATO entry that was a far more troubling point - this is the same in regards to Ukraine. Russia has always seen NATO as a military alliance that was designed to confront it and thus any encroachment of this alliance onto its borders are seen as a massive threat. To be honest, the US would have felt the same if Mexico hypothetically joined the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War.

Originally Posted by Papaya

Russia had been unable to make moves militarily because of the Chechen conflict, as Chechnya borders Georgia. That's one of the reasons they ended up issuing passports--so they could get an ideological hold on the area, as well as set up an excuse to invade Georgia ("to defend their citizens").

This is unfounded. My point is that South Ossetia and Abkhazia declared independence in 1992. If Russia had any interest in annexing them, it would have recognized that independence, and both would be Russian territories by now. However, this ran counter to other Russian interests at the time (and did so right up until the independence of Kosovo), which is why we had our present situation. The understanding was at the time was that the two territories had de facto independence, and that Russian was the guarantor of that status. This remained the status quo until Saakashvili came to power in 2004.

The Second Chechen War has been effectively over since 2004 or 2005. While there are still a few Chechen rebels around, this number has shrank to less than 1000, and most of their leaders have already been assassinated by the Russians. Some of the former Chechen rebels have formed the current government of Chechnya, and in fact many of the pictures of Russian troops in the latest conflict are actually Chechens.

On the point about passports, it's not really all that unusual for Russia to offer Russian citizenship. In 1992, all of these peoples had been part of the same country only a couple of years ago, and it was common for extended families to be spread across Russia and South Ossetia/Abkhazia.

Originally Posted by Papaya

If Russia had been playing the role of peacekeeper or defender, this affair would've been over long ago. Instead, they've gone and kept pushing, and it's now clear that they want a regime change as well. There's no way they're giving back South Ossetia now, and the fact that they want to eventually install a pro-Russian leader that won't object to it speaks greatly of what they've had in mind.

Of course Russia wants regime change - why the heck would they want the belligerent nutter who just launched such a stupid attack as the leader of a neighboring country? If the Russians were interested in forcibly removing him, they would have done so already. Now that they agreed to a ceasefire, it really looks as if they've largely achieved their goals. However, I think that it's likely Russia is going to demand a pound of flesh at the negotiation table.

Saakashvili isn't really much of a friend to begin with. If the Americans hadn't already staked their reputation on preserving him, they'd be well rid of him. On the other hand, the way he demands the US to protect him while simultaneously ramping up the rhetoric shows very well that he's out to save his own skin; the long-term consequences be damned. Then again, his fear is pretty well founded since the Russians have a propensity to assassinate leaders they really don't like (see Chechnya).

Originally Posted by Papaya

Either way you look at it though, it was the Georgians who triggered the mess, but the Russians who are prolonging it.

I wouldn't worry about the ceasefire violations all that much - unless any major shooting flares up, the ceasefire will hold in all likelihood.

Originally Posted by karasuma

That might be true and that might not be true. That is why US is putting "humanitarian aid" convey thru these town, road and ports.

This is mostly for domestic consumption - to let the Americans think that Bush is actually accomplishing something. Both Georgia and Russia are aware the it won't amount to much. In fact, the Americans will make sure that the troops they send will be very lightly armed to prevent the chances of and conflict with Russian troops.

Originally Posted by karasuma

So, the ball is back to Russia to see what they will do.

Hopefully, the Russians won't be inclined to make another show of force.

[Papaya]

Originally Posted by Ellaya_dw

And pro-American leader now is better?


There was no invasion. Of course Saak is screaming about invasion and sees imaginary jets above him. But russian army is just destroed military objects on the border and back to the S. Osetia.

I think you need to get your news from someplace other than the Russian state media.

@4Tran, you base a lot of your argument on the assumption that Russia is immune to diplomatic consequence and is able to do whatever it wants to. They may throw their influence around a lot, but to say that they could've invaded or annexed whenever they want to is ignoring the obvious. The Western countries are already threatening to take Russia out of the G8 and more (and this is WITH Russia having some justification for the invasion), and Russia has been in some hard times since the dissolution of the USSR, so I think there is plenty of reason to have waited for a more opportune moment. It's also clear that their invasion is a fear tactic to the other former Soviet republics.

[aohige]

Originally Posted by 4Tran

I could barely contain myself when I heard that Bush made his decision after speaking with the French president and the Georgian president - the lack of mention of any Russian leaders was very telling in its petulence. The clumsiness of top-level American diplomacy never ceases to amaze me.

That's nothing compared to the state of disbelief I was in earlier today, with my jaw hitting the floor, when I saw McCain say "In the 21st century, Nations don't invade other nations." followed by Condi Rice saying This isn't 1968...(refering to the Czech/Russia tensions back then)... you don't get away with invading a nation, occupying its capital, and overthrowing its government.

Did I just hear that from the neo-cons?

I swear, some people don't seem to realize they are throwing a massive boomerang.

[Vexx]

Yes.... and even the "30%ers" are scratching their heads that something just doesn't *sound* right with the inane remarks of Condi, McCain, and Bush.

[Ermes Marana]

McCain is outright insane.

Not only did he say nations don't invade other nations after invading Iraq, but he also said "we are all Georgians."

Of course, his foreign policy advisor is on the payroll of Saakashvili.

If McCain was president things would be getting VERY ugly right now. But as it is, the US won't do anything.


4Tran, you are ignoring the most important thing. The UN still recognizes South Ossetia as part of Georgia. That is the entire issue. They consider it to be Georgia dealing with separatists inside Georgia, and then Russia coming in to invade.

[yezhanquan]

On the issue, Russia can do a Kosovo in South Ossetia. The people there clearly had no love for Georgia, and if the West tries to raise their voices, Russia can point to Kosovo and say,"What about THAT?"

Frankly, what the UN recognises is an non-issue. With Russia as part of the Security Council, the veto hammer is good enough.

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by Papaya

@4Tran, you base a lot of your argument on the assumption that Russia is immune to diplomatic consequence and is able to do whatever it wants to.

It isn't, but it's unlikely that anyone's going to do anything of consequence to Russia over Georgia. It's pretty much all talk at this point, and all the players know it.

Originally Posted by Papaya

They may throw their influence around a lot, but to say that they could've invaded or annexed whenever they want to is ignoring the obvious.

But Russia hasn't invaded anyone yet. That may change, but it's sort of unlikely since they seem to already have what they want. Russian troops have penetrated Georgian borders, but there's no sign that they plan to stay there.

Originally Posted by Papaya

The Western countries are already threatening to take Russia out of the G8 and more (and this is WITH Russia having some justification for the invasion), and Russia has been in some hard times since the dissolution of the USSR, so I think there is plenty of reason to have waited for a more opportune moment.

This is not only mere talk; it's a total farce - the only way to remove a country from the G8 is by an unanimous vote of all members including Russia itself. There can be few threats as empty as this one.

On the note of Russia recognizing the Georgian territories, they wouldn't have to do anything but announce it. Even now, Russia would probably prefer if they stayed in legal limbo, but Georgia's attack has make that politically unfeasible.

Originally Posted by aohige

That's nothing compared to the state of disbelief I was in earlier today, with my jaw hitting the floor, when I saw McCain say "In the 21st century, Nations don't invade other nations." followed by Condi Rice saying This isn't 1968...(refering to the Czech/Russia tensions back then)... you don't get away with invading a nation, occupying its capital, and overthrowing its government.

McCain is only a minor American politician who obviously isn't very familiar with history or foreign affairs, he can be excused since he certainly doesn't intend to do anything important in those fields. Nobody ever tells Rice about anything the US did in the last ten years, and stuff like Panama and Grenada happened too long ago to count any more.

Originally Posted by Ermes Marana

4Tran, you are ignoring the most important thing. The UN still recognizes South Ossetia as part of Georgia. That is the entire issue. They consider it to be Georgia dealing with separatists inside Georgia, and then Russia coming in to invade.

That doesn't really matter since everyone knows that South Ossetia had de facto independence much like Taiwan does.

[Amirali]

I'm quite curious about the reports of atrocities by Russian soldiers, for example this one:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008...georgia.russia

Are such reports exaggerated or valid? I'm confused. While I know that Georgia has done quite a bit of playing to the Western media , such reports concern me in light of Russia's checkered human rights record in Chechnya conflict. Hopefully, the truth will come out in the aftermath of a peace settlement.

[4Tran]

Originally Posted by amirali1985

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008...georgia.russia

Are such reports exaggerated or valid? I'm confused. While I know that Georgia has done quite a bit of playing to the Western media , such reports concern me in light of Russia's checkered human rights record in Chechnya conflict. Hopefully, the truth will come out in the aftermath of a peace settlement.

Even if the Russian regular army troops were the best behaved of soldiers (and they certainly aren't), there's probably more than a grain of truth to at least some of the atrocities. Not only are Ossetian irregulars with the Russian forces looking for a bit of revenge over the Georgian attack, but there's also plenty of Chechens involved who are used to their own forms of brutality over the last few years.

While the details remain muddled, this doesn't seem to be a systematic directive, so it's more likely just bunches of soldiers taking advantage of the chaos. If that weren't the case, we'd be seeing a lot more Georgian civilian casualties.

[Lexander]

Georgia was not justified in entering this region with force because these people don't want to be a part of it. And Russia looks foolish denying Chechnya and Kosovo their independant status. Then you have the U.S. that is looking foolish because of Kosovo and Iraq.

I'd say it's a total circus right now ... the way super powers behave is incredible. Why do they even bother with the lip service ? Hypocrisy left and right ... it's ridiculous.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=93573814

That's the latest on npr.

[Sander RX]

While the details remain muddled, this doesn't seem to be a systematic directive, so it's more likely just bunches of soldiers taking advantage of the chaos.

That maybe a response to big rally in Tbilisi.Misha showed them that he had followers(even those who outright hated him were on his side these days.)
Oh and while Russia cant outright annex Georgia,they can remove Saakashvili with their little lapdog Giorgadze.
I dont understand what civilian ships and cement factory in Kaspi has to do with war.