Newsflash: Fighting in South Ossetia/Georgia

[gabbytay]

Originally Posted by james0246

LOL, we finally have the sequel - The Cuban Missile Crisis II: Operation Poland - Only this time...it's personal. So, America finally went through with their missile defense plan. I really find it funny that America is using the same maneuver that the USSR used some 45 years ago in Cuba. America has just covered their bases by claiming the defense is for Poland, when we all know that it is solely for America. I just hope that Russia decides to help some of the Caribbean nations to establish their own defenses, just for safeties sake.

Or give them free weapons

[karasuma]

Originally Posted by james0246

LOL, we finally have the sequel - The Cuban Missile Crisis II: Operation Poland - Only this time...it's personal. So, America finally went through with their missile defense plan. I really find it funny that America is using a similar maneuver that the USSR used some 45 years ago in Cuba. America has just covered their bases by claiming the defense is for Poland, when we all know that it is for America. To keep the good times going, I hope that Russia decides to help some of the Caribbean nations to establish their own defenses, just for safeties sake. Now that would be fuuny.

That's how stupid bush is. If we are not careful, we will collapse just like the Soviet Union. Just look at the national deficit. All these military expansion cost money that we don't have.

[gabbytay]

Originally Posted by karasuma

That's how stupid bush is. If we are not careful, we will collapse just like the Soviet Union. Just look at the national deficit. All these military expansion cost money that we don't have.

Its already starting bush is just making it worse.

[Prestwick]

I don't think the thought has occurred to anyone, but has anyone realised that maybe the United States probably didn't want to deploy Patriot Missile batteries and US troops to Poland?

The stipulations about American military assistance were included after heavy Polish pressure brought on by the fear of a very strong Russia sitting right next to it. The Baltic states are also feeling very nervous. To be honest, if I were a head of state of a former Wasaw Pact/Soviet SSR and saw what was happening in Georgia, I'd be seeking some sort of rampart to protect against new Russian aggression.

Its obvious that NATO membership means nothing if the powerful members of NATO (the United States, the UK, Germany and Italy) cannot agree on how to respond to Russia in regards to Georgia. Some sort of response is already being negotiated, but that is only because Western Europe seeks energy security by building gas and oil pipelines around Russia and thus prevent Gazprom from holding the European Union hostage every time Putin disagrees with what President Yushchenko of the Ukraine says.

Expect to see more former Communist satellites like the Czech Republic (with their "American puppets" Vaclav Havel and Vaclav Klaus I presume? *eyeroll*) and Romania seeking diplomatic and military support from their NATO and EU allies.

[yezhanquan]

This will be true, but again, the US is a distant ally, and Russia is a close hostile neighbour. Seriously, I don't think US support will be able to count much.

[Prestwick]

You may think that but you'd be surprised at how much more support the United States is providing to the likes of Poland and the Baltic States than their closer allies in the EU and NATO.

So far, the United States has provided diplomatic, financial and military assistance. The likes of France, Germany and Italy (the latter having a PM boasting that he is "Putin's Defense Lawyer") however have roughly provided...zilch.

The new Eastern European democracies are very nervous, it is a very poor reflection on the European Union when they disagree on whether or not to take care of their own.

[yezhanquan]

Exactly that. With internal problems, how long can the States keep up this support?

[Prestwick]

Quite easily. For a start, it is agreeing to sell Patriot Missile batteries to Poland, technology which it usually keeps very close to home and only gives out to close allies. Also, I'd bet that some of those US troops will have a mission to train and develop Polish military infrastructure, all very cost effective.

Assistance can go beyond simple donation of money, stationing of troops and giving away arms.

[Zu Ra]

I support Russia not morally but in terms of strategy.If I was in command or think tank of military I would have advised same actions My main concern would be why so late why not earlier . The reason to that justification would be you dont want a country on your borders going NATO . Thats a security threat of the nth degree .

Now focusing on NATO why does this cold war coalition exists ? to keep non existent commies in check ? .In Russian Communism is dead now the era of Oligarchs who will stop at nothing to keep capitalism alive . NATO when conceived was an alliance to fight communism in Europe i.e. Soviet Russia . Soviet Russia's current avatar is Russia . So yes indirectly I would perceive NATO as a threat to Russia's sovereignty and interests. Though I dont have issues with NATO warming up to ex USSR states and CIS . But Georgia was the final straw . This kinds of situation is a repeat of Enemy at the Gates .

No one should be deluded or naive to think South Ossetia is any concern to Russia. South Ossetia is just the flash point or the catalyst to keep NATO in check. And this is a blast from the past . This is a similar scenario to Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962 any country in the right mind would do exactly the same . Russia is doing the same thing what US did during the Cuban crisis .

Georgia is to blame for there own situation is a classical case of what you sow is what your reap . Joining or desire to join NATO was the last nail in the coffin esp when you get aid and oil from Russia . And I dont have to highlight the importance of oil in 2K .

To put a comical spin to this scenario we could speculate this is Russia's war on terror . They are trying to liberate South Ossetia from Vile grip of Georgia. Georgia just like Iraq may have WMDS .

I would like to conclude though I feel bad for Georgians to be caught in cross fire between NATO and Russia . They have there own leadership to blame .Georgia became democratic capitalist or pro west was a good thing it was betterment of average Georgian . But wanting to join NATO is going to far . As for NATO I would like to see it going in the direction of what it was conceived for fighting communism . Instead of indulging in minor politics of Europe it should channel its energy in fighting real communism i.e. N Korea China Burma and so on

[Orchunter226]

I think you're missing one key point, Geta. Russia shouldn't care at all about NATO bordering it, unless it has malicious plans. NATO was initially created to keep the Soviets in check. But, that is long gone, and now NATO just focuses on helping each other when one country is in a crisis. NATO also acts as a peacekeeping force sometimes, similar to what the UN should do. But like I said, unless Russia is intending to attack a NATO ally, it shouldn't need to worry.

NATO isn't some organization that goes out of its way to screw over Russia. It's just an alliance of countries that help each other.

Sometimes, I think Putin wants to resurrect the old Soviet Union. I wonder if he feels sadness some days that Russia is TECHNICALLY a democracy.

[Zoned87]

Originally Posted by yezhanquan

Exactly that. With internal problems, how long can the States keep up this support?

Forever probably, if the goverment really wanted to... we blew hundred of billions on iraq just because they felt like it.

One thing about the U.S. is the internal affairs and global affairs are often handled entirely seperately with very little effect on one another. The U.S. government functions in an odd manner, somewhat like Willy Wonka's chocolate factory. There is so much bureaucracy here that almost everything is controlled by different branches.

Although if there was a war with Russia I could see them reinstating the draft which would suck because they would probably pick me and I would have to flee to Canada.

[gabbytay]

Originally Posted by Zoned87

Forever probably, if the goverment really wanted to... we blew hundred of billions on iraq just because they felt like it.

Guess your the one to blame for those wasted tax moeny. People didn't feel like starting a war with iraq it was bush and his cabinet.

Originally Posted by Zoned87

One thing about the U.S. is the internal affairs and global affairs are often handled entirely seperately with very little effect on one another. The U.S. government functions in an odd manner, somewhat like Willy Wonka's chocolate factory. There is so much bureaucracy here that almost everything is controlled by different branches.

What have you been smoking?

Originally Posted by Zoned87

Although if there was a war with Russia I could see them reinstating the draft which would suck because they would probably pick me and I would have to flee to Canada.

I though you were to though the a war with Russia doesn't scare you

[Zoned87]

Originally Posted by gabbytay

Guess your the one to blame for those wasted tax moeny. People didn't feel like starting a war with iraq it was bush and his cabinet.


What have you been smoking?



I though you were to though the a war with Russia doesn't scare you

It doesn't scare me, just moving would be a pain in the ass if I was drafted. But then again its random selection so I got a 50/50.

[Ledgem]

Originally Posted by Orchunter226

I think you're missing one key point, Geta. Russia shouldn't care at all about NATO bordering it, unless it has malicious plans. NATO was initially created to keep the Soviets in check. But, that is long gone, and now NATO just focuses on helping each other when one country is in a crisis. NATO also acts as a peacekeeping force sometimes, similar to what the UN should do. But like I said, unless Russia is intending to attack a NATO ally, it shouldn't need to worry.

NATO isn't some organization that goes out of its way to screw over Russia. It's just an alliance of countries that help each other.

That's pretty easy to say given that our country is a part of NATO. Wouldn't you be somewhat suspicious, perhaps even frightened, if a large number of countries created a loose coalition based upon military premises, and we weren't invited to be a part of it? Even if NATO now only operates to give countries a channel to provide non-military aid to each other, why should an outsider believe that? It's not much different than how we view Iran and nuclear technology: they need electricity just like the rest of us, and they claim that they just want nuclear reactors for that purpose, but we're frightened and don't believe them. Why should Russia trust NATO?

[Zu Ra]

Originally Posted by Orchunter226

I think you're missing one key point, Geta. Russia shouldn't care at all about NATO bordering it, unless it has malicious plans. .

Russia does care about NATO irrespective of any intent . Any country wont like it old enemies setting up camp on its borders . Even if there is pecae between those two countries its not good military strategy . I wouldnt like my countries security to be breached in this manner . This isnt respective to Russia alone US would act the same way if Russia pulled something like that . To further substantiate what I am sayings lets go into detail

Lets take a hypothetically scenario where Canada goes communist stock piles itself with Nukes and allies with Russia . So going by your scenario if USA has no malicious plans they shouldnt be bothered by it let alone be concerned . Will this bode well with US Establishment ?. There will be no action from US Government and it will just sit down and go hey we have no malicious plans so its okay .

Why Russia is bothered as its an threat to National Security . If there is scenario where Russia and US are forced to go to War . Who has the full house here who has the advantage who has the troops in enemy's backyard .

Cold war was fueled by ' if ' if Russia attacks and usurp democratic countries . If Russia has plans to attack US . The same if made both the countries stockpile Nukes and Troops .

NATO was initially created to keep the Soviets in check But, that is long gone, and now NATO just focuses on helping each other when one country is in a crisis. NATO also acts as a peacekeeping force sometimes, similar to what the UN should do. But like I said, unless Russia is intending to attack a NATO ally, it shouldn't need to worry.

We have UN Peace Keepers for that we have UN Security Council . There is no need for NATO now unless US still views Russia as a threat . NATO is a cold war relic which should be dismantled . If NATO wants to do these activities without any hidden personal agenda they could where very well assimilate into UN (as its ineffective). They could carry on there missions under the control of Security Council .

World Politics isnt so simple as saying long as Russia behaves itself NATO wont be a bother .Reverse the scenario and say USA attacks Russia who has the advantage due to NATO ?.The whole point I was trying to make was having you old enemy on your borders cant be overlooked or ignored .

Sometimes, I think Putin wants to resurrect the old Soviet Union. I wonder if he feels sadness some days that Russia is TECHNICALLY a democracy.

I been to ST Peterburgs and Moscow . And from what I saw Russians have embraced capitalism with much fervour . There is no chance in hell that Russia will go commie again . If you want to see capitalism and consumerism at its very best you should visit Nevsky Prospekt .

Also Putin is a sell out just like Yeltsin, he is a mere pawn in the hands of Oligarchs . Recent Reports suggest he quite well may be a billionaire

http://weltpolitik-blog.blogspot.com...llionaire.html

[Lathdrinor]

Communism is long dead. NATO has been reinvented as an apparatus of Euro-American dominance. In this respect, it's clear that NATO would be against Russia, since Russia seeks to challenge US influence (projected through the post-Soviet states of Ukraine, Georgia, etc., all of which were created by revolutions that the US supported) in the Caucasus.

[gabbytay]

Originally Posted by Lathdrinor

Communism is long dead. NATO has been reinvented as an apparatus of Euro-American dominance. In this respect, it's clear that NATO would be against Russia, since Russia seeks to challenge US influence (projected through the post-Soviet states of Ukraine, Georgia, etc., all of which were created by revolutions that the US supported) in the Caucasus.

Are you Implying that Russia shouldn't challenge US dominance?

[Lathdrinor]

In international politics, right and wrong are often relative. In this respect, an American might tell you that the US has done much good in the world during its tenure as global superpower and that Russia, by comparison, has only contributed misery via Communism. Russians, on the other hand, will probably tell you that American dominance is due to be challenged, and that based on its recent behavior, the US is no longer capable of being a moral leader.

Who's right? It depends on how you look at it. Certainly there are good arguments for both sides. At the end of the day, though, it's not always about who's right - more likely, it's about whose interests are being served, and in the case of NATO, that would be the interests of the US-led West.

[WanderingKnight]

lol @ Communism in the 21th century.

Guess it's the same kind of ignorance plaguing those who can't seem to understand the difference between economical and political systems.

After all, China is a tyranny, so they HAVE to be communist, right? Uncle Sam don't deal with anti-freedom pinko communist dictators.

[Zoned87]

Originally Posted by WanderingKnight

lol @ Communism in the 21th century.

Guess it's the same kind of ignorance plaguing those who can't seem to understand the difference between economical and political systems.

After all, China is a tyranny, so they HAVE to be communist, right? Uncle Sam don't deal with anti-freedom pinko communist dictators.

China has alot of cheap labor and materials that we benefit from, so they are exempt.