PDA

View Full Version : Russia Invades Georgia


Davian93
08-08-2008, 10:27 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/08/08/georgia.ossetia/index.html

Russian Bear Smash!!!

Luckily for the US, they invaded the less important Georgia that doesn't contain Atlanta. Still it bears watching.

StrangePackage
08-08-2008, 10:30 AM
I'll take the Dawgs to beat the spread, and bet the over.

Ivhon
08-08-2008, 10:31 AM
Lovely world we live in.

Everyone knows that we are massively overextended from our bogus war in Iraq and that we cannot spare one iota of military aid anywhere else in the world.

Which gives our dear friend Mr. Putin carte blanche license to invade wherever Russian interests decide that a land grab would be beneficial since he knows perfectly well we are all talk right now.

Gilshalos Sedai
08-08-2008, 10:37 AM
Nothing like a common enemy to bring an end to a boiling civil war.

Unfortunately, the USSR is using it to rise from the dead.

StrangePackage
08-08-2008, 10:58 AM
Nothing like a common enemy to bring an end to a boiling civil war.

Unfortunately, the USSR is using it to rise from the dead.

http://bp2.blogger.com/_9E75GWFDMec/SCUIuQuaXzI/AAAAAAAAAMU/_Wx9htfjNgQ/s400/SimpsonsUSSR.jpg

That is what we WANTED you to believe! HAHAHAHAHA

Realnow
08-08-2008, 11:05 AM
This thread wins Davian!

But yeah, I thought you meant that other Georgia to begin with, phew.

tanaww
08-08-2008, 03:52 PM
I'll take the Dawgs to beat the spread, and bet the over.

Ha ha ha! No worries, I'm sure they won't play the Cocks or the Heels. I think they'll try some interleague with the Gators and Seminoles next. My money's on Florida straight up.

irerancincpkc
08-09-2008, 08:05 AM
This is a very serious situation, and while I doubt it, I hope it can come to a peaceful end. Go Georgia! :D

Ivhon
08-09-2008, 08:41 AM
This is a very serious situation, and while I doubt it, I hope it can come to a peaceful end. Go Georgia! :D


It will come to a peaceful end. With one less sovereign nation on the map.

Sarevok
08-09-2008, 08:46 AM
It will come to a peaceful end. With one less sovereign nation on the map.
Either that, or a whole bunch more nations...

4Alethinos
08-09-2008, 09:32 PM
I wonder what in the world was the leadership in Caucasian Georgia thinking when they decided to tick off Russia?

Who would come to their aid. Certainly not the US and not the hapless and helpless Euros. As others have pointed out we really could not support Georgia and why should we? Their gas and oil terminal services Russia and Europe. Oh wait, I forgot, no war for oil. Where are the protestors? Where is the outrage among the intellegentsia? Oh wait, they are really on the Marxist-Lenenist side so they will have nothing to say except platitudes.

Putin will go after them just as he did the Chechnyans and with better results from the Russain point of view.

Power and the will tu use it has driven international politics for many milleniums now. Do not expect any changes soon.

Frenzy
08-10-2008, 02:18 AM
This thread wins Davian!

But yeah, I thought you meant that other Georgia to begin with, phew.
Which is why the shit in Darfur has been going on for how long now? i mean, who gives a crap about people we don't know dying in a country we confuse with our own drought-stricken backwater. John Edwards had an affair, for crap's sake! Priorities, people!!

jason wolfbrother
08-10-2008, 02:41 AM
Old News Frenzy. Paris Hilton put out a political ad???? now that is news ;)

Sodas
08-10-2008, 02:46 AM
Putin will go after them
Putin is no longer President. He will have Medvedev do it for him, but I'm just nitpicking.

And btw, from Bush to Obama, they all want the fighting to end.

How come only McCain seems to think Georgia the victim? That we need to kick Russia out of the G8? And that NATO needs to be involved - despite Georgia not being a NATO member.

Oh, that's right (http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/08/the-trouble-wit.html), his top foriegn policy advisor was a lobbyist for Georgia.

Sinistrum
08-10-2008, 01:19 PM
And btw, from Bush to Obama, they all want the fighting to end

And yet all any of them are willing to do is talk about it.

How come only McCain seems to think Georgia the victim?

Explain to me why they are not.

GonzoTheGreat
08-10-2008, 01:46 PM
Explain to me why they are not.
Once upon a time, a bit over a century ago, Ossetia and Georgia were both more or less independent states. Then Russia conquered the region. During the Soviet period borders were drawn and redrawn, and when the Soviet Union ended the latest borders were used to make to make newly independent states. According to these borders, half of Ossetia is part of Russia, the other half belongs to Georgia. Just as the Georgians wanted self determination, so do the Ossetians.

Now, I suspect things are a lot more complicated than that, thoroughly messing up all hope for a reasonable solution, but neither side is entirely correct. I do think that Georgia is more correct, but I doubt Putin (or Medvedev, for that matter) is going to pay all that much more attention to my opinion than Bush did in the matter of Iraq.

Sinistrum
08-10-2008, 02:17 PM
Once upon a time, a bit over a century ago, Ossetia and Georgia were both more or less independent states. Then Russia conquered the region. During the Soviet period borders were drawn and redrawn, and when the Soviet Union ended the latest borders were used to make to make newly independent states. According to these borders, half of Ossetia is part of Russia, the other half belongs to Georgia. Just as the Georgians wanted self determination, so do the Ossetians.

Makes sense in terms of background though I wonder what indications there are that the Russians are truly interested in Ossetian independence and not just out to grab territory.

Davian93
08-10-2008, 05:40 PM
Things will be alot more peaceful once the reborn Russian Empire regains its pre-1914 borders again...its only a matter of time at this point...go Czar Vladimir Putin I!

Sodas
08-10-2008, 07:02 PM
Once upon a time, a bit over a century ago, Ossetia and Georgia were both more or less independent states. Then Russia conquered the region. During the Soviet period borders were drawn and redrawn, and when the Soviet Union ended the latest borders were used to make to make newly independent states. According to these borders, half of Ossetia is part of Russia, the other half belongs to Georgia. Just as the Georgians wanted self determination, so do the Ossetians.

Now, I suspect things are a lot more complicated than that, thoroughly messing up all hope for a reasonable solution, but neither side is entirely correct. I do think that Georgia is more correct, but I doubt Putin (or Medvedev, for that matter) is going to pay all that much more attention to my opinion than Bush did in the matter of Iraq.
It's my understanding that South Ossetia broke away from Georgia in the early 1990's. They have been working with the Russians since, for economic and security reasons. So the Russians have had peacekeepers in that region to protect against the Georgians.

It's the Georgians moving military back into that zone that has caused this conflict. The Russians are claiming the Georgians killed many of their peacekeepers and were wiping out the population of South Ossetia (which is probably somewhere between 50,000-100,000).

Birgitte
08-10-2008, 07:39 PM
It's the Georgians moving military back into that zone that has caused this conflict. The Russians are claiming the Georgians killed many of their peacekeepers and were wiping out the population of South Ossetia (which is probably somewhere between 50,000-100,000).

Is that confirmed by anyone other than the Russians? Because, seriously... Who would be that stupid? "Yes, I'm an itty bitty country that Russia could eat for breakfast and won't have any moral problems with doing so, how about I kill a bunch of Russians and the people they were protecting?!" Honestly... If that's true, then the people who made that decision deserve what they're likely to get when the Russians get their hands on them. But I have a hard time believing it's not lies and Russian propaganda.

Purple Dragon
08-11-2008, 03:48 AM
be quiet...
if you make people think NOW, then by the time Denmark uses our 10 outdated tanks and 3 submarines to takes over all of Scandinavia to use as our base for world conquest, they'll never believe it when we claim that they started it and then we'll never get International help in beating up the bigger countries.

GonzoTheGreat
08-11-2008, 05:46 AM
Makes sense in terms of background though I wonder what indications there are that the Russians are truly interested in Ossetian independence and not just out to grab territory.
Well, perhaps some Russian said something like that, if they ever even thought of it. Apart from that, there are no such indications at all.
It's my understanding that South Ossetia broke away from Georgia in the early 1990's. They have been working with the Russians since, for economic and security reasons. So the Russians have had peacekeepers in that region to protect against the Georgians.
Of course, there is not much evidence the Georgians wanted to do anything else then merely restor the rule of law. Those Russian peace keepers were not all that much more justified in being there than Saddam's peace keepers were in Quwait in the early 1990's. I'm quite sure Russia would have had something to say if another country had sent peace keepers into Chechnya, for example.

It's the Georgians moving military back into that zone that has caused this conflict. The Russians are claiming the Georgians killed many of their peacekeepers and were wiping out the population of South Ossetia (which is probably somewhere between 50,000-100,000).
The Georgians claim that they were merely restoring their territorial integrity.

Of course, the dastardly Georgians are willing to let journalists into the area, while the brave and honest Russians throw bombs at those journalists (as shown on the BBC news yesterday). So it is not entirely clear who is the most trustworthy in this case. I have my suspicions, but not many people on this board seem willing to trust my opinion in cases like this.

Ishara
08-11-2008, 08:29 AM
Yeah, it's definitely being protrayed on the news over here that Georgia is the instigator of this issue, and that they are the "bad" guys. Poor little Russia is just defending South Ossetia's right to independence. Yeah. Right.

The way I see it, South Ossetia wanted independence. Fine. But Russia supported them against Georgia because in the end, they wanted the territory. So make a nation beholden to you for trade and economic support, then come to its rescue, and when you bring them into the fiold, who'll look twice?

The fact of the matter is, this is a big freaking deal. That Russia is essentially making a landgrab right when everyone knows that the major military power in the world is overextended on two fronts is no coincidence. I see nothing but trouble coming from this, and the longer people close their eyes to what this portends, the worse off we will all be.

Davian93
08-11-2008, 08:33 AM
Why don't countries like Ukraine come to their defense...you know the whole common enemy and all. My grim prediction is that countries like Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia, etc will be independent in name only by around 2020...

Davian93
08-11-2008, 08:45 AM
So far news sources:

CNN: Pro-Georgia
MSNBC: Pro-Russia
Fauxnews: Pro-Georgia
BBCNews: Pretty Neutral actually/slightly Pro-Georgia maybe
CBCNews: Pro-Russia

Ishara
08-11-2008, 08:52 AM
2012 at the latest, I think, if things keep going as they are right now.

Makes Putin's comment re: Solzhenitsyn even more disgusting, don't you think?

Davian93
08-11-2008, 08:59 AM
2012 at the latest, I think, if things keep going as they are right now.

Makes Putin's comment re: Solzhenitsyn even more disgusting, don't you think?

Yeah just a tad.

Thinking for a moment, Ukraine shut up pretty quickly when Russia cut off that natural gas pipeline a couple years back IIRC. Small states cannot survive between two major powers and remain independent.

StrangePackage
08-11-2008, 09:22 AM
My Russian professor in college had the biggest laugh when Bush originally claimed he looked into Putin's soul. As she informed the class, the Russians call Putin "Nashe Nemezkey"- literally, "Our German." "What soul does he have to look into?" she joked to us.

The man is soulless and power-hungry, and so long as the price of oil remains where it is, he will do whatever he damn well pleases.

Gilshalos Sedai
08-11-2008, 09:30 AM
Welcome to the Cold War
We got fun 'n' games
We got everything you want
Honey we know the names
We are the people that can find
Whatever you may need
If you got the money honey
We got your disease

Terez
08-11-2008, 09:33 AM
When you're high, you never
ever wanna come down.

Davian93
08-11-2008, 09:36 AM
The ever rare GnR reference.

Gilshalos Sedai
08-11-2008, 09:39 AM
Sorry, just struck me as appropriate. I know I'm wierd, you can stop pointing now.

Sodas
08-11-2008, 01:55 PM
I don't feel either the Georgians or Russians are free of guilt, don't get me wrong. The Georgians for going over the border, and the Russians for using it as an excuse to pound Georgia.

That said, I think this the major failure of Condolezza Rice, who is supposed to have been picked because of her expertise in Russia. She might be the worst US secretary of state in the last 50 years.

Davian93
08-11-2008, 02:03 PM
I don't feel either the Georgians or Russians are free of guilt, don't get me wrong. The Georgians for going over the border, and the Russians for using it as an excuse to pound Georgia.

That said, I think this the major failure of Condolezza Rice, who is supposed to have been picked because of her expertise in Russia. She might be the worst US secretary of state in the last 50 years.

Having read her dissertation paper (I own a book that has a copy of it)...I am not very surprised. There's a reason that Rumsfeld always referred to as, "A jumped-up Russian Studies grad student." and had absolutely no respect for her. That's pretty sad considering the source (who's quite the moron himself though probably better qualified on the Russians overall). Her dissertation was not impressive BTW.

Sodas
08-11-2008, 04:50 PM
Obviously, Russia is gambling that we won't take action, now that it has been confirmed that they are entering Georgia territory. Let's see how far they go. I wonder if they will be pushing for "regime change."

The problem is that McCain is calling to move ahead quickly for Georgia to be included in the NATO alliance. Georgia and Ukraine were both promised they would be included back in April if you remember. And the reasoning at the time was to allow both countries to improve their relationships with Russia BEFOREHAND. That way, those two countries would not become a center of a confrontation between Russia and the U.S. So McCain's case, that Georgia should be included in NATO, while it's at war with Russia, would mean the US would be technically at war with Russia. Hence, the craziness of it all.

It doesn't mean we shouldn't be ready to intervene, but there is alot to be said about it happening now - while Bush is weak, Olympics are a distraction, and the US remains tied up.

yks 6nnetu hing
08-12-2008, 07:10 AM
Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Ukraine have the heads of state in Georgia right now (look at the map, you'll see that is the entire Eastern border of EU, minus Finland but they don't count anyway because they're not in NATO and don't want to be unlike Ukraine which isn't in neither but really really wants to be). Estonia has also already sent the "battle hardened" IT experts to Georgia to stop/ hamper the internet attacks... so yes, there is solidarity there at least.

as for provocation and history, let's just say that things in South Ossetia and Abkhasia got a LOT worse earlier this year when Russia sent in their "peace corps" and started supplying the rebels with weapons. Georgia protested... and protested... and applied to all imaginable international organs to at least get international (i.e. non-Russian) peace keepers in but no one reacted really. Look at it this way: say if Texas wanted to join Mexico and there would be some (scattered) gunfire and lots of bad feelings and THEN if Mexico would send in "peacekeepers" to Texas. Those are most definitely not impartial to whom they protect, right? and then if those peacekeepers took part on the rebel's side in some of the shootings and started giving out weapons? that's not keeping peace AT ALL, if you ask me...

And then, when Georgia sees 150 Russian tanks crossing the border and retaliates, everyone says it's Georgia's fault. And then Georgia tries to backtrack a little and offers truce for 3 hours so that the civilians could be evacuated, Russians just keep shooting...

The most alarming bit about this whole issue is the reason Russia brings for its actions: they are protecting native Russians and Russian passport-holders from the discriminating Georgians (and so what if last year Georgian natives were sacked, beaten up on the streets and deported from Russia en masse last year after the issue with the Russian spy-plane over Georgia? that's not discrimination, that's... er... based on individual merits. yes.) If no one says anything about this reason then yes, tomorrow it will be Ukraine, the day after that the Baltics, the day after that England. Because that's where all the Russian natives/passport holders are. And since they don't run those countries, they are - obviously - discriminated in those countries.

Davian93
08-12-2008, 08:20 AM
Question for yks: Didn't Russia and Belarus basically sign a reunification pact 8 or 9 years ago. Whatever happened to that and why was it never implemented? I could swear I remember reading about it at some point.

I agree on the farce that is "protecting ethnic russians". There are ethnic Russians in most Eastern Bloc states in varying degrees. The eastern oblasts of Ukraine for example are heavily Russian (and right along a strategic corridor) as are parts of Kazahkstan, Belarus, and the Baltic. The whole reasoning is very imperial in viewpoint. This could easily be 1908 instead of 2008 when you look at the motivations behind the move.

Gilshalos Sedai
08-12-2008, 08:49 AM
I agree on the farce that is "protecting ethnic russians".


What next? Are they going to protect them HERE?

Uno
08-12-2008, 10:16 AM
Question for yks: Didn't Russia and Belarus basically sign a reunification pact 8 or 9 years ago. Whatever happened to that and why was it never implemented? I could swear I remember reading about it at some point.

I agree on the farce that is "protecting ethnic russians". There are ethnic Russians in most Eastern Bloc states in varying degrees. The eastern oblasts of Ukraine for example are heavily Russian (and right along a strategic corridor) as are parts of Kazahkstan, Belarus, and the Baltic. The whole reasoning is very imperial in viewpoint. This could easily be 1908 instead of 2008 when you look at the motivations behind the move.

Russia and Belarus signed a political union more than a decade ago, but it's never amounted to much. Pretty much a paper entity at the moment, it would appear. I don't think Lukashenko is that eager to place himself in the hands of Medvedev-Putin.

I'd say that the Russian argument echoes 1938, considering that the alleged need to protect Volksdeutsche served as justification for German expansionism in eastern Europe.

yks 6nnetu hing
08-12-2008, 10:30 AM
What next? Are they going to protect them HERE?

of course... duh! What most people don't understand about Russia is that in Russia's mind, it is mutilated, stripped of its natural parts (such as Ukraine, the heart of Old-Russia and Constantinople, of course... nowadays known as Istanbul. And actually, when you think about it, Russia is really the successor of Rome what with the Tzars - the name comes from caesar - and all. Starting to sound farmiliar?) and on top of that has a God-given right to expand to wherever there are Russians. Like the Moon. And the North Pole. And all of the space, for that matter.

Russia is like a reverse-anorexic. It holds a sixth of Earth and STILL, looking at the map, it sees itself as too small, powerless and hated. er... well, it is hated right now anyway so they have that right.



Dav, Belarus pretty much is an extension of Russia. Unlike Ukraine or Georgia (this millennium) they haven't put up a fight and have very obediently done everything Russia has asked so... you know...

Davian93
08-12-2008, 11:27 AM
Historically they have a far better claim to Ukraine (Little Russia), Georgia, Belarus (White Russia) and most of the former Turkistan than alot of countries that have expanded.

I don't like it but technically they do have a point about their former territories. Many of those conquests go back to the time of Peter the Great and even before him. Therefore I can see where they're coming from. You could very well use your Texas reference the other way around when with Russia looking at Georgia as a rebellious province.


That said, I still don't agree with their aggression.

Davian93
08-12-2008, 11:30 AM
I'd say that the Russian argument echoes 1938, considering that the alleged need to protect Volksdeutsche served as justification for German expansionism in eastern Europe.

Taking eastern Prussia away (and giving it to Poland, a historical enemy) was a big mistake after WWI by the allies. As was the Saar restrictions and the indemnities. They basically dared Germany to come back for another round.

irerancincpkc
08-12-2008, 11:53 AM
I think the way Georgia acted is being ignored in this, a lot. They need to share a very good portion of the blame, as well as our leaders.

GonzoTheGreat
08-12-2008, 12:00 PM
Alaska was Russian too, wasn't it?

Gilshalos Sedai
08-12-2008, 12:00 PM
There speaks someone too young to remember the Cold War. ;)


Though perhaps that's a good thing in some cases.

Davian93
08-12-2008, 12:06 PM
There speaks someone too young to remember the Cold War.


Yup. Georgia has been being undermined for years in this matter Spammer. Their actions have been defensive in nature despite what Russia would have you believe.

irerancincpkc
08-12-2008, 12:09 PM
Russia has grown over the past years, and Bush and the supposed expert Condi Rice have sat back, thinking they will do whatever we say. And then yesterday, Bush makes demands with nothing to back them up. Why did our wonderful VP say Russia's action will not go unanswered' when we will not go to war with them? Why did the US permit Georgia, last week, to march into South Ossetia? Why did the US provoke Moscow for a number of years by building up Georgia's military?

Davian93
08-12-2008, 12:18 PM
Q: Why did our wonderful VP say Russia's action will not go unanswered' when we will not go to war with them?

Because there are other options we can use such as the popular "Emergency Security Council meeting" followed by empty economic threats. We can't project power into Central Asia and Putin knows it. We wouldn't anyway even if we could...it would be suicidal at best.

Q: Why did the US permit Georgia, last week, to march into South Ossetia?

Well for one they are a sovereign power and we can't tell them not too even if we suggest to them otherwise. Also, they are an ally (one that recently had 2K troops in Iraq) and we try to give them the benefit of the doubt when they do things. Also, the US knows about all the aggression taking place by Russia over the past few months and years and may have been hoping to spotlight an issue to the world by allowing Georgia to ignite the situation.
Q: Why did the US provoke Moscow for a number of years by building up Georgia's military?

They are an ally and of strategic interst to us as part of our continuing containment of Russia to the north and Iran to the south. Also, because we can.

irerancincpkc
08-12-2008, 12:28 PM
1. Doesn't change the fact that all they are doing to splurting empty threats, playing the media, while Russia laughs at them.

2. If we had told Georgia not to, they wouldn't have. And if what you are saying about the spotlight is true, you mean to tell me our leaders were willing to sacfrice how many Georgians, to shed light on an issue? I don't think so; I think the White House underestimated Russia because of over-confidence.

3. Because we can? Come on. That is exactly the same attitude that continues this mess in Iraq, and continues to get us in scraps.

Gilshalos Sedai
08-12-2008, 12:33 PM
Spammer Said:
Q: Why did our wonderful VP say Russia's action will not go unanswered' when we will not go to war with them?

Dav Said:
Because there are other options we can use such as the popular "Emergency Security Council meeting" followed by empty economic threats. We can't project power into Central Asia and Putin knows it. We wouldn't anyway even if we could...it would be suicidal at best.

Because Vizini was correct, never get involved in a land war in Asia.

Spammer Said:
2. If we had told Georgia not to, they wouldn't have. And if what you are saying about the spotlight is true, you mean to tell me our leaders were willing to sacfrice how many Georgians, to shed light on an issue? I don't think so; I think the White House underestimated Russia because of over-confidence.

I'll buy the overconfidence part. That's part and parcel to every policy this administration has implemented.

Davian93
08-12-2008, 12:43 PM
Spammer I wasn't justifying it...just explaining it. ;)

Ivhon
08-12-2008, 06:39 PM
Because Vizini was correct, never get involved in a land war in Asia.



I'll buy the overconfidence part. That's part and parcel to every policy this administration has implemented.


I also believe our leaders are perfectly willing to sacrifice any number of foreign civilians (or domestic, if they can get away with it) to highlight an issue. Has been done before under a far more righteous administration than this one. My government is just as dirty as any others out there.

GonzoTheGreat
08-13-2008, 04:45 AM
My government is just as dirty as any others out there.
Well, no. I am willing to admit they're dirty, but I do not think that they are anywhere near the top of the league. You're ruled by merely mediocre dirt. You can't compete with someone like Mugabe, or the Sudanese, let alone Leterme.

Davian93
08-13-2008, 03:28 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/13/us.russia.diplomacy/index.html

Looks like it just got a bit more interesting. Russia apparently hasn't really declared a ceasefire and BUsh is sending US support to Georgia in every area but combat troops.

Interesting.

Gilshalos Sedai
08-13-2008, 03:37 PM
Only if you mean in the Chinese sense, Dav.

Davian93
08-13-2008, 03:40 PM
I see recognized Russian sovereignty over South Ossetia and Abkhazia in the very near future. Abkhazia is historically Russian anyway and they have a very good claim that is currently reinforcd by a friendly local gov't and their "peacekeeping" troops on the ground. South Ossetia will likely be given over too as Georgia and the other Eastern Bloc states find out how weak US support is when it comes to a land war in Central Asia.

Bryan Blaire
08-13-2008, 06:25 PM
If only they had the Kildar...

StrangePackage
08-13-2008, 07:25 PM
Thank God our administration had the foresight to recognize the pending threat recognized by this thug, Putin, and to strategically martial our forces and allies to resist their imperialist expansions, rather than squander our men, materiel, reputation, and credibility on a no-win war of choice.


Oh, wait.

Ivhon
08-13-2008, 07:49 PM
Thank God our administration had the foresight to recognize the pending threat recognized by this thug, Putin, and to strategically martial our forces and allies to resist their imperialist expansions, rather than squander our men, materiel, reputation, and credibility on a no-win war of choice.


Oh, wait.

Nonono... The Great Decider looked into Putin's soul and saw that he was "a good guy." How can you argue?

Davian93
08-13-2008, 07:53 PM
Nonono... The Great Decider looked into Putin's soul and saw that he was "a good guy." How can you argue?


God I hate Bush.

StrangePackage
08-13-2008, 08:09 PM
God I hate Bush.

At least he's using stern language against Putin now. Cuz, like Gil says, we don't want to get involved in a land war in Asia.

Not that we could get involved in another if we were so inclined.

irerancincpkc
08-13-2008, 08:17 PM
At least he's using stern language against Putin now.
Stern language he can't back up. Putin is laughing at the fool right now... before Bush goes blaming people he should look at himself.

Davian93
08-13-2008, 08:27 PM
Russia is merely resetting the historical status quo. It has always had buffer zones and after 20 years of weakness, they are reasserting themselves. This is their version of the Monroe Doctrine and the Banana Wars.

Sei'taer
08-13-2008, 08:43 PM
God I hate Bush.


Uh...heeheehahahahahHAHA
HAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAH
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
AH
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH
AHAH

I'm thinkin or Full Metal Jacket.

"Are you a peter puffer?"

Sodas
08-13-2008, 09:52 PM
Well, this is more than just a return to a larger country, this is about those gas pipelines and infrastruture that the US has spent millions on. It seems this is a strategic move by Russia and it needs to be stopped.

On the other hand, once again, we got McCain out there saying we are all Georgians. But now i'm reading about what the Georgian President is saying to his own people.
Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili conducted a blitz of interviews with news outlets at home and abroad and made a series of claims, some of which were disputed as inaccurate or exaggerated.

He said on national television that the U.S. arrival of a military cargo plane with humanitarian aid "means that Georgia's ports and airports will be taken under the control of the U.S. Defense Department."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26116598/

Who told him THAT?! The Pentagon denies it. Is it McCain who is telling him that? McCain claims he speaks with Saakashvili every day.

I'm not sure we'd ever get involved in a land war in asia. We'd skip straight to nuclear.

Davian93
08-13-2008, 10:07 PM
Hmmm...what wonderful choices Bush has given us with his 8 years of politicking:

1.) Support an ally that we can't actually support.

2.) Appease Russia and give in to their demands and look weak.


That's super.

Bryan Blaire
08-14-2008, 08:36 AM
Obama should be backing McCain up as well. After all, he was the one that said that we were all citizens of the world. Last I saw, Georgia was part of the world too.

Really, people should be mad at McCain for stealing Obama's line and mad at Obama for not saying "We are all Georgians" first.

As well, where is the condemnation from the Democratic party against Russia? After all, isn't this just an "illegal war of choice" by Russia? They've entered a country, made a demand of its elected President to step down, started bombing and taking cities, etc. I mean, the Democrats condemn our country for doing that in Iraq, where is the media coverage of their condemnations now? Oh, right, because the Speaker ran away from her duties for a book tour and turned off all the cameras in the House - where there is still debate being had, I might add, effectively hidden from the public, two Senators have abandoned their duties to run for President, and all in all, we, the People, are left in a lurch.

On the other hand, the Republican party should be shouting "Go Russia!"

;)

irerancincpkc
08-14-2008, 08:59 AM
Back McCain up? McCain has become part of the problem in this situation, deciding it was a good time to display his 'foreign policy stregnth' and actually screwing things up. McCain, who actually stated with a straight face that in the 21st century nations don't invade other nations. McCain, who was called out by the Georgian President, even though McCain's lead foreign policy advisor was a lobbyist for Georgia?

Thanks, but I'd rather have Obama like he is now, talking sense and what is right for America rather than pandering on what McCain thinks is the right message to get votes.

Sei'taer
08-14-2008, 10:29 AM
I really don't want to get into this conversation, but i just have to say this. Evidently nobody has said the right thing because it's still happening. So at this point who did better or worse is all a moot point. Seems to me that if someone was going to make it better it would have happened by now. Instead the Russians are still on the move and there is no ceasefire yet...and a lot of hot air is being blown by politicians all over the world.

Sinistrum
08-14-2008, 11:52 AM
Thanks, but I'd rather have Obama like he is now, talking sense and what is right for America

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ACwdYdu26xA

But if we are really citizens of the world like Obama told us, how can we simply sit by and only do what is right for America? As citizens of the world, don't we have a broader duty to do what is right globally?

Evidently nobody has said the right thing because it's still happening.

Ditto. Once again neither McCain nor Obama are getting it right.

After all, isn't this just an "illegal war of choice" by Russia?

Yeah, where is all the screaming about needing to get a security counsel resolution, trying sanctions, or diplomacy first? Or do those "rules" not apply simply because it is Russia.

Davian93
08-14-2008, 11:59 AM
How can we condemn Russia for doing exactly what we would do in the same situation? Or for acting unilaterally in their nation's best interests?

Yuri33
08-14-2008, 12:06 PM
That's the brilliance of Russia's invasion. I'm not endorsing it, but has anyone stopped to think about the timing? The US has a lame-duck and unpopular president, and is currently in the middle of election season, where the candidates are in no position to affect policy. The Olympics are on, and no one wants to ruin the atmosphere. The news may cover the invasion, but only when there's time in between Micheal Phelps's races.

Medvedev (Putin, really) could not have chosen a better time. Russia is trying to re-extend their sphere of influence, essentially trying to reconstitute the old Soviet Union. And it's all fueled by the massive wealth Russia is accumulating from high oil prices. Think about it: if Russia next decides to invade the Ukraine, who's going to stop them?

Neither candidate has a sufficient plan, and really, neither candidate, when elected, has a strong position with which to restrain Russia, especially when we're talking about Russia's back yard.

Crispin's Crispian
08-14-2008, 12:08 PM
That's the brilliance of Russia's invasion. I'm not endorsing it, but has anyone stopped to think about the timing? The US has a lame-duck and unpopular president, and is currently in the middle of election season, where the candidates are in no position to affect policy. The Olympics are on, and no one wants to ruin the atmosphere. The news may cover the invasion, but only when there's time in between Micheal Phelps's races.

Medvedev (Putin, really) could not have chosen a better time. Russia is trying to re-extend their sphere of influence, essentially trying to reconstitute the old Soviet Union. And it's all fueled by the massive wealth Russia is accumulating from high oil prices. Think about it: if Russia next decides to invade the Ukraine, who's going to stop them?

Neither candidate has a sufficient plan, and really, neither candidate, when elected, has a strong position with which to restrain Russia, especially when we're talking about Russia's back yard.
Well, the timing wasn't entirely Russia's doing, since Georgia "invaded" South Ossetia first. Russia definitely took advantage of the opportunity though, and is now entrenched.

Davian93
08-14-2008, 12:09 PM
Ukraine has a pretty big (300K) and very well equipped military...that would be quite bloody for Russia.

This is far older than the USSR though. These areas have always been in Russia's sphere of influence or direct rule. The last 20 years is the exception to the rule...not this invasion. Georgia leaving Russia was the equivalent of Maine leaving the US...We'd want Maine back right?

Gilshalos Sedai
08-14-2008, 12:12 PM
Um, Dav... So. Osetia is part of Georgia. No. Osetia is part of Russia. So. Osetia was getting uppity because it wanted to be reunited with No. Osetia. It started attacking its lawful government. The lawful government waded in and started shoot the uppity residents of So. Osetia.

Russia, being the big bad bully on the block, decided little Georgia was being aggressive towards its borders. And sent in troops to "protect ethnic Russians" in So. Osetia and BEYOND.

That's like Minnesota throwing a fit because it wants to go back to being part of Canada (not that it ever was), us moving in with the national guard and Canada deciding to invade us because we were a vague threat, not that we'd crossed their borders to subdue the residents of MN, or anything.


At least that's what I'm getting in summary from everything I've read.

Sinistrum
08-14-2008, 12:17 PM
How can we condemn Russia for doing exactly what we would do in the same situation? Or for acting unilaterally in their nation's best interests?

That is sort of the point Dav. The fact is the liberals in this country, for right or wrong, DID condemn us for doing exactly what Russia is doing right now. And now all I hear is crickets chirping from them. No whining about human rights, no picketing with signs comparing Putin to Hitler, no chants of no blood for oil. Nothing.

Davian93
08-14-2008, 12:21 PM
Gil, the difference is that Georgia is historically part of Russia and was an integral part of both the Russian Empire and USSR for over 250 years. Russia feels, rightly, that it has claim to all of it...they're being rational by taking Abhkazia and So. Ossetia first.

Gilshalos Sedai
08-14-2008, 12:22 PM
And Texas was once a part of Mexico for over 100 years. So what?

Davian93
08-14-2008, 12:24 PM
If Mexico were stronger it would probably contest the claim...Russia is stronger. Besides, Russia has strategic interests in the area. The same justifications we used for Iraq and hell, even the Mexican War can be used for Russia.

I don't like it or support their attack but I see little ground for us to stand on without appearing heavily hypocritical.

Gilshalos Sedai
08-14-2008, 12:36 PM
At the risk of invoking Godwin's Law....


Germany invading the Rhine valley was looking after its own strategic interests, too.

irerancincpkc
08-14-2008, 01:00 PM
But if we are really citizens of the world like Obama told us, how can we simply sit by and only do what is right for America? As citizens of the world, don't we have a broader duty to do what is right globally?

Yes we do. As Obama says...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qISqGnZWw0

You can't tell me he would have allowed Georgia to provoke anything, like Bush did or McCain would.

Gilshalos Sedai
08-14-2008, 01:07 PM
So... who did Georgia provoke, exactly, by trying to subdue it's own province?

Sinistrum
08-14-2008, 01:13 PM
You can't tell me he would have allowed Georgia to provoke anything, like Bush did or McCain would.

Furthermore, last time I checked Georgia was a sovereign nation. Isn't suggesting that Obama "wouldn't let" Georgia do something demonstrating the same kind of arrogant assumption of control and supremacy so many like you Ire, harp on the Bush adminsitration for showing toward the rest of the world?

Ivhon
08-14-2008, 01:27 PM
How has this turned to a discussion of US electoral politics?

Neither McCain nor Obama has a whit of influence on this situation. Bush does, a bit (outside the overextended military in Asia, etc.).

And yet this has come around to the candidates? And as usual, the liberals are somehow wrong?

This is a complicated international issue with neither side - Russia or Georgia - clearly in the right or clearly in the wrong. There are geopolitical concerns that go beyond this, of course. But how does it have to do with how either McCain or Obama have a) contributed to the mess or b) is being hypocritical about what should be done?

StrangePackage
08-14-2008, 02:41 PM
Ivhon, haven't you learned yet that libruls are responsible for every bad thing in the entire world?

Obviously, Obama ordered this invasion.

Or something.

Really, I don't understand what point, if any, injecting US electoral politics has in this situation, other that the one party in control of this country for the last 8 years has effectively eliminated any ability of our nation to respond to this kind of aggressive behavior diplomatically, economically, or militarily, and they desperately want people not to be aware of that. Going on the offensive precludes those they attack from discussing exactly why it is that we are paralyzed and can't respond.

Sinistrum
08-14-2008, 02:59 PM
Ivhon, haven't you learned yet that libruls are responsible for every bad thing in the entire world?

Really, and here I thought everyone blamed Bush for all the worlds ills. Speaking of him...

Going on the offensive precludes those they attack from discussing exactly why it is that we are paralyzed and can't respond.

If ya notice, nobody is exactly giving him a ringing endorsement for his response either. ;) I think his incompetence and responsibility for our inability to properly react is sort of taken as a given at this point, which is why nobody is discussing it.

How has this turned to a discussion of US electoral politics?

In answer to that question, U.S. electorial politics got drawn into this discussion at the point below.

And btw, from Bush to Obama, they all want the fighting to end.

How come only McCain seems to think Georgia the victim? That we need to kick Russia out of the G8? And that NATO needs to be involved - despite Georgia not being a NATO member.

Oh, that's right, his top foriegn policy advisor was a lobbyist for Georgia.


Lets see, that would be post #14, by Sodas, an Obama supporter. Glad I was able to clear this up.

Crispin's Crispian
08-14-2008, 03:25 PM
Ukraine has a pretty big (300K) and very well equipped military...that would be quite bloody for Russia.

This is far older than the USSR though. These areas have always been in Russia's sphere of influence or direct rule. The last 20 years is the exception to the rule...not this invasion. Georgia leaving Russia was the equivalent of Maine leaving the US...We'd want Maine back right?
Ooo...are you calling for a thread on state secession and the rights of the federal government?

Do it Dav, do it! Cascadia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cascadia_(independence_movement))

Sei'taer
08-14-2008, 05:30 PM
I have a question. A guy I work with is a Serb and he is watching this really closely. He says that Iraq lost it's sovereignty in the first Gulf War (Desert Storm) and they did not get it back until June 28 of 2004. According to him, the UN is the one that made the determination of sovereignty just like they did in his country. I tried to find something online, but the stories are all over the place and I can't access the UN website here at work...funny that its blocked by the firewall...lol.

He is freaked out by what this means to his part of the world and has begun the process of spending his life savings to move his family here. He is really worried that this is going to go very bad for that part of the world.

Bryan Blaire
08-14-2008, 06:16 PM
Thanks, but I'd rather have Obama like he is now, talking sense and what is right for America

Yup... LOL

Playing golf in Hawaii. :eek:

It is great for America.

As has been pointed out, Obama and McCain have 0 influence for the US or Asia ATM in regards to this conflict. That's what has made their actions so ridiculously silly, Obama in calling for the cease-fire (and his supporters for thinking that the Russians had actually listened to him) and McCain for effectively egging the Georgian President on (and the Georgian President for seeming to listen to him and think that he could actually do something for the country).

I did ask though, "Why is there no righteous indignation, hatred and vitrol being spread around by the US media and the Democratic party about Russia and its actions, when they have already shown that they are more than willing to do it to their own country about a very similar situation?" Well, similar, barring the fact that with Iraq, there were at least some UN resolutions not being followed, etc. There's not even that kind of flimsy, limited support to invoke here for Russia's response. I also asked "Why the hell isn't the Republican party standing up and yelling 'Go Team, er, Russia' in response to this move as well?"

SP, your persecution complex seems as big as the Republicans right now... ;)

As far as state seccession, I was going to bring that up too, SDog. LOL

Davian93
08-14-2008, 06:29 PM
States cannot legally secede...its unconstitutional. The Civil War set the precedent for that.

Though there is a fervent secessionist movment in Vermont as well...feel free to google "The Second Vermont Republic"

Mort
08-14-2008, 06:30 PM
In other news, Georgia has a pretty tough newsreporter. (http://beltwaysnark.com/2008/08/14/tamara-urushadze-is-hardcore/)

She gets graced by a bullet while doing a live tv bit and continues the reporting. Anything for the audience I guess :)

Davian93
08-14-2008, 06:47 PM
Considering that Georgia tried to seize power in a autonomous province (Think Serbia in Kosovo) and Russia came to the defense of their own citizens that have Russian passports and have been autonomous for many years...Geogia deserves what it got. Honestly, I will be impartial and not Pro-America for a moment. Russia has a right to secure its borders and defend those provinces. Georgia should never have been allowed to leave Russia to begin with nor should alot of the southern tier states...The Baltic states, Poland all have a history of independence despite their inclusion in the Warsaw Pact. These countries do not. Georgia has been part of the Rodina for centuries with but a brief interlude since 1991 til now. If Mother Russia wants to take its oblasts back then they have every right. The only Law under International Law is that there is no laws. Just as we could invade Iraq and Afghanistan because we saw strategic interests...Russia can try to take back its lost provinces (and coincidentally the vast oil fields within them...) If Russia managed to reassert its historic sovereignty over its lost states in the Causcasus, Ukraine, the former Turkistan, and Belarussia, I would'nt see it as anything more than the natural order being restored after a brief period of disorder. Now if they attempted to take back Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia or Poland that would be wrong...

That being said, I hope they fail and fail miserably as I don't want to see a reborn Russian Empire with huge strategic oil reserves and the leadership to make the US merely an equal at best. That would suck for us.

irerancincpkc
08-14-2008, 07:30 PM
Furthermore, last time I checked Georgia was a sovereign nation. Isn't suggesting that Obama "wouldn't let" Georgia do something demonstrating the same kind of arrogant assumption of control and supremacy so many like you Ire, harp on the Bush adminsitration for showing toward the rest of the world?
Let me rephrase. If Georgia asked Obama, as President, if he would like to see them take action like they did, I believe he would say he wouldn't. But if Georgia asked Bush (which we can be pretty sure they did), he would say yes. Over-confidence.

Davian93
08-14-2008, 07:43 PM
I think its really funny that you guys think that Georgia asked first...Georgia acted on the assumption that the Olympics would distract everyone and that Russia wouldn't say anything...Ooops, That didn't work...Mr. Bush sir we F#*#ed up...little help?

Ishara
08-15-2008, 09:50 AM
Russia has a right to secure its borders and defend those provinces. Georgia should never have been allowed to leave Russia to begin with nor should alot of the southern tier states...The Baltic states, Poland all have a history of independence despite their inclusion in the Warsaw Pact. These countries do not.
Dav, forgive me, but now I'm confused. I feel like this is a pretty abrupt about-face....

Who gets to determine if a state should be allowed to secede? What does a history of independence have to do with it? Is that the only thing that determines future independence?

Russia is defending nothing right now except for their own huge nationalistic ego. The majority of collateral damage has occured because of Russian actions.

tanaww
08-15-2008, 09:54 AM
States cannot legally secede...its unconstitutional. The Civil War set the precedent for that.

Though there is a fervent secessionist movment in Vermont as well...feel free to google "The Second Vermont Republic"

I do believe, good sir, that the Great State of Texas does have the right to secede if it so desires. I'm sure Bry or the Lizard will clarify.

Gilshalos Sedai
08-15-2008, 10:00 AM
I do believe, good sir, that the Great State of Texas does have the right to secede if it so desires. I'm sure Bry or the Lizard will clarify.

Not really. We'd have to get Congress to agree to dissolve the treaty granting us statehood.

Also, Dav, no matter what Georgia's PAST status is... It's currently its own sovereign country. That's like excusing Iraq's invasion of Kuwait because they all used to be part of Persia.

Davian93
08-15-2008, 10:10 AM
Ishara...I often don't have a real point. I was looking at it from Russia's POV for a moment...not that I agree with their opinion nor support it.

Davian93
08-15-2008, 10:10 AM
Also, Dav, no matter what Georgia's PAST status is... It's currently its own sovereign country.


For now...give it a few more months.;)

Ishara
08-15-2008, 10:29 AM
That helps Dav - but I think Russia's view point is more:

"oooh. Pretty/ shiny/ valuable/... - mine!"

They're like the seagulls in Finding Nemo.

Realnow
08-15-2008, 10:35 AM
So now the USA is sending aid over now, I didn't read the whole article but apparently that means weapons+supplies?

Gilshalos Sedai
08-15-2008, 10:37 AM
Usually aid doesn't mean weapons.... officially.

yks 6nnetu hing
08-15-2008, 11:00 AM
1) what Ishara said about seagulls

2) in this case, I read from several sources (Wall street Journal, Washington Post, too lazy to go look them up now) that military aid - excluding actual troops - has been promised.

3) Poland has -finally, after years of wriggling - signed an agreement to allow part of the US missile shield on its territory. That is a big "in your face" to Russia, which is now fuming. Plus, both USA and Canada have cancelled the upcoming military excercises.

4) Hi everyone! Friday!:)

Ivhon
08-15-2008, 11:12 AM
This makes me larf:

"The president said the Cold War is over and that a contentious relationship with the United States is not in Russia's interests. Bush said "bullying and intimidation are not acceptable ways to conduct foreign policy in the 21st century."

Crispin's Crispian
08-15-2008, 11:21 AM
1) what Ishara said about seagulls

2) in this case, I read from several sources (Wall street Journal, Washington Post, too lazy to go look them up now) that military aid - excluding actual troops - has been promised.

We were just in Georgia a few weeks ago (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/28935910-528b-11dd-9ba7-000077b07658.html) training their armed forces.

We might not be sending troops to fight, but we're clearly already working with their military.

Here's something interesting from that article:

In a recent Financial Times interview, Mikheil Saakashvili, Georgia’s president, played down reports alleging his country was on the brink of a military conflict with Russia over the two breakaway territories. He appealed for western diplomatic support to stop an annexation policy by Russia which, he said, could spread to Ukraine and other ex-Soviet states.


3) Poland has -finally, after years of wriggling - signed an agreement to allow part of the US missile shield on its territory. That is a big "in your face" to Russia, which is now fuming. Plus, both USA and Canada have cancelled the upcoming military excercises.

Amazing timing, no? Not only are we getting our own missile defense system, but we're giving Poland a Patriot battery as well.

Sinistrum
08-15-2008, 11:29 AM
Heh. MINE! MINE! MINE! MINE! MINE!

Davian93
08-15-2008, 12:14 PM
Russia also promised to punish Poland for that decision...it was on the news earlier...basically they are threatening military actions from aiming nukes at Poland to violations of Polish territory. I'd be worried if I were Poland and all I had were some Patriot missile batteries and Bush's word.

tanaww
08-15-2008, 12:28 PM
We go lots of places to train troops and lots of troops come here for training. There appears to be German soldiers permanently based at Ft. Happy Tejas as well as a healthy contingent of international soldiers in Sarge's current class. No Russians that I am aware of but some from former Soviet possessions, South Africa... all over!

czymann
08-16-2008, 08:01 AM
Russia also promised to punish Poland for that decision...it was on the news earlier...basically they are threatening military actions from aiming nukes at Poland to violations of Polish territory. I'd be worried if I were Poland and all I had were some Patriot missile batteries and Bush's word.

I rarely post here,but this worries me greatly. Russia has seen alot of democratic setbacks in the past few years. The very fact that Russia is worried about an anti-missile system in European countries makes no sense. The U.S. were willing to share this technology with Russia. Makes me wonder if Russia is planning on becoming an aggressor once again.

Mort
08-16-2008, 08:06 AM
We go lots of places to train troops and lots of troops come here for training. There appears to be German soldiers permanently based at Ft. Happy Tejas as well as a healthy contingent of international soldiers in Sarge's current class. No Russians that I am aware of but some from former Soviet possessions, South Africa... all over!
Parts of Sweden's airforce were during the summer near Las Vegas and trainined with the americans in something called "Red Flag". Apperently our pilots and planes did pretty good :)

In a way I can understand Russias reaction. Some of those break out states doesn't even want to be ruled by Georgia, and 90% of it's population have Russian passports many actually felt they belong to Russia, not Georgia. Georgia started this conflict, not Russia. In a way they protected what they felt were their citizens, to a horrible cost though, but civilian casualties have always been a factor and if states would have thought that protecting civilians from harm was a priority, they would have laid down their weapons long ago.

As to the missile defense in Georgia and Poland. The US would get VERY anxious if they found out Russia is planning to (yet again) place missles on Cuba, or Mexico etc.

It all goes both ways...

GonzoTheGreat
08-16-2008, 09:46 AM
I rarely post here,but this worries me greatly. Russia has seen alot of democratic setbacks in the past few years. The very fact that Russia is worried about an anti-missile system in European countries makes no sense. The U.S. were willing to share this technology with Russia. Makes me wonder if Russia is planning on becoming an aggressor once again.
Perhaps Russia was not convinced that the USA would be entirely honest in sharing it. If the Russian version happened to have some built in code that the Americans could use to disable it, that would leave the USA with a significant strategic advantage.
Frankly, I would be surprised if the USA would not try to arrange something like that, so the Russian worry seems entirely justified.

I do not like that they have to worry about it, because it makes the world a whole lot more dangerous. But it seems rather naive to assume that the Russians wouldn't think of this type of issue.

Davian93
08-16-2008, 04:36 PM
I wouldn't trust the Russians on something like that so why should they trust us. Old fears die hard and most of their leadership and ours were around for the Cold War. Putin is a Cold Warrior and Bush is the son of one (the spoiled moronic jackass son of one) thus these things are hard to get over. More importantly the defense depts of both nations cut their teeth in the 80s at last final push of the conflict. All the senior leaders remember looking at the other with fear.

Of course we wouldn't want Russian missiles based in Cuba again or god forbid Venezuela.

Davian93
08-16-2008, 07:53 PM
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,24193291-401,00.html

Russia threatens Poland with Nukes in case of aggression...I gotta give it to Bush, he's killed our economy, destroyed the budget, started an unnecessary war and now reignited the cold war and did it all in under 8 years. How much damage has his policies and lack of a long term strategic plan cost us?

GonzoTheGreat
08-17-2008, 07:34 AM
Don't forget that he has also restarted the transatlantic slave trade, launched the first crusade against Muslim countries in a long time, and turned a large patch of ocean into a national park.

That last one may actually be a good decision, though I keep expecting some odd side effects to pop up. Hopefully my mistrust is misplaced in this case.

Mort
08-17-2008, 06:42 PM
Girl tells the truth on FOX (http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=H8XI2Chc6uQ)

Apperently FOX news cuts off a girl and her aunt when saying that it is Georgias fault that this happened and they thank the russian troops. I dunno if they got cut off for commercial intentionally or not, a little weird though. *shrug*

yks 6nnetu hing
08-18-2008, 10:14 AM
Russia threatens Poland with Nukes in case of aggression...I gotta give it to Bush, he's killed our economy, destroyed the budget, started an unnecessary war and now reignited the cold war and did it all in under 8 years. How much damage has his policies and lack of a long term strategic plan cost us?

It's not all Bush's doing, he just made it easy for others to take advantage.

http://larussophobe.wordpress.com/2008/08/16/the-wall-street-journal-stands-up-to-russia/#more-6945

"Ever since Vladimir Putin became Russia’s president in 2000, Russian authorities have used the power of the state to gut Russian companies and seize their assets for a fraction of their value. Yukos, once Russia’s largest oil producer, was seized by Russian authorities allegedly for back taxes. Its assets were auctioned off at bargain prices to Russia’s state-owned energy giants, Rosneft and Gazprom, while its CEO and other company officials were arrested and imprisoned.

The government’s seizure also deprived ExxonMobil and Chevron from buying major stakes in Yukos. Sibneft, Russneft, and other Russian hydrocarbon companies have suffered similar fates."

***************************

"Since Mr. Putin became president, the Russian government has renationalized much of the energy sector; it now owns 50% of the country’s oil reserves and 89% of the gas reserves. Beyond ownership, the Kremlin has positioned high-ranking government officials and other Putin-loyalists — elites in the security services known as siloviki (men of power) — to key positions in leading Russian companies, even while they keep their government jobs."

******************

"This strategy extends beyond energy. Two weeks ago, Moscow announced the formation of a state grain-trading company to control up to half of the country’s cereal exports, which are the fifth-largest in the world. Its purpose, most analysts believe, is to provide the government with greater leverage over food-importing nations at a time of rising food costs and shortages."

AND

"While Russia may or may not intend to start a new Cool War, it is not afraid of leaving Europeans out in the cold — literally. In the middle of winter 2006, it cut off gas supplies to Ukraine and parts of Western Europe. It has also cut off gas to Moldova, Belarus and Georgia."

brrrr....

***************

So what to do?

"Short of sanctions, the West does not currently have much economic leverage. European, Japanese and American export credit agencies could refuse to finance any deals involving Russian companies that have acquired assets expropriated from foreign investors. European countries could also bar such Russian firms from operating in Europe, or could impose a special fee to reimburse expropriated investors. And rather than expel Russia from the G-8 as John McCain has proposed, members should demand that Russia respect the rights of foreign investors and ratify the Energy Charter Treaty.

Longer term, the U.S. needs to use its diplomatic and financial clout to push forward alternative energy routes. Washington’s backing was vital to building the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline in five years. One of the longest of its kind, the pipeline bypasses Russia and carries crude oil from offshore fields in the Caspian Sea across Georgia to the Mediterranean. Washington must make financing and constructing the NABUCCO gas pipeline a top priority.

Washington also needs to reach out to Central Asia, and should push for a Trans-Caspian pipeline from Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan across the Caspian Sea to Azerbaijan and west to Europe. Years of Russian domination have made these countries open to Western investment. Moreover, they understand the strategic importance of diversifying sales and transport options for their oil and gas. Western companies also offer superior technology.

But after Russia’s use of military force in Georgia, these countries are wary of antagonizing their former overseer. Without a strong American presence, it is impossible for the West to compete in the region. Yet Turkmenistan has lacked a full-time U.S. ambassador for more than a year.

The markets can also help hold Russia accountable for its heavy-handedness. Two weeks ago after Mr. Putin targeted Mechel, a steelmaking giant — suggesting that Russian antitrust and tax authorities investigate the company — Russia’s stock market lost $60 billion. Market forces may not protect BP’s Russian investments or save Georgia, but they could make it far more costly for the Kremlin to proceed."



Plus, today it was made public that since the outbreak of the Georgian war, 7 million dollars have been withdrawn from foreign investments in Russia and another 30 million are expected to be invested less than previously planned (hope the sentence made sense). So there IS something that the west can do: kick Russia where it hurts - the wallet.

Gilshalos Sedai
08-18-2008, 10:24 AM
Longer term, the U.S. needs to use its diplomatic and financial clout to push forward alternative energy routes. Washington’s backing was vital to building the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan oil pipeline in five years. One of the longest of its kind, the pipeline bypasses Russia and carries crude oil from offshore fields in the Caspian Sea across Georgia to the Mediterranean. Washington must make financing and constructing the NABUCCO gas pipeline a top priority.


Aha!

Davian93
08-18-2008, 10:38 AM
The major problem is that Russia still has HUGE Oil and Gas reserves and is thus Energy self-sufficient. We can try to hurt them in minor ways but they can just sell their oil/gas to China. Eastern Europe is beholden to them and thus there's not much we can do as they HAVE to play nice with Russia. Russia is gonna make them understand that cozying up to the US and NATO during a temporary period of weakness was a major mistake.

Yuri33
08-18-2008, 04:45 PM
Plus, today it was made public that since the outbreak of the Georgian war, 7 million dollars have been withdrawn from foreign investments in Russia and another 30 million are expected to be invested less than previously planned (hope the sentence made sense). So there IS something that the west can do: kick Russia where it hurts - the wallet.

Uh, 37 million is a drop in the bucket compared to the billions being made from oil. From the article you quoted:

"This after Gazprom wrested control of the $22 billion Sakhalin-2 oil and gas project from Royal Dutch Shell for a fraction of market value."

Oil is a global market--we stop buying from Russia, and other countries (China! India!) will take up the slack. And we're left buying oil from other countries who will still demand we pay through the teeth. This is one time that the sanction strategy won't really work.

The only way to put Russia back in its place is to curb global demand for oil. Oil prices have fallen off a bit since the high of $147 a couple weeks ago, but it can easily go back up.

Bryan Blaire
08-19-2008, 07:08 PM
That's easy, Yuri. In the short term: Drill here, drill now, drill often. Sort of like sex. And build more refineries.

In the long term: provide some incentives to alternative fuel source research (actual incentives, make it a race, etc, not just "Hey, we'll fund 3 million in research for you", etc) and stop making stupid ass laws and decisions that actually block alternatives from being introduced into the market.

Yuri33
08-20-2008, 01:33 PM
That's easy, Yuri. In the short term: Drill here, drill now, drill often. Sort of like sex. And build more refineries.

And one more little conflict in an oil-rich nation (say, Iran maybe?) will wipe out all potential reductions in fuel costs associated with that drilling, not that there would be a whole lot to begin with. We could spend the next 10 years bringing domestic production to something like 1 million barrels of oil a day, and an oil-rich country could wipe that out in an instant by cutting production by 1 million barrels of oil a day. When global demand is so high, cutting supply to price gouge is a no-brainer.

In the long term: provide some incentives to alternative fuel source research (actual incentives, make it a race, etc, not just "Hey, we'll fund 3 million in research for you", etc)

The prize-based model for innovation has historically not worked well. The "prize" for alternative fuel is the profits gained by bringing such alternative fuel technology to a capitalistic market. We don't have a "cure for cancer" prize, we have the NIH.

GonzoTheGreat
08-21-2008, 04:47 AM
That's easy, Yuri. In the short term: Drill here, drill now, drill often. Sort of like sex.
If you formulate it like that, all American politicians will vote against drilling.

Why didn't the treehuggers think of that, I wonder?

Frenzy
08-22-2008, 01:21 AM
http://punditkitchen.files.wordpress.com/2008/08/political-pictures-vladimir-putin-can-haz-georgia.jpg

yks 6nnetu hing
08-22-2008, 07:35 AM
in other news,

"There can be no business as usual with Russia under present circumstances," Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said after the meeting. "We are not abandoning the NATO-Russia Council, but as long as Russian forces are occupying large parts of Georgia, I cannot see the NATO-Russia Council meeting," (emphasis mine)

so NATO suspended the council allowing Russia to have information on the plans etc.
Russia promptly responded in withdrawing their ambassador from NATO and making a declaration of freezing all relations with NATO.

Also, looks like G-8 has become G-7:

http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/08/20/america/NA-US-Georgia-Finances.php

"We, the G-7, stand ready to support Georgia in order to promote the continued health of the Georgian economy, maintain confidence in Georgia's financial system and support economic reconstruction," the finance officials said. (emphasis mine)

neener!

Ivhon
08-22-2008, 07:42 AM
Im cold...

Davian93
08-22-2008, 08:04 AM
Brrr.....Its a gettin' cold in here!

I'm gonna go watch Rocky IV!!!

Yuri33
08-22-2008, 11:53 AM
I'm gonna go watch Rocky IV!!!

But they already killed off Apollo Creed. I know, we can blame the deaths of Isaac Hayes and Bernie Mac on them!

Ivhon
08-22-2008, 12:52 PM
Brrr.....Its a gettin' cold in here!

I'm gonna go watch Rocky IV!!!

I must break you!

Davian93
08-22-2008, 01:13 PM
I FIGHT FOR ME!!!

Sinistrum
08-22-2008, 01:40 PM
If he dies, he dies. :D

4Alethinos
08-22-2008, 03:34 PM
All of this yak about keeping Russia out of trade organizations does not mean diddly squat. They have oil and gas to sell and they do not need a trade organization to sell it.

This is just weak posturing and Russia and Putin know it. They said they would cease fire and leave Georgia. Yeah, right. They are going to stay until they bring about regime change and hang the president for war crimes.

NATO will do nothing because they are too weak and useless to do anything. So kiss Georgia goodbye. The next stop will be the Ukraine. As I said in another thread, Russia will also raise the pressure level on the Baltics. Wait and watch and see.

Davian93
08-22-2008, 04:00 PM
I doubt a military intervention would be quite as easy with Ukraine...they have a much larger and much much better equipped military than Georgia.

4Alethinos
08-23-2008, 03:18 AM
Dav, I agree with you. Putin and the boys will attempt to isolate the Ukraine first. After that, well we will see.

Putting the Ukraine in NATO will solve nothing. Treaties with useless partners is a waste of time. Let them make a treaty with the US. That might mean something. Though if BHO makes into the presidency, then no country can count on the US for any help, ever.

Yuri33
08-23-2008, 10:55 PM
I suspect we'll be soon reading about a brand new agreement for Russia to install a new missile defense system in Cuba, because, you know, Iran or North Korea might decide to strike.

GonzoTheGreat
08-24-2008, 07:35 AM
They could claim to be worried over the possibility of Colombian drug lords acquiring nuclear tipped ICBMs.