We all know it's more than a Yes or No answer.Brother None wrote:Well, pretend I missed it. All I'm looking for is a yes or no answer: Are you saying Russia's defence of South-Ossetia was a bad thing? Should Russia not have stepped in to protect South-Ossetia?
Russia invades Georgia - WW3 on it's way?
-
Brother None
- Posts: 1075
- Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 1:45 pm
- Location: Liberty City, the Netherlands
- Contact:
Of course it is, but it can still be answered as such. I'm not asking if he approves of Russia's actions wholesale, I'm simply asking that given the situation, is it a bad thing Russia stepped in?GawainBS wrote:We all know it's more than a Yes or No answer.
I'm not trying to set anyone up for a clever rhetoric trap or anything, I'm just curious whether or not there really is much disagreement to be had here or are we just talking past one another.
GameBanshee, your resource for all things RPG
No Mutants Allowed, your Fallout resource
"Those who say they give the public what it wants begin by underestimating public taste and end by debauching it" T.S. Eliot
No Mutants Allowed, your Fallout resource
"Those who say they give the public what it wants begin by underestimating public taste and end by debauching it" T.S. Eliot
Well, looks like Russian troops still push around close to Tblisi, and that villages get looted and burned down "behind" the Russian troops by amongst other Ossetia-based looters. (So much for peace keeping troops)
And now Russia have threaten Poland with military retaliation, due to the missile defense issue, where Poland changed stance after this conflict. Looks like Georgia-conflict will also push Ukraine closer to the missile defense program amongst other things. Will be interesting to see what happens with the Russian naval bases in Ukraine now and the effect that will get.
@BN: No I do think Russia should help defend S.O if Georigan troops attack.
But I do not think they should have escalated the conflict, and have invaded and started occupation of Georgian territories because then they are no longer peace keeping force, but performing an act of war becoming an invading army - and they should not portray themselves as noble defenders, when their hands are so bloody in the entire conflict.
From both military strategical, political and economical perspectives, this runs much more complex then a simple "but they should defend S.O." that it makes it naive to focus purely on that point.
edit: Seems like both Russia and Gerogia have signed the peace treaty now ... will be interesting to see further development regarding the Russian troops location and attitude towards Poland (and likely soon Ukraine)
And now Russia have threaten Poland with military retaliation, due to the missile defense issue, where Poland changed stance after this conflict. Looks like Georgia-conflict will also push Ukraine closer to the missile defense program amongst other things. Will be interesting to see what happens with the Russian naval bases in Ukraine now and the effect that will get.
@BN: No I do think Russia should help defend S.O if Georigan troops attack.
But I do not think they should have escalated the conflict, and have invaded and started occupation of Georgian territories because then they are no longer peace keeping force, but performing an act of war becoming an invading army - and they should not portray themselves as noble defenders, when their hands are so bloody in the entire conflict.
From both military strategical, political and economical perspectives, this runs much more complex then a simple "but they should defend S.O." that it makes it naive to focus purely on that point.
edit: Seems like both Russia and Gerogia have signed the peace treaty now ... will be interesting to see further development regarding the Russian troops location and attitude towards Poland (and likely soon Ukraine)
Insert signature here.
-
Lady Dragonfly
- Posts: 1384
- Joined: Sat Feb 25, 2006 8:12 pm
- Location: Dreamworld
- Contact:
OK, since everybody wants to be serious and dig deeper, I would like to present a little more background information on the Georgian government and its political affiliation.
First, let's look who is who:
By now, everybody knows that President Mikheil Saakashvili is a "US-educated lawyer" noted for his aggressive language (made Amnesty International cringe) and emotionally charged speeches;
His Prime Minister Lado Gurgenidze is UK national who holds dual citizenship.
His 29-years old Defence Minister Davit Kezerashvili is Israeli.
According to Wikipedia, Shalva Natelashvili of the Georgian Labour Party criticized Kezerashvili's appointment, arguing that he "has never served in the army... doesn't even have the title of sergeant and has no clue about the armed forces."
As chief of the financial police, Kezerashvili received criticism for heavy-handed tactics in raiding businesses.
His Vice President Temuri Yacobashvili is a UK-educated Geogian Jew.
Before you accuse me of antisemitism, let me explain. I tend to think that the strong ties between Georgia and Israel is one of the factors destabilizing the region.
According to DEBKAfile (a well-informed Israeli website):
DEBKAfile discloses Israel’s interest in the conflict from its exclusive military sources:
Jerusalem owns a strong interest in Caspian oil and gas pipelines reach the Turkish terminal port of Ceyhan, rather than the Russian network. Intense negotiations are afoot between Israel, Turkey, Georgia, Turkmenistan and Azarbaijan for pipelines to reach Turkey and thence to Israel’s oil terminal at Ashkelon and on to its Red Sea port of Eilat. From there, supertankers can carry the gas and oil to the Far East through the Indian Ocean.
Aware of Moscow’s sensitivity on the oil question, Israel offered Russia a stake in the project but was rejected.
Last year, the Georgian president commissioned from private Israeli security firms several hundred military advisers, estimated at up to 1,000, to train the Georgian armed forces in commando, air, sea, armored and artillery combat tactics. They also offer instruction on military intelligence and security for the central regime. Tbilisi also purchased weapons, intelligence and electronic warfare systems from Israel.
These advisers were undoubtedly deeply involved in the Georgian army’s preparations to conquer the South Ossetian capital Friday.
In recent weeks, Moscow has repeatedly demanded that Jerusalem halt its military assistance to Georgia, finally threatening a crisis in bilateral relations. Israel responded by saying that the only assistance rendered Tbilisi was “defensive.”
This has not gone down well in the Kremlin. Therefore, as the military crisis intensifies in South Ossetia, Moscow may be expected to punish Israel for its intervention.
(Add to that 100 American military personnel and American weaponry I mentioned in my previous post).
Now, let's follow the stinking trail further. It leads to a steamy pile of manure in McCain's camp. Cover your nose, Boo.
According to PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer,
John McCain's chief foreign policy adviser and his business partner lobbied the senator or his staff on 49 occasions in a 3 1/2-year span while being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars by the government of the former Soviet republic of Georgia.
The payments raise ethical questions about the intersection of Randy Scheunemann's personal financial interests and his advice to the Republican presidential candidate who is seizing on Russian aggression in Georgia as a campaign issue.
McCain warned Russian leaders Tuesday that their assault in Georgia risks "the benefits they enjoy from being part of the civilized world."
On April 17, a month and a half after Scheunemann stopped working for Georgia, his partner signed a $200,000 agreement with the Georgian government. The deal added to an arrangement that brought in more than $800,000 to the two-man firm from 2004 to mid-2007. For the duration of the campaign, Scheunemann is taking a leave of absence from the firm.
"Scheunemann's work as a lobbyist poses valid questions about McCain's judgment in choosing someone who — and whose firm — are paid to promote the interests of other nations," said New York University law professor Stephen Gillers. "So one must ask whether McCain is getting disinterested advice, at least when the issues concern those nations."
"If McCain wants advice from someone whose private interests as a once and future lobbyist may affect the objectivity of the advice, that's his choice to make."
McCain has been to Georgia three times since 1997 and "this is an issue that he has been involved with for well over a decade," said McCain campaign spokesman Brian Rogers.
McCain's strong condemnation in recent days of Russia's military action against Georgia as "totally, absolutely unacceptable" reflects long-standing ties between McCain and hardline conservatives such as Scheunemann, an aide in the 1990s to then-Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott.
Scheunemann, who also was a foreign policy adviser in McCain's 2000 presidential campaign, has for years traveled the same road as McCain in pushing for regime change in Iraq and promoting NATO membership for Georgia and other former Soviet republics.
While their politics coincide, Russia's invasion of Georgia casts a spotlight on Scheunemann's business interests and McCain's conduct as a senator.
Scheunemann's firm lobbied McCain's office on four bills and resolutions regarding Georgia, with McCain as a co-sponsor or supporter of all of them.
In addition to the 49 contacts with McCain or his staff regarding Georgia, Scheunemann's firm has lobbied the senator or his aides on at least 47 occasions since 2001 on behalf of the governments of Taiwan and Macedonia, which each paid Scheunemann and his partner Mike Mitchell over half a million dollars; Romania, which paid over $400,000; and Latvia, which paid nearly $250,000. Federal law requires Scheunemann to publicly disclose to the Justice Department all his lobbying contacts as an agent of a foreign government.
After contacts with McCain's staff, the senator introduced a resolution saluting the people of Georgia on the first anniversary of the Rose Revolution that brought Mikhail Saakashvili to power.
Four months ago, on the same day that Scheunemann's partner signed the latest $200,000 agreement with Georgia, McCain spoke with Saakashvili by phone. The senator then issued a strong statement saying that "we must not allow Russia to believe it has a free hand to engage in policies that undermine Georgian sovereignty."
Rogers, the McCain campaign spokesman, said the call took place at the request of the embassy of Georgia. And McCain campaign spokeswoman Nicolle Wallace added that the senator has full confidence in Scheunemann. "We're proud of anyone who has worked on the side of angels in fledgling democracies," she said in an interview.
McCain called Saakashvili again on Tuesday. "I told him that I know I speak for every American when I said to him, today, we are all Georgians," McCain told a cheering crowd in York, Pa. McCain's Democratic rival, Barack Obama, had spoken with Saakashvili the day before.
In 2005 and 2006, McCain signed onto a resolution expressing support for the withdrawal of Russian troops from Georgia; introduced a resolution expressing support for a peace plan for Georgia's breakaway province of Ossetia; and co-sponsored a measure supporting admission of four nations including Georgia into NATO.
On Tuesday, McCain told Fox News that "as you know, through the NATO membership, ... if a member nation is attacked, it is viewed as an attack on all."
Scheunemann's lobbying firm is one of three that he has operated since 1999, with clients including BP Amoco, defense contractor Lockheed Martin Corp. and the National Rifle Association.
Scheunemann is part of the community of neoconservatives who relentlessly pushed for war in Iraq.
You've probably heard that when Bush sent his delivery girl Condi Rice to Tbilisi, McCain dispatched his own envoy (Lieberman and Graham). The question is why.
This could be the answer:
The war that's broken out between Georgia and Russia is just the international incident that McCain needed to switch the discussion from the economy and healthcare onto national security. Now McCain is dispatching Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman to Georgia (ostensibly as members of the Armed Services Committee).
The Bushies insist they knew nothing about what the Georgians were planning, Condi Rice phoned it in despite the fact that she's a Russia specialist who met with Saakashvilli on July 9, and Karl Rove was suspiciously in the area with Saakishvilli shortly thereafter. Throw in McCain's lobbyist ties to Georgia and you've got quite a constellation of events that just happened to play to McCain's perceived strengths.
As Greg Sargent notes, at the very least it looks like "McCain's announcement of his key campaign allies' trip abroad also seems designed to shoulder Bush aside as the primary GOP leadership figure here."
Meanwhile, Bush issues stern warnings from his Texas ranch (he is always on vacation during crisis, that is a hallmark of his Presidency. Along with Stupidity and Hypocrisy) but nobody is paying particular attention. Except bloggers exersising their wit at Dubya expense.
Comments? (Preventive strike: anyone implying that I consider Russia "noble defenders" will be nuked, disintegrated and... and... well, you get the idea).
First, let's look who is who:
By now, everybody knows that President Mikheil Saakashvili is a "US-educated lawyer" noted for his aggressive language (made Amnesty International cringe) and emotionally charged speeches;
His Prime Minister Lado Gurgenidze is UK national who holds dual citizenship.
His 29-years old Defence Minister Davit Kezerashvili is Israeli.
According to Wikipedia, Shalva Natelashvili of the Georgian Labour Party criticized Kezerashvili's appointment, arguing that he "has never served in the army... doesn't even have the title of sergeant and has no clue about the armed forces."
As chief of the financial police, Kezerashvili received criticism for heavy-handed tactics in raiding businesses.
His Vice President Temuri Yacobashvili is a UK-educated Geogian Jew.
Before you accuse me of antisemitism, let me explain. I tend to think that the strong ties between Georgia and Israel is one of the factors destabilizing the region.
According to DEBKAfile (a well-informed Israeli website):
DEBKAfile discloses Israel’s interest in the conflict from its exclusive military sources:
Jerusalem owns a strong interest in Caspian oil and gas pipelines reach the Turkish terminal port of Ceyhan, rather than the Russian network. Intense negotiations are afoot between Israel, Turkey, Georgia, Turkmenistan and Azarbaijan for pipelines to reach Turkey and thence to Israel’s oil terminal at Ashkelon and on to its Red Sea port of Eilat. From there, supertankers can carry the gas and oil to the Far East through the Indian Ocean.
Aware of Moscow’s sensitivity on the oil question, Israel offered Russia a stake in the project but was rejected.
Last year, the Georgian president commissioned from private Israeli security firms several hundred military advisers, estimated at up to 1,000, to train the Georgian armed forces in commando, air, sea, armored and artillery combat tactics. They also offer instruction on military intelligence and security for the central regime. Tbilisi also purchased weapons, intelligence and electronic warfare systems from Israel.
These advisers were undoubtedly deeply involved in the Georgian army’s preparations to conquer the South Ossetian capital Friday.
In recent weeks, Moscow has repeatedly demanded that Jerusalem halt its military assistance to Georgia, finally threatening a crisis in bilateral relations. Israel responded by saying that the only assistance rendered Tbilisi was “defensive.”
This has not gone down well in the Kremlin. Therefore, as the military crisis intensifies in South Ossetia, Moscow may be expected to punish Israel for its intervention.
(Add to that 100 American military personnel and American weaponry I mentioned in my previous post).
Now, let's follow the stinking trail further. It leads to a steamy pile of manure in McCain's camp. Cover your nose, Boo.
According to PETE YOST, Associated Press Writer,
John McCain's chief foreign policy adviser and his business partner lobbied the senator or his staff on 49 occasions in a 3 1/2-year span while being paid hundreds of thousands of dollars by the government of the former Soviet republic of Georgia.
The payments raise ethical questions about the intersection of Randy Scheunemann's personal financial interests and his advice to the Republican presidential candidate who is seizing on Russian aggression in Georgia as a campaign issue.
McCain warned Russian leaders Tuesday that their assault in Georgia risks "the benefits they enjoy from being part of the civilized world."
On April 17, a month and a half after Scheunemann stopped working for Georgia, his partner signed a $200,000 agreement with the Georgian government. The deal added to an arrangement that brought in more than $800,000 to the two-man firm from 2004 to mid-2007. For the duration of the campaign, Scheunemann is taking a leave of absence from the firm.
"Scheunemann's work as a lobbyist poses valid questions about McCain's judgment in choosing someone who — and whose firm — are paid to promote the interests of other nations," said New York University law professor Stephen Gillers. "So one must ask whether McCain is getting disinterested advice, at least when the issues concern those nations."
"If McCain wants advice from someone whose private interests as a once and future lobbyist may affect the objectivity of the advice, that's his choice to make."
McCain has been to Georgia three times since 1997 and "this is an issue that he has been involved with for well over a decade," said McCain campaign spokesman Brian Rogers.
McCain's strong condemnation in recent days of Russia's military action against Georgia as "totally, absolutely unacceptable" reflects long-standing ties between McCain and hardline conservatives such as Scheunemann, an aide in the 1990s to then-Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott.
Scheunemann, who also was a foreign policy adviser in McCain's 2000 presidential campaign, has for years traveled the same road as McCain in pushing for regime change in Iraq and promoting NATO membership for Georgia and other former Soviet republics.
While their politics coincide, Russia's invasion of Georgia casts a spotlight on Scheunemann's business interests and McCain's conduct as a senator.
Scheunemann's firm lobbied McCain's office on four bills and resolutions regarding Georgia, with McCain as a co-sponsor or supporter of all of them.
In addition to the 49 contacts with McCain or his staff regarding Georgia, Scheunemann's firm has lobbied the senator or his aides on at least 47 occasions since 2001 on behalf of the governments of Taiwan and Macedonia, which each paid Scheunemann and his partner Mike Mitchell over half a million dollars; Romania, which paid over $400,000; and Latvia, which paid nearly $250,000. Federal law requires Scheunemann to publicly disclose to the Justice Department all his lobbying contacts as an agent of a foreign government.
After contacts with McCain's staff, the senator introduced a resolution saluting the people of Georgia on the first anniversary of the Rose Revolution that brought Mikhail Saakashvili to power.
Four months ago, on the same day that Scheunemann's partner signed the latest $200,000 agreement with Georgia, McCain spoke with Saakashvili by phone. The senator then issued a strong statement saying that "we must not allow Russia to believe it has a free hand to engage in policies that undermine Georgian sovereignty."
Rogers, the McCain campaign spokesman, said the call took place at the request of the embassy of Georgia. And McCain campaign spokeswoman Nicolle Wallace added that the senator has full confidence in Scheunemann. "We're proud of anyone who has worked on the side of angels in fledgling democracies," she said in an interview.
McCain called Saakashvili again on Tuesday. "I told him that I know I speak for every American when I said to him, today, we are all Georgians," McCain told a cheering crowd in York, Pa. McCain's Democratic rival, Barack Obama, had spoken with Saakashvili the day before.
In 2005 and 2006, McCain signed onto a resolution expressing support for the withdrawal of Russian troops from Georgia; introduced a resolution expressing support for a peace plan for Georgia's breakaway province of Ossetia; and co-sponsored a measure supporting admission of four nations including Georgia into NATO.
On Tuesday, McCain told Fox News that "as you know, through the NATO membership, ... if a member nation is attacked, it is viewed as an attack on all."
Scheunemann's lobbying firm is one of three that he has operated since 1999, with clients including BP Amoco, defense contractor Lockheed Martin Corp. and the National Rifle Association.
Scheunemann is part of the community of neoconservatives who relentlessly pushed for war in Iraq.
You've probably heard that when Bush sent his delivery girl Condi Rice to Tbilisi, McCain dispatched his own envoy (Lieberman and Graham). The question is why.
This could be the answer:
The war that's broken out between Georgia and Russia is just the international incident that McCain needed to switch the discussion from the economy and healthcare onto national security. Now McCain is dispatching Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman to Georgia (ostensibly as members of the Armed Services Committee).
The Bushies insist they knew nothing about what the Georgians were planning, Condi Rice phoned it in despite the fact that she's a Russia specialist who met with Saakashvilli on July 9, and Karl Rove was suspiciously in the area with Saakishvilli shortly thereafter. Throw in McCain's lobbyist ties to Georgia and you've got quite a constellation of events that just happened to play to McCain's perceived strengths.
As Greg Sargent notes, at the very least it looks like "McCain's announcement of his key campaign allies' trip abroad also seems designed to shoulder Bush aside as the primary GOP leadership figure here."
Meanwhile, Bush issues stern warnings from his Texas ranch (he is always on vacation during crisis, that is a hallmark of his Presidency. Along with Stupidity and Hypocrisy) but nobody is paying particular attention. Except bloggers exersising their wit at Dubya expense.
Comments? (Preventive strike: anyone implying that I consider Russia "noble defenders" will be nuked, disintegrated and... and... well, you get the idea).
Man's most valuable trait is a judicious sense of what not to believe.
-- Euripides
-- Euripides
Come now - we know better then this?
I've deleted a number of posts, because they were spinning out of control.
We can still disagree while being mature about disagreements without it turning into a bickering match.
__________________
GameBanshee Moderator
GameBanshee - Make Your Gaming Scream
Forum rules
I've deleted a number of posts, because they were spinning out of control.
We can still disagree while being mature about disagreements without it turning into a bickering match.
__________________
GameBanshee Moderator
GameBanshee - Make Your Gaming Scream
Forum rules
Insert signature here.
-
Brother None
- Posts: 1075
- Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 1:45 pm
- Location: Liberty City, the Netherlands
- Contact:
Lady Dragonfly: I've seen quite a few conspiracy theories about Israel/US involvement, I'm not buying it beyond the obvious extent: US involvement and arming of Georgia was an attempt of the US to gain leverage over Russia by having an armed deployement zone on its border, just like the pipeline was an attempt at economic leverage.
Speaking of goading people into war, I don't know what that is if not provocation. A serious blunder in international politics by the US, and maybe when the outcries die down the media will start realising how the West messed up once again.
Though I should footnote that the peace agreement between Russia and Georgia contained a clause allowing Russia to station soldiers in Georgia if they felt it was necessary for pacification reasons. Russia being in Georgia does not violate the peace agreement, but their holding and looting of towns and roads does.
Not that Russia has any reason to be happy over any of that, but they're not impressed by it either. The West completely failed to do anything about Russia policing its own back yard while sternly disagreeing with it and has set a dangerous precedent by doing so. Besides, there's an inconsistency of the West towards South Ossetian self determination compared to the West's attitude towards Kosovo plus the West's odd attitude of condemning civilian deaths caused by Russia, while Western politics is ignoring that Georgia opened the war by spread-bombing Tskhinvali and caused a big whop of unnecessary civilian deaths in the first few days). The Kosovo-South Ossetia comparison is basically one of "no you are"-equal blame, but both these cases are raising a lot of ill will in Russia, making it easier for their politicians to sell both this war and consolidation against the West. Considering how the first Chechen crisis was so unpopular that it almost toppled Jeltsin, the fact that this war can so easily be turned to consolidation is a serious loss to Western lovers of democratic ideals.
If you're interested, here's a good scorecard showing how this is a victory for Russia in every sense of the word. Another thoughtful one - though obviously a bit outdated.
Simply put: short of blocking a new EU-RF agreement or kicking Russia out of the WTO, there's nothing the West can do "in response to" Russia's actions in Georgia that will make a dent of an impression, or change this from simply reading "score: Russia".
The only thing Russia lost is the media war, but with Georgia being the democratic pet project it is they never had much of a chance on winning that one. That is a shame, because it means that understanding of this conflict is blocked by skewed media coverage, and it may mean that Saakashvili will remain in power, which would be pretty bad for the Georgians. However, it's nothing but a childish blame game, a bit of PR, and it does not change the impact this has on the arena of international politics.
EDIT: this NATO response is interesting. Putting relations on hold until Russia withdraws is pretty standard fare, but I find it interesting that they're going to push through advance cooperations with Georgia. Probably not full membership (duh), but it's still a strike against Russia. Pretty smart from an international politics viewpoint, but a bit stupid on the internal politics of NATO-side as Georgia is still as unstable as it was before now, and advanced cooperation between NATO and an unstable state is always a bad idea.
Speaking of goading people into war, I don't know what that is if not provocation. A serious blunder in international politics by the US, and maybe when the outcries die down the media will start realising how the West messed up once again.
Aye, no surprise there. Poland knew they'd be put under pressure when accepting the missile defense thing. And no small wonder, Russia simply does not want a missile shield on its border. And who's to blame 'em? Considering the viable alternatives, the US has no excuse for pushing through this planXandax wrote:And now Russia have threaten Poland with military retaliation, due to the missile defense issue, where Poland changed stance after this conflict
Cool, then we're in basic agreement.Xandax wrote:No I do think Russia should help defend S.O if Georigan troops attack.
But I do not think they should have escalated the conflict, and have invaded and started occupation of Georgian territories because then they are no longer peace keeping force, but performing an act of war becoming an invading army - and they should not portray themselves as noble defenders, when their hands are so bloody in the entire conflict.
Though I should footnote that the peace agreement between Russia and Georgia contained a clause allowing Russia to station soldiers in Georgia if they felt it was necessary for pacification reasons. Russia being in Georgia does not violate the peace agreement, but their holding and looting of towns and roads does.
I don't think it matters. This has already been an enormous victory for Russia, both in military pacification of the Caucasus (again) and international politics. This has been a huge embarrassment for both the US, the EU and NATO, and they're trying to cover it up with strong condemnation, hastening on the missile defence treaty or meaningless things like Sweden breaking off military cooperation with Russia.Xandax wrote:Sweden appears to break off military cooperation with Russia over this incident. Wonder how far this'll roll on.
Not that Russia has any reason to be happy over any of that, but they're not impressed by it either. The West completely failed to do anything about Russia policing its own back yard while sternly disagreeing with it and has set a dangerous precedent by doing so. Besides, there's an inconsistency of the West towards South Ossetian self determination compared to the West's attitude towards Kosovo plus the West's odd attitude of condemning civilian deaths caused by Russia, while Western politics is ignoring that Georgia opened the war by spread-bombing Tskhinvali and caused a big whop of unnecessary civilian deaths in the first few days). The Kosovo-South Ossetia comparison is basically one of "no you are"-equal blame, but both these cases are raising a lot of ill will in Russia, making it easier for their politicians to sell both this war and consolidation against the West. Considering how the first Chechen crisis was so unpopular that it almost toppled Jeltsin, the fact that this war can so easily be turned to consolidation is a serious loss to Western lovers of democratic ideals.
If you're interested, here's a good scorecard showing how this is a victory for Russia in every sense of the word. Another thoughtful one - though obviously a bit outdated.
Simply put: short of blocking a new EU-RF agreement or kicking Russia out of the WTO, there's nothing the West can do "in response to" Russia's actions in Georgia that will make a dent of an impression, or change this from simply reading "score: Russia".
The only thing Russia lost is the media war, but with Georgia being the democratic pet project it is they never had much of a chance on winning that one. That is a shame, because it means that understanding of this conflict is blocked by skewed media coverage, and it may mean that Saakashvili will remain in power, which would be pretty bad for the Georgians. However, it's nothing but a childish blame game, a bit of PR, and it does not change the impact this has on the arena of international politics.
EDIT: this NATO response is interesting. Putting relations on hold until Russia withdraws is pretty standard fare, but I find it interesting that they're going to push through advance cooperations with Georgia. Probably not full membership (duh), but it's still a strike against Russia. Pretty smart from an international politics viewpoint, but a bit stupid on the internal politics of NATO-side as Georgia is still as unstable as it was before now, and advanced cooperation between NATO and an unstable state is always a bad idea.
GameBanshee, your resource for all things RPG
No Mutants Allowed, your Fallout resource
"Those who say they give the public what it wants begin by underestimating public taste and end by debauching it" T.S. Eliot
No Mutants Allowed, your Fallout resource
"Those who say they give the public what it wants begin by underestimating public taste and end by debauching it" T.S. Eliot
Of more interesting development, then Abkhazia is requesting of Russia to acknowledge them as an independent nation. What is interesting will be what Russia's reply to that will be, seeing as Russia went into Georgia because they consider especially South Ottesia to be populated with Russian citizen.
I think Abkhazia was just there for convience of adding more pressure on Georgia, but it is the interesting after match of what happens to the regions now.
I think Abkhazia was just there for convience of adding more pressure on Georgia, but it is the interesting after match of what happens to the regions now.
Insert signature here.
What baffles me is why the political Neanderthals like Putin decided to reopen the cold war and why the Russian people voted for them.
What's with this infantile attitude toward Poland for example, it seems to be built on completely irrational paranoia.
Which is why I viewed Russia's antics in Georgia with such alarm in the first place, the current leaders of Russia are clearly mentally unbalanced. With us having loony toons in charge of the US and the UK the last thing we needed was a bunch of nutcases with their fingers on the nuclear button in the Kremlin.
What's with this infantile attitude toward Poland for example, it seems to be built on completely irrational paranoia.
Which is why I viewed Russia's antics in Georgia with such alarm in the first place, the current leaders of Russia are clearly mentally unbalanced. With us having loony toons in charge of the US and the UK the last thing we needed was a bunch of nutcases with their fingers on the nuclear button in the Kremlin.
[QUOTE=Darth Gavinius;1096098]Distrbution of games, is becoming a little like Democracy (all about money and control) - in the end choice is an illusion and you have to choose your lesser evil.
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
-
Brother None
- Posts: 1075
- Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 1:45 pm
- Location: Liberty City, the Netherlands
- Contact:
Should I point out it was the U.S. who decided to put a missile shield in Russia's backyard and in doing so made a step towards hostile relations? How exactly did Putin reopen it?galraen wrote:What baffles me is why the political Neanderthals like Putin decided to reopen the cold war and why the Russian people voted for them.
Eh? Abkhazia has Russian citizens as well, was involved in the 1992 war as well and was stuck in exactly the same situation. It wasn't there for "convenience" or to add pressure on Georgia. You make it sound as if their status as a breakaway province or their militia's decision to strike while Georgia was weak was somehow Russia's call.Xandax wrote:Of more interesting development, then Abkhazia is requesting of Russia to acknowledge them as an independent nation. What is interesting will be what Russia's reply to that will be, seeing as Russia went into Georgia because they consider especially South Ottesia to be populated with Russian citizen.
I think Abkhazia was just there for convience of adding more pressure on Georgia, but it is the interesting after match of what happens to the regions now.
And Russia has absolutely no benefit in Abkhazia or South-Ossetia being independent states completely dependent on Russia's support economically and militarily. Russia might feel forced to pull for it in reply to all this Western foolhardy chest-bashing, but from an internal politics viewpoint they just want the status quo ante.
GameBanshee, your resource for all things RPG
No Mutants Allowed, your Fallout resource
"Those who say they give the public what it wants begin by underestimating public taste and end by debauching it" T.S. Eliot
No Mutants Allowed, your Fallout resource
"Those who say they give the public what it wants begin by underestimating public taste and end by debauching it" T.S. Eliot
Exactly, a missile SHIELD, a defensive tool, so why the paranoid responce? How the hell is agreeing to put anti-missile defences in an allies territory a hostile act. The hostility is originating from Russia, and for what purpose and why? I've not got any respect or trust in Dubya, but even he isn't insane enough to launch an attack on Russia. Their rhetoric is completely unbalanced and paranoid, it's as if Brezhnev was still in charge, why?Brother None wrote:Should I point out it was the U.S. who decided to put a missile shield in Russia's backyard and in doing so made a step towards hostile relations? How exactly did Putin reopen it?
[QUOTE=Darth Gavinius;1096098]Distrbution of games, is becoming a little like Democracy (all about money and control) - in the end choice is an illusion and you have to choose your lesser evil.
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
-
Brother None
- Posts: 1075
- Joined: Thu Jun 21, 2007 1:45 pm
- Location: Liberty City, the Netherlands
- Contact:
Well, on the one hand the US is giving Poland Patriot missiles in return for permission to put up this shield, on the other hand having a missile shield is pretty handy in an offensive war.galraen wrote:Exactly, a missile SHIELD, a defensive tool, so why the paranoid responce?
Just because it's a shield doesn't mean it can't be used as either a point of military intimidation or eventually used in a war.
Well, how do you think the US would respond if Russia put anti-missile defences on Cuba?galraen wrote:How the hell is agreeing to put anti-missile defences in an allies territory a hostile act.
And this is hardly the first time the US is pushing their boundaries. As I mentioned above, they armed Georgia with offensive means, including attack helicopters, and trained Georgian troops. Those are pretty hostile acts to be performing on a country's border.
Last time Russia tried a trick like this in the American sphere of influence, Bay of Pigs happened, not to mention the main Cuba crisis.
Just because the rhetoric is coming from Russia doesn't mean Russia is on the offensive. Russia has the most bravado, they have to because on the one hand they're the weaker party and on the other because it's expected by the people, who want this kind of rhetoric coming from the president, it makes them feel good about their country.galraen wrote:The hostility is originating from Russia, and for what purpose and why? I've not got any respect or trust in Dubya, but even he isn't insane enough to launch an attack on Russia. Their rhetoric is completely unbalanced and paranoid, it's as if Brezhnev was still in charge, why?
But despite all the rhetoric, it's constantly been the US making the provocative moves. Me? I'm surprised Russia has only responded so far by humiliating Georgia and stealing a lot of their American-issued weaponry. They could've done a lot worse, to be honest.
GameBanshee, your resource for all things RPG
No Mutants Allowed, your Fallout resource
"Those who say they give the public what it wants begin by underestimating public taste and end by debauching it" T.S. Eliot
No Mutants Allowed, your Fallout resource
"Those who say they give the public what it wants begin by underestimating public taste and end by debauching it" T.S. Eliot
OK Brothernone, your messxage is clear, Russia is wonderful, NATO is evil.
NATO countries certainly have done a lot of bad things over the decades, but Russia has done just as bad. For every Iraq there's a Georgia, for every Suez there's a Hungary. Both are as bad as each other. Many of the people that criticise Russia for it's rhetoric and actions have already critisised the US/UK in equal measure. At least we're being consistent!
NATO countries certainly have done a lot of bad things over the decades, but Russia has done just as bad. For every Iraq there's a Georgia, for every Suez there's a Hungary. Both are as bad as each other. Many of the people that criticise Russia for it's rhetoric and actions have already critisised the US/UK in equal measure. At least we're being consistent!
[QUOTE=Darth Gavinius;1096098]Distrbution of games, is becoming a little like Democracy (all about money and control) - in the end choice is an illusion and you have to choose your lesser evil.
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
And everything is hidden in the fine print.[/QUOTE]
Dear god, you're all still discussing this? Oh the irony.
I kind of childishly expected this thread to have come to some resolution by now. I suppose this symbolizes the truth that no direct action is ever taken. All people know how to do is discuss and defend their own viewpoints while real people die.
Man, I hate how this reminds me of the Phantom Menace. Stupid movie.
I kind of childishly expected this thread to have come to some resolution by now. I suppose this symbolizes the truth that no direct action is ever taken. All people know how to do is discuss and defend their own viewpoints while real people die.
Man, I hate how this reminds me of the Phantom Menace. Stupid movie.
[INDENT]'..tolerance when fog rolls in clouds unfold your selfless wings feathers that float from arabesque pillows I sold to be consumed by the snow white cold if only the plaster could hold withstand the flam[url="http://bit.ly/foT0XQ"]e[/url] then this fountain torch would know no shame and be outstripped only by the sun that burns with the glory and honor of your..'[/INDENT]
Man, as adult as you obviously are, please give us a hint as to the next Tricky-sanctioned topic on SYM. Your last one was a gripe about mail order. I guess you went out and changed the world with that one.Tricky wrote:Dear god, you're all still discussing this? Oh the irony.
I kind of childishly expected this thread to have come to some resolution by now. I suppose this symbolizes the truth that no direct action is ever taken. All people know how to do is discuss and defend their own viewpoints while real people die.
Man, I hate how this reminds me of the Phantom Menace. Stupid movie.
I am not young enough to know everything. - Oscar Wilde
Support bacteria, they're the only culture some people have!
Support bacteria, they're the only culture some people have!
-
Maharlika
- Posts: 5991
- Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2001 10:00 pm
- Location: Wanderlusting with my lampshade, like any decent k
- Contact:
May I just remind everyone to just stick to the issues and refrain from making ad hominems and character assassinations.
Don't expect agreement in conflicts.
But we certainly expect respect and civility.
Thank you.
Don't expect agreement in conflicts.
But we certainly expect respect and civility.
Thank you.
"There is no weakness in honest sorrow... only in succumbing to depression over what cannot be changed." --- Alaundo, BG2
Brother Scribe, Keeper of the Holy Scripts of COMM
[url="http://www.gamebanshee.com/forums/speak-your-mind-16/"]Moderator, Speak Your Mind Forum[/url]
[url="http://www.gamebanshee.com/forums/speak-your-mind-16/sym-specific-rules-please-read-before-posting-14427.html"]SYM Specific Forum Rules[/url]
For what we know the shield can't be used offensively. The missiles used in the shield doesn't as far as I've read, carry an explosive charge but use impact to explode incoming missiles. As for patriot missiles, those are also mainly a defensive weaponry due to the nature of how they work (surface to air missiles basically)Brother None wrote:Well, on the one hand the US is giving Poland Patriot missiles in return for permission to put up this shield, on the other hand having a missile shield is pretty handy in an offensive war.
<snip>
The only way the shield could be used is in connection with offence is to preventing/reducing the effect of a retaliating strike after a first strike. But the weapon on its own is purely defensive.
You can't compare that in situation to placement of offensive nuclear-capable missiles on Cuba, as the situations are vastly different in all aspects, except perhaps a type of missiles where used in both.
And @Tricky - nobody is forcing you to read the discussion. If you want to change the world, by all means go out and do it.
Insert signature here.
Think of it as a castle: Tactically defensive, but strategically offensive. Cutting down on your opponents options is quite an offensive tactic.Xandax wrote:For what we know the shield can't be used offensively. The missiles used in the shield doesn't as far as I've read, carry an explosive charge but use impact to explode incoming missiles. As for patriot missiles, those are also mainly a defensive weaponry due to the nature of how they work (surface to air missiles basically)
The only way the shield could be used is in connection with offence is to preventing/reducing the effect of a retaliating strike after a first strike. But the weapon on its own is purely defensive.
I never understood why the US were so keen on that shield anyway, unless, you've got no intrest in letting the Cold War die.
Okay. But I just wanted to be part their world.. in the face of blistering irony.Maharlika wrote:May I just remind everyone to just stick to the issues and refrain from making ad hominems and character assassinations.
[INDENT]'..tolerance when fog rolls in clouds unfold your selfless wings feathers that float from arabesque pillows I sold to be consumed by the snow white cold if only the plaster could hold withstand the flam[url="http://bit.ly/foT0XQ"]e[/url] then this fountain torch would know no shame and be outstripped only by the sun that burns with the glory and honor of your..'[/INDENT]