# Georgia and Russia at war.



## rochie (Aug 8, 2008)

just saw on the news russian tanks have rolled into south ossetia in georgia.
georgians asking for U.S help saying russia has attacked them, claiming to have shot down 4 russian jets while russia says 10 of its peace keeping force have been killed


----------



## fly boy (Aug 8, 2008)

ok first of all what the hell


----------



## marshall (Aug 8, 2008)

I read somewhere that on the opening ceremony of the olimpic games Putin said to Bush that "the war has started"...


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 8, 2008)

fly boy said:


> ok first of all what the hell




Flyboy...not Georgia, USA.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 8, 2008)

marshall said:


> I read somewhere that on the opening ceremony of the olimpic games Putin said to Bush that "the war has started"...



Oh c'mon... really? That would be all over the news I would think.


----------



## Thorlifter (Aug 8, 2008)

Our local news radio station reported that Russian TV and radio has broadcast that it is a "war".


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 8, 2008)

I was just watching some of it on the news. I would not call it a war yet but it is getting pretty bad. As per the news (not sure what the truth is yet), 4 Russian aircraft have been shot down.

I am wondering what is going to happen to our troops. I can say for a fact that we have troops in Georgia at this very moment. Them being there has nothing to do with this, and I think we will pull them out.


----------



## comiso90 (Aug 8, 2008)

whats Turkey's position on the matter... they are in the neighborhood. Has NATO released a statement?

"Aircraft":

Frogfoots? Hinds?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 8, 2008)

comiso90 said:


> whats Turkey's position on the matter... they are in the neighborhood. Has NATO released a statement?
> 
> "Aircraft":
> 
> Frogfoots? Hinds?



They did not say what kind of aircraft.


----------



## ccheese (Aug 8, 2008)

Why is it that someone always wants a piece of the other guys turf ??

I doubt that the U.S. will get into an armed conflict over this.... geeze,
I sure hope not...

Charles


----------



## comiso90 (Aug 8, 2008)

fly boy said:


> ok first of all what the hell



They are coming to get you fly boy!!!
Better hide your comic books!

.


----------



## rochie (Aug 8, 2008)

comiso90 said:


> They are coming to get you fly boy!!!
> Better hide your comic books!
> 
> .



i figured that's what fly boy thought was going on but couldnt bring myself to answer !
nice one comiso  .
showing frogfoots rocketing targets on sky news over here, hope this all fizzles out and not gets much worse


----------



## Lucky13 (Aug 8, 2008)

comiso90 said:


> They are coming to get you fly boy!!!
> Better hide your comic books!
> 
> .


Cheeky....!


----------



## timshatz (Aug 8, 2008)

This one has been brewing for a while. Not sure if anyone knows where it will stop but right now it is local but not limited. Not sure where the Russians are going, nobody seems to know their objectives. 

Give it another week. As long as it stays local (between the Russians and the Georgians), it should be ok. If it gets beyond that, it could be trouble. 

Keep an eye on the price of oil. It if keeps falling (down $5 to 115bbl), then this is no biggie. But if it starts coming back, then somebody is either knows something or the markets are getting spooked.


----------



## DBII (Aug 8, 2008)

It has been over 20 yrs since my Russian history classes. If I remember right Stalin was from Georgia. The Russians and Georgians have never played nice. I do not remember why. It may be another case of they always fight each other. Does anyone know the reason this time?

DBII


----------



## JugBR (Aug 8, 2008)

BBCBrasil.com | Notícias | Tanques russos entram em região rebelde da Geórgia

its not a war of russia against georgia dammit !!!!

its a war of russia and georgia against a few separatists in "south ossetia" the russias will quit that reagion very quikly.

fly boy, keep cool man, ruskies are your allies that time !


----------



## Lucky13 (Aug 8, 2008)

Just saw it on the box here tonight....


----------



## JugBR (Aug 8, 2008)

its not a big deal, 3° world war wasnt start that time.

some of the south ossetians will come back with russians to the another side of border, instead the georgia will recover the control of the region.


----------



## comiso90 (Aug 8, 2008)

Lets hope that no missing nukes will suddenly show up.

.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 8, 2008)

comiso90 said:


> Lets hope that no missing nukes will suddenly show up.
> 
> .



well comiso, sometime these nukes must show up. 

but not for now...


----------



## Njaco (Aug 8, 2008)

It was reported on the local news here. Saying the Russians claim the US started it by supplying Georgia with weapons.

Once again.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 8, 2008)

here is the russian newspaper, the pravda:

Russian tanks enter South Ossetia to oust Georgian troops - Pravda.Ru

i read that usa is watching very closely the situation and have also contacted the russian defense minister.

also the un security council made a very strong statement to stop the conflict.

as i readed until now, nobody talked about foreign intervention or troops deployment in georgia.


----------



## RabidAlien (Aug 9, 2008)

The LAST thing this world needs right now is for Russia and the US to get into a pissin match.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 9, 2008)

RabidAlien said:


> The LAST thing this world needs right now is for Russia and the US to get into a pissin match.



the usa until now didnt made any ultimate, or strong statement, or even talked about troops deployment in south ossetia. i think bush wants to resolve that one by diplomacy. 

well lets see, i think until sunday the situation could be resolved... or not.


----------



## comiso90 (Aug 9, 2008)

Njaco said:


> It was reported on the local news here. Saying the Russians claim the US started it by supplying Georgia with weapons.
> 
> Once again.



Charlie Wilson's War?

/


----------



## The Basket (Aug 9, 2008)

Well Georgia is an ally of the west, wants to join NATO and the EU.

The Soviets...I mean Russians...have attacked Georgian terrority outside the warzone.

The Russians are certainly given the finger to the West and the West can do nothing.

The Russians are playing for keeps so it is interesting what the Americans do.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 9, 2008)

The Basket said:


> Well Georgia is an ally of the west, wants to join NATO and the EU.
> 
> The Soviets...I mean Russians...have attacked Georgian terrority outside the warzone.
> 
> ...



for the russians: they entered in south ossetia  to protect their fellows ossetians and their economic interests since they are the main investitor in the region. and also support the south ossetians in their statement to be independent of georgia.

for the georgians this is an invasion of georgian territory, and their attack on south ossetinans are internal affairs, not russian problem. also, georgia thinks russia wants take control of the south ossetia.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 9, 2008)

meanwhile in beijing....







- que bundinha bonita !

a menina bate um bolaum seu bush !

i dont like bush, but i believe he is doing fine there !


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 9, 2008)

DBII said:


> Does anyone know the reason this time?
> 
> DBII



Oil. Oil. Oil.

If the Russians can keep the world oil prospects at high risk, they believe they can prosper by driving up their local commodity prices. However, this will ultimately backfire if Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Venezuela don't back off. The West's lifeblood is oil. And like a strangled animal, if you inhibit the ability for the animal to breathe, you are subject to the animal lashing out at you.

Lord forbid.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 9, 2008)

DBII said:


> The Russians and Georgians have never played nice. I do not remember why. It may be another case of they always fight each other. Does anyone know the reason this time?DBII




They didnt fight each other. Russia protected Georgia from Persian and Ottoman empires in 18th and 19th centuries.
In WWII 700000 Georgians fought as Red Army soldiers against Nazi Germany. About 350000 died in the battlefields of the Eastern Front.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 9, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Oil. Oil. Oil.



There is no oil in Georgia. 
Georgia is the second poorest country in the world after Afganistan.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 9, 2008)

a friend of mine who is a journalist came back today from Tsinhvali and said that in the whole city not a single building was left due to Georgian bombardment and that there're bodies everywhere..hundreds of them.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 9, 2008)

stasoid said:


> There is no oil in Georgia.
> Georgia is the second poorest country in the world after Afganistan.



yes, thats true, but Gazprom(state russian company) is building a gas tunnel from russia to supply the region with natural gas. they are spending 640 milion USD on that.

around 2/3 of south ossetias budget, came from russia. almost every local ossetian have russian passport and they also use the ruble as local currency insteal the georgian currency.

also 70% of south ossetians are from diferent ethnicity than georgians. also the language is diferent.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 9, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> a friend of mine who is a journalist came back today from Tsinhvali and said that in the whole city not a single building was left due to Georgian bombardment and that there're bodies everywhere..hundreds of them.



i heard about 1400 deaths...

how the russia media is dealing with that conflict ? whats the opinion of russians about that ?


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 9, 2008)

JugBR said:


> how the russia media is dealing with that conflict ? whats the opinion of russians about that ?



the news coverage is quite good, both Russian, Ossetian and Georgian points of view are present, and Russians for the very most part support actions taken by the goverment.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 9, 2008)

from g1.com.br

G1 - O Portal de Notícias da Globo - GALERIA DE FOTOS - Conflito na Geórgia


----------



## JugBR (Aug 9, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> the news coverage is quite good, both Russian, Ossetian and Georgian points of view are present, and Russians for the very most part support actions taken by the goverment.



if you heard some new thing about the situation in russian media, would post here dimitri ?


----------



## comiso90 (Aug 9, 2008)

JugBR said:


> from g1.com.br
> 
> G1 - O Portal de Notícias da Globo - GALERIA DE FOTOS - Conflito na Geórgia



nice post


----------



## comiso90 (Aug 9, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> the news coverage is quite good, both Russian, Ossetian and Georgian points of view are present, and Russians for the very most part support actions taken by the goverment.



You are in a good position to share your perspective. Please enlighten us. More info.

.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 9, 2008)

JugBR said:


> i heard about 1400 deaths...


1600 according to the latest reports


----------



## JugBR (Aug 9, 2008)

comiso90 said:


> nice post



   

first of all, my first and secont post here in this topic was pure BS, because i didnt understoot what was really going on. but now i see its a very complex situation.

well, i found more pics here:

http://noticias.terra.com.br/mundo/galerias/banner/0,,EI294,00.html

from terra.com.br

and thats a letter, form the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, that i found in pravda.com :

Russian FM: Georgia’s treacherous attack - Pravda.Ru


----------



## JugBR (Aug 9, 2008)

from georgia times:

Territory between Village of Ksuisi and Khelchua was being intensive Bombed for 20 minutes 
In the Georgian – Ossetian conflict zone, the territory between the village of Ksuisi and Khelchua was being intensive bombed for 20 minutes by Russian aircrafts.According to the released information bombing was committed by Russian Su -25 aircrafts. 

-------------------------------------------------------

Most of S.Ossetia Under Tbilisi’s Control’ – Saakashvili 
President Saakashvili said he had announced a general mobilization of reserve troops amid “large-scale military aggression” by Russia. In a live televised address on August 8, Saakashvili said Georgian government troops had gone “on the offensive” after South Ossetian militias responded to his peace initiative on August 7 by shelling Georgian villages. 

-------------------------------------------------------

Medvedev: Russia will Protect its Citizens in S.Ossetia Russia will protect its citizens wherever they are and punish the perpetrators, President Medvedev said on August 8, while commenting on the situation in South Ossetia. Russian President Dimitri Medvedev said Russia would punish those guilty of inflicting human casualties. 

-------------------------------------------------------

Russia Says Confidence in Georgia Undermined Georgia launched “a treacherous and massive attack” on Tskhinvali “just hours after” reaching an agreement on holding talks, the Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement on August 8. “The Georgian authorities chose force despite all the diplomatic efforts between Moscow, Tbilisi, Tskhinvali, Washington and other interested capitals,” it said. “As a result confidence in the Georgian leadership has been totally undermined.” 

-------------------------------------------------------

Peace Enforcement Measures Underway in S.Ossetia – PM The Georgian forces are undertaking “measures for establishment of guaranteed peace” in South Ossetia, Lado Gurgenidze, the Georgian Prime Minister said early on August 8.“The governmental troops were forced to launch measures for establishment of peace in the region 

-------------------------------------------------------

http://www.geotimes.ge/

i couldnt access the full page of the news so i posted the headlines and the box resume. its almost impossible to access anything in georgia from here. i think all world is triyng to do the same...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 9, 2008)

I am really wondering what is going to happen to our troops in the country...

I wonder if I will be seeing some of my friends a bit sooner.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 9, 2008)

i just cant sleep !

from russia today:

South Ossetian capital liberated – Russia







RussiaToday : News : Second emergency UN meeting ends without deal

RussiaToday : News : South Ossetian capital liberated â€“ Russia
"theres a interesting banner in left"



Russian president Dmitry Medvedev said:


> The situation reached the point that Georgian peacekeepers have been shooting at Russian peacekeepers. Now women, children and old people are dying in South Ossetia - most of them are citizens of the Russian Federation. According to the constitution, I, as the President of the Russian Federation, must protect lives and the dignity of Russian citizens wherever they are. Those responsible for the deaths of our citizens will be punished.



curious thing:

in russia today, they made a pool about the coincidence of the georgian attack on south ossetia and the opening of olimpic games:

most part of readers(43%) think the date of attack was planned by georgian government to attract less publicity as possible. other part(35%) think was to attract more publicity as possible.

RussiaToday


----------



## JugBR (Aug 9, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I am really wondering what is going to happen to our troops in the country...
> 
> I wonder if I will be seeing some of my friends a bit sooner.



are they near south ossetia ?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 9, 2008)

JugBR said:


> are they near south ossetia ?



I do not know...

But Georgia is not very big.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 9, 2008)

JugBR said:


> curious thing:
> 
> in russia today, they made a pool about the coincidence of the georgian attack on south ossetia and the opening of olimpic games:
> 
> ...



One way or another it confirms once again that current Georgian president is a mentally sick person.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 9, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I am really wondering what is going to happen to our troops in the country...



they are all safe so far


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 9, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I do not know...



they are stationed (at least officially) at the Vasiani military base near Tbilisi. Sure not the safest place in Georgia at the moment...

Russians have just confirmed the loss of two aircraft since yesterday


----------



## JugBR (Aug 9, 2008)

herr adler:

your embassy is in tibilisi, the georgia´s capital, it is not so distant of south ossetia.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 9, 2008)

south ossetia on google earth:

Google Earth Community: South Ossetia (Conflict Zone)


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 9, 2008)

heavy tank clashes currently ongoing at the outscirts in Tshinvali, it looks like the Georgians are attempting the last all out major offensive to retake the city


----------



## Arsenal VG-33 (Aug 9, 2008)

Georgia declares a "state of war" with Russia this morning. Also, on a military forum there is a sudden and huge discussion about a large multi-nationational fleet that is headed to the Persian Gulf. Just the kind of news I like to wake up to in the morning.....not.


----------



## syscom3 (Aug 9, 2008)

There are no vital US interests in this country and historically its been a Russian "backyard". 

I say we stay the heck out of this fight, and remind Putin that Cuba is a no go zone for their military.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 9, 2008)

looks like the Georgians achieved the breaktrough on some points and reached the city


----------



## Pisis (Aug 9, 2008)

I don't know if somebody mentioned it, most likely not (or at leaast I didn't see it), but I'll try to shed some light upon the whole territorial problem.

_Osetia_ - inhabited by the _Osetians_ (who came from Asia several thousands years ago) - was historically divided into two parts: *North Osetia* (which was taken over by Russia in _1774_) and *South Osetia* (Taken by Russia in _1801_). 

With creation of the USSR, both parts stayed in the Union. 

In _1990_, when *Georgia declared independence from Russia*, _Northern Osetia remianed in the Russian Federation, while *Southern Osetia has become part of Georgia.*_ Though they are an autonomous territory, they were actually never recognized as an independent state.

Got it?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 9, 2008)

syscom3 said:


> There are no vital US interests in this country and historically its been a Russian "backyard".



Not true. We have set up training bases in Georgia for quite some time now.

I know for fact that we have US troops in Georgia right now, people that I actually know. They have been there for quite some time now.

Troops in my opinion is "vital US interest."

Now I am not saying we should get involved. I do believe we need to get these troops out though.


----------



## Freebird (Aug 9, 2008)

rochie said:


> just saw on the news russian tanks have rolled into south ossetia in georgia.
> georgians asking for U.S help saying russia has attacked them, claiming to have shot down 4 russian jets while russia says 10 of its peace keeping force have been killed




I'm watching this on the news, the Russian PM wants to force Georgia to negotiate - "by force if need be"....


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 9, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> They did not say what kind of aircraft.



Su-25
Tu-22MR recce , 2 KIA and 2 POW


----------



## comiso90 (Aug 9, 2008)

They shot down a Backfire bomber?

When it was taking off or landing with a shoulder fired weapon?

.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 9, 2008)

With Georgia almost having been admitted into NATO and the agreements to provide defense for NATO protectorates, what is the European reaction about Georgia. NATO would be in the thick of it right now if the decision were differently. Russia vs NATO? Oh man what a mess that would be.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 9, 2008)

stasoid said:


> One way or another it confirms once again that current Georgian president is a mentally sick person.



he is threatening quit the georgian delegation from beijing.

he also removing the georgian troops from iraq.

i suspect his plan was to make sure europe and us would help him. i believe he knew that russia would retaliate if he attacks a region full of russian citzens, so hes strategy was make sure the western powers would take party in his side of content.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 9, 2008)

I too am waiting on the European response to this.

I really dont know what to think of this, or who to put the blame on. I just get the feeling that this "invasion" was planned for quite some time now.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 9, 2008)

comiso90 said:


> They shot down a Backfire bomber?
> 
> When it was taking off or landing with a shoulder fired weapon?
> 
> .



still unclear , but most probably it was shot down during the cruise flight. SA-11 "buk" or maybe S-200, which they could recieve from the Ukraine (unconfirmed).


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 9, 2008)

Ramirezzz, what is the situation with the Ukraine? They too are in a similar situation with not quite being a NATO member. If Ukraine is accused of providing arms to Georgia, will Russia react negatively? Will this escalate?


----------



## comiso90 (Aug 9, 2008)

Dont believe for a second the the timing with the Olympics is a coincidence. They're banking on the world being distracted.

.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 9, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Ramirezzz, what is the situation with the Ukraine? They too are in a similar situation with not quite being a NATO member. If Ukraine is accused of providing arms to Georgia, will Russia react negatively? Will this escalate?



well the russian officials already warned the Ukraine from any further military or political support of Georgia and I'm quite sure the Ukraine will not go that far - I mean it will not provide the Georgia with arms while this country is de-facto in the war with Russia. The relationship between the Ukraine und Russia is cold enough , and neither side wants to make the things even worser.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 9, 2008)

JugBR said:


> i suspect his plan was to make sure europe and us would help him. i believe he knew that russia would retaliate if he attacks a region full of russian citzens, so hes strategy was make sure the western powers would take party in his side of content.



Europe should try to stay away from this guy. He is unpredictable sometimes looks even psychopathic. Some sort of a georgian version of Hugo Chaves crossed with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 9, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> With Georgia almost having been admitted into NATO and the agreements to provide defense for NATO protectorates, what is the European reaction about Georgia. NATO would be in the thick of it right now if the decision were differently. Russia vs NATO? Oh man what a mess that would be.



I highly doubt the Georgia will make it to the NATO. Nobody wants a member which acting so unpredictably and hazardous. The Germany is against it more than ever.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 9, 2008)

I have to plead guilty of being ignorant of Shakisvily's (sp?) actions. But stasiod's comments about being a cross between "Chaves and I'maMeanOleWackjob" is telling. What has the Georgian president done that is considered so chaotic? I do know he is vilified by Russian politicos, but why? Because he's anti-Russia?

Honest question here guys and value your input.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 9, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> well the russian officials already warned the Ukraine from any further military or political support of Georgia and I'm quite sure the Ukraine will not go that far - I mean it will not provide the Georgia with arms while this country is de-facto in the war with Russia. The relationship between the Ukraine und Russia is cold enough , and neither side wants to make the things even worser.



What is Russia's statement to the United States. The US has been supplying Georgia with weapons for quite some time now. Just today I saw footage of US built helicopters flying in Georgian colors.

The United States has also been training the Georgian military for several years now as well.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 9, 2008)

What's the German press saying about this, Adler?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 9, 2008)

The same as the American Press, nothing new yet either.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 9, 2008)

Hmmm


----------



## Gnomey (Aug 9, 2008)

Nothing being said from the British point of view either. Not sure what to make it of it myself, I'm going to wait a bit before passing judgement on it to see how it pans out.

Some links

RussiaToday : News : South Ossetian bloodshed claims hundreds of lives
BBC NEWS | Europe | Peace bid as Ossetia crisis rages


----------



## DBII (Aug 9, 2008)

Thanks for the information guys. I have heard very little about the subject. The only thing I can add is that prior to the start of hostilities, Russia was talking about moving equipment into Cuba if the US did not stop trying to put a missle defense system into eastern Europe. Was Russia warning the US to stay out of this war? Is the cold war is returning or will this just fade from the front pages? 

DBII


----------



## JugBR (Aug 9, 2008)

acording to globo.com.br, the georgian president is now talking about a cease-fire. also the baltic republics and poland are condening the "russian attack"

but i think this is quite funny, because what i understood in fact, georgia attacked first south ossetia.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 9, 2008)

DBII said:


> Thanks for the information guys. I have heard very little about the subject. The only thing I can add is that prior to the start of hostilities, *Russia was talking about moving equipment into Cuba if the US did not stop trying to put a missle defense system into eastern Europe. Was Russia warning the US to stay out of this war?* Is the cold war is returning or will this just fade from the front pages?
> 
> DBII



i didnt readed none of this in pravda.ru, or any other russian news site. the usa is already out of this war.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 9, 2008)

JugBR said:


> but i think this is quite funny, because what i understood in fact, georgia attacked first south ossetia.



You see that is where it is unclear. South Ossentia is a Georgian province. Georgia has a right to try and keep the province. Of course it would have been better had they learned from Serbia and not tried to used force to keep them in the nation.

Technically Russia had no business going into Georgia or South Ossentia because none of the lands belong to Russia.

That is why it is a very confusing situation. I too am not sure what to make of this and I am not going to pass judgement until I know the facts. Right now both sides are just pointing fingers.

The only area I will pass judgement in is the bombing and shelling of civilian centers. Both sides are doing it and they should not be doing it. In the end it is only going to make both sides look bad.


----------



## syscom3 (Aug 9, 2008)

For some bizarre reason, the past few years has seen NATO and the US needlessly antagonizing Russia.

There was no need for us to expand eastwards into the ex soviet republics. And ditto for a missle defense system the Europeans didn't want.


----------



## Njaco (Aug 9, 2008)

JUg, cheeky devil, isn't he?


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 9, 2008)

syscom3 said:


> For some bizarre reason, the past few years has seen NATO and the US needlessly antagonizing Russia.
> 
> There was no need for us to expand eastwards into the ex soviet republics. And ditto for a missle defense system the Europeans didn't want.



I don't agree with that syscom. I don't think the US has been antagonizing Russia. The US agreed to share in the technology and administration of the missile defense site. In fact, we offered to let Russia manage the bloody radar with their equipment and monitor the overall activity.

Other than our leasing military bases for our war on fanatical Islam, the expansion is not a US expansion. What you are referring to with respect to old soviet satellite nations is NATO endeavor. NATO is a common defence network that is highly prized for its ability and efficiency compared with Russia and past Warsaw Pact capabilities. Sovereign nations have a right to choose. They have not been forced to join NATO either via the gun, economically nor socially. Rather, joining the most efficient defence organization is an organic decision that any sane country would want to pursue. It is a common defence mechanism to surround yourself with powerful friendlies.

Russia is neither.


----------



## magnocain (Aug 9, 2008)

I try to watch the news to see what is going on, but they only talk about John Edwards' affair. Typical.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 9, 2008)

That's okay. Another lying politicial deserves the microscope. They all do.


----------



## The Basket (Aug 9, 2008)

I do get the feeling there is a bigger picture here and the Russians are playing a far bigger game.

South Ossetia is just the reason for a bit of power projection to show that the big dog is alive and barking. 

Most of Europes natural gas comes from Russia and energy is a better weapon than any MiG. So Europe will suck it up where the Russians are involved.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 9, 2008)

You are right Basket. Oil has come down almost 33% lately per barrel and that hits right home to Russia, which is their really only true commodity that fuels their economy. A little chaos is necessary to keep those barrels running up.

While the argument has been made that Georgia is not an oil oasis, the ability to destablize the region associate with Russia's state supported Gazprom's endeavors has huge implications to the world economy. With the exception of British Petroleum, Russia has assumed all state ownership of oil/gas exploration. This is similarly true for Iran. This is similarly true for Venezuela. This is similarly true for Saudi Arabia.

Once the ability to find and exploit gas is gone when western technology vacates the area, this will create a crisis.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 10, 2008)

The Basket said:


> I do get the feeling there is a bigger picture here and the Russians are playing a far bigger game.
> 
> South Ossetia is just the reason for a bit of power projection to show that the big dog is alive and barking.
> 
> Most of Europes natural gas comes from Russia and energy is a better weapon than any MiG. So Europe will suck it up where the Russians are involved.



i disagree with you for 2 reasons:

1 - 70% of south ossetians are russian citzens and desire that south ossetia becomes part of russia.

2 - the georgia´s army striked the region first.

3 - what american or britons or any other would do if in another country there been killed 1000 of their citzens ? war ! the logical choice !

i think the russia is in their right to defend the south ossetians that are also russian citzens. and georgia is wrong because, like have been posted here before: "Of course it would have been better had they learned from Serbia and not tried to used force to keep them in the nation".


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

Does your position hold true if it were the Kayapo of Brazil wanting independence?


----------



## stasoid (Aug 10, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> You see that is where it is unclear. South Ossentia is a Georgian province. Georgia has a right to try and keep the province. Of course it would have been better had they learned from Serbia and not tried to used force to keep them in the nation.
> 
> Technically Russia had no business going into Georgia or South Ossentia because none of the lands belong to Russia.



This situation is very similar to Serbia-Kosovo affairs. 
In early 90th, ethnic cleansings left several thousands dead and hundreds of thousands ossetian refugees fled to Russia. To stop the massacre Russia deployed a peacekeeping contingent into the region. And it was peace for another 16 years or so (very fragile though) until August 8th 2008 when Georgia launched a massive artillery and rocket bombardment of the capital city of South Ossetia killing 1400 people within several hours while the rest of the World was watching the Opening of The Olympic Games.

Now it will be more like a dream for Georgia to return this breakaway province back to Georgia without physical extermination of all its ossetian population. It would be the same task as, say, returning Kosovo to Serbia now.

The things are even more complex considering that fact that many of the early 90th ossetian refugees got russian citizenship while being in refuge but later decided to return to their homes in South Ossetia hoping for a prolonged peace. So, Russia, I guess, has more business in the region, where its citizens being slaughtered, then anyone else. 
What I dont understand is why it took them so long (more then 10 hours) to retaliate, allowing so many civilians being killed in the first hours of Georgia's attak. They defenetely been cought by surprise.
And why the russians are so shy in their airstrikes? Didnt they learn those lessons given by NATO dealing with Belgrad in mid 90th? First, destroing all bridges, power station, airfields, military bases and other infrastructure all at once.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 10, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Does your position hold true if it were the Kayapo of Brazil wanting independence?




yes i do matt, we have 8 million km square here, we can give a good piece of land for them if they really wants. i would support that, if all of them are really wanting be independent. not 2 or 3 villages but the whole kayapos.

its quite the same way acre. acre in 19 century was part of bolivia but most part of the inhabitans was brazilians, their desire was to acre be part of brazil. that generated the "acre´s issue", then in in 1903, with the treaty of petropolis, brazil peacefully integrated acre in exchane of 2 million english pounds.

bolivians says the president of bolivia exchanged acre by a horse, thats not true...

 

or also is quite the same independence of uruguay, since that land was part of the brazilian empire in 19 century then uruguayans fought for their independence and they made it. was very fair they became a independent country since they dont wanna be part of brazil.

os same way americans and brazilians would desire be independent of their european metropolis... well you get it i know... the topic is about georgia and my trip just goes too far !


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 10, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> You are right Basket. Oil has come down almost 33% lately per barrel and that hits right home to Russia, which is their really only true commodity that fuels their economy. A little chaos is necessary to keep those barrels running up.



Well until now Russia financially has lost more than gained in this war. RTS and MMVB index (Russian "Dow Jones" index) has fell to 10 % and is on the two years low by now. The conflict wont last much long - so there's no potential for the oil prices to skyrocket.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 10, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Does your position hold true if it were the Kayapo of Brazil wanting independence?


which citizenship have the people of Kayapo? Are they cut off economically and politically from Brazil like Ossetia and Abkhazia from Georgia? Do they have a semi-autonomy?


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 10, 2008)

quite frankly speaking guys I do believe the Georgian assault on Ossetia was a solely Georgian initiative without much consulting the USA. Looks like American officials were caught unaware by Georgia's actions. Of course now they're trying to save a face and ask Russia to stop the bombing but it looks like they are as angry with Georgian actions as many other countries.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 10, 2008)

ramirezzz:

kayapos are a indian nation of brazil, like xanvantes, tupis, guaranis, yanomamis, tucanos... etc. with their own language and their own culture. they are brazilians citzens, they also speak portuguese and they have their lands to fishing, hunting and lives. but in a hypotetical situation, if they wants be independent of brazil, they would have all the right to do so. if all of them want that. not just some chiefs because had a fight with funai or because some obscure n.g.o. put that idea on their minds for obscure interests.

interesting article in portuguese about kayapos issue:

Amazonia.org.br


----------



## JugBR (Aug 10, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> quite frankly speaking guys I do believe the Georgian assault on Ossetia was a solely Georgian initiative without much consulting the USA. Looks like American officials were caught unaware by Georgia's actions. Of course now they're trying to save a face and ask Russia to stop the bombing but it looks like they are as angry with Georgian actions as many other countries.



i think georgia wanted that usa and nato could help them by some form, thats why they send troops for iraq and thats why they are so close of european union.

the president of georgia may tought: - now i have big friends, russia wouldnt intervene here if we try to drive south ossetians out to north ossetia and take back south ossetia.

but the sad true is that neither usa or nato even far consirered the option of a troops deployment. so georgia is alone now. their only suporters are some baltic republics and poland that complains the russian invasion. but just political support. not military.

is better that situation ends fast and the future of south ossetia would traced in a negotiation table, by both parts, in a peacefull way.


----------



## Gnomey (Aug 10, 2008)

BBC NEWS | Europe | Georgia 'pulls out of S Ossetia'

"peace", Georgia has pulled out. Not sure what happens next - perhaps the territory will secede to Russia.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 10, 2008)

more pictures:

G1 - O Portal de Notícias da Globo

some sad pictures...


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 10, 2008)

Gnomey said:


> BBC NEWS | Europe | Georgia 'pulls out of S Ossetia'
> 
> "peace", Georgia has pulled out. Not sure what happens next - perhaps the territory will secede to Russia.




they hadn't .Either this statement was a mistake or it was a deliberate desinformation. They simply regrouped their forces and and deployed it on other positions in SO.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 10, 2008)

Russian autorities described the conditions under which the cease-fire talks could begin - withdrawing of Georgian troops to their pre-attack positions (before friday attack) and signing of an non-agression agreement with Ossetians and Abkhazians


----------



## JugBR (Aug 10, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> they hadn't .Either this statement was a mistake or it was a deliberate desinformation. They simply regrouped their forces and and deployed it on other positions in SO.



thats right dimitri, i readed that so, also seems like the soldiers in iraq are about to come back to georgia and they are recruiting many volunteers.

they are regrouping for the next action. but since georgian air force is quite small and is not fully operational and their main airport was destroyed, their comandants may are considering take defensive positions along SO borders.

lets see whats happends...


----------



## Pisis (Aug 10, 2008)

Another information I could get about any other countries being involved is that Ukraine had blocked Russian ships to come to their territorial waters "until the complete cease-fire".

_Source: Interfax_


----------



## rochie (Aug 10, 2008)

sky and bbc news are very anti russian in the way they are reporting events in georgia.
giving the impression that big bad russia is attacking poor little georgia, seems to me georgia was fighting ossetian militia a couple of days before the russians stepped in


----------



## evangilder (Aug 10, 2008)

Agreed, Rochie. The NY Times is doing something similar. Unless I am completely missing something here, it seems to me that the Russians were reacting to their citizens being attacked.


----------



## rochie (Aug 10, 2008)

on the other hand i've heard the russians were handing out russian passports like confetti thus giving them reason to react, but if south ossetia wants to be russian what can you do !
is that region vital for georgia or could they let it go without feeling any pain ?


----------



## JugBR (Aug 10, 2008)

rochie said:


> on the other hand i've heard the russians were handing out russian passports like confetti thus giving them reason to react, *but if south ossetia wants to be russian what can you do !*
> is that region vital for georgia or could they let it go without feeling any pain ?



thats where the "kosovo factor" is present. georgia made a very risky play triyng to crush the ossetian forces and bring back south ossetia for georgia dominion. the georgians didnt expected that russia would react so strongly and so quickly cross the border with their tanks and bombers.

since georgia is an allie of usa in iraq, an allie of ukraine in the region and an allie of european union, they would think that also could intimidade russia and support georgia.

but russia quickly responds te georgian attack sending your 56th army to cross the border, and bombs important georgian military instalations. the russians defends the right of south ossetians to be independent or part of russia just like what happends in kosovo.

its a strong argument because that time nato ran to help kosovo, after many tention been generated and some massacres. and russia noticied that at least 2.000 people have been killed in s. ossetia, russia claims also a humanitarian issue.

also, the georgia, besides been allie of usa in iraq, is not considered a close allie by american government wich makes difficult any kind of military help by usa since conflict started, or any more harder position of washington over that conflict. usa will act togheter with their partners of un security council. and russia in inside the council.

the georgia claims they abandoned the positions on south ossetia capital and ask for a cease-fire. russians wants they drive out completely from s. ossetia as a condition for a cease-fire.

one of the national sports of russians is the chess, and i believe puttin is real good chess player, he throws all the pressure over georgian shoulders and take the positions over s. ossetia waiting for the next move. georgia and their president are almost checked !


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

It gets back to oil. Sustained conflict in the Caucacus region could directly affect Russian oil profits. The regions pipelines carry oil from the Caspian Sea to world markets. Disruption of the oil flow through this region is a Russian strategic issue.

In addition to that, the flood of refugees were headed into Russia, were they not?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 10, 2008)

evangilder said:


> Agreed, Rochie. The NY Times is doing something similar. Unless I am completely missing something here, it seems to me that the Russians were reacting to their citizens being attacked.



That is where it is gets real interesting though, because technically the land belonged to Georgia, not Russia. As Rochie said as well, if the news are correct Russia was just giving passports away like candy to the people in the province as well. So in that case Russia was interfering with Georgian sovereignty to begin with.

I don't know what to think though. I am not going to pass judgement until the full facts are known.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 10, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> It gets back to oil. Sustained conflict in the Caucacus region could directly affect Russian oil profits. The regions pipelines carry oil from the Caspian Sea to world markets. Disruption of the oil flow through this region is a Russian strategic issue.



The conflict is hundreds years old. And first of all it's an ethnic conflict when it began centuries ago people didnt even know what oil is.
In recent history, those ethnic cleansings of early 90th had nothing to do with the oil either. There was no pipeline through georgian territory and oil cost 10 bucks per barrel at the time.

Now, since the pipeline has been built (if you're referring to the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline) I dont know how that pipeline might affect Russia's oil producers, there are two dozens of them, mostly privately owned companies including BP. And Google search doesnt even show Azerbaidzhan among top oil producers of the World. I'm not an expert in oil import/export but if you know more please enlighten us on how this little pipeline can affect world's oil prices.

Anyways, in my opinion, building a pipeline through disputed territories, through zones of numerous ethnic conflicts and rebel movements, through countries with autocratic regimes like Azerbaidzhan and Georgia was a mistake at first place and might cause more human lives in future.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 10, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> That is where it is gets real interesting though, because technically the land belonged to Georgia, not Russia. As Rochie said as well, if the news are correct Russia was just giving passports away like candy to the people in the province as well. So in that case Russia was interfering with Georgian sovereignty to begin with.
> 
> I don't know what to think though. I am not going to pass judgement until the full facts are known.



since 1991 theres conflicts between south ossetians and georgia central government. seems like south ossetians dont wanna be part os georgia. the ethiny of s. ossetians, their language and culture also are diferent of georgia. they are ore near to north ossetia wich stays inside russia. thats the reason of too many russian passports.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 10, 2008)

stasoid said:


> The conflict is hundreds years old. And first of all it's an ethnic conflict when it began centuries ago people didnt even know what oil is.
> In recent history, those ethnic cleansings of early 90th had nothing to do with the oil either. There was no pipeline through georgian territory and oil cost 10 bucks per barrel at the time.
> 
> Now, since the pipeline has been built (if you're referring to the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline) I dont know how that pipeline might affect Russia's oil producers, there are two dozens of them, mostly privately owned companies including BP. And Google search doesnt even show Azerbaidzhan among top oil producers of the World. I'm not an expert in oil import/export but if you know more please enlighten us on how this little pipeline can affect world's oil prices.
> ...



stasoid, does the conflict have any relation with past failed stalinist ethnical policies ?


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

stasoid said:


> I'm not an expert in oil import/export but if you know more please enlighten us on how this little pipeline can affect world's oil prices..



I'm not inferring that the Russians are taking action against Georgia for the sake of the world. Far from it. Rather, I suggest that Russia is protecting their own interests and seeking to bolster their own economy.



stasoid said:


> Anyways, in my opinion, building a pipeline through disputed territories, through zones of numerous ethnic conflicts and rebel movements, through countries with autocratic regimes like Azerbaidzhan and Georgia was a mistake at first place and might cause more human lives in future.



On that we agree. And that is really my point about Russia's involvement. Don't think for minute that I am foolish enough to believe this a 1-dimensional issue. But oil and Russia economic/strategic interests rank at the very top. This was a planned operation whose military buildup had been occurring over a significant period of time. This is NOT a reactionary peace keeping force assembled by Russia in wee hours of the morning.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

Oh, and stasiod/Ramirezzz, I would expect no less from the US in protecting their interests too. That was not meant as a condemnation of Russian actions.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 10, 2008)

*JugBR*, All ethnic conflicts were neutralized by the soviet regime, you know. 
But, here is what wiki says:

History

Medieval and early modern period
The Ossetians are originally descendants of the Alans, a Sarmatian tribe. They became Christians during the early Middle Ages, under Georgian and Byzantine influences. Under Mongol rule, they were pushed out of their medieval homeland south of the Don river in present-day Russia and part migrated towards and over the Caucasus mountains, to Georgia[14] where they formed three distinct territorial entities. Digor in the west came under the influence of the neighboring Kabard people, who introduced Islam. Tualläg in the south became what is now South Ossetia, part of the historical Georgian principality of Samachablo[15] where Ossetians found refuge from Mongol invaders. Iron in the north became what is now North Ossetia, under Russian rule from 1767. Most Ossetians are now Christian (approximately 61%); there is also a significant Muslim minority.


South Ossetia under Russia and the Soviet Union
The modern-day South Ossetia was annexed by Russia in 1801, along with Georgia proper, and absorbed into the Russian Empire. Following the Russian Revolution, South Ossetia became a part of the Menshevik Georgian Democratic Republic, while the north became a part of the Terek Soviet Republic. The area saw a series of Ossetian rebellions during which claims for independence were made. The Georgian government accused Ossetians of cooperating with Bolsheviks. According to Ossetian sources about 5,000 Ossetians were killed and more than 13,000 subsequently died from hunger and epidemics.[16]

The Soviet Georgian government established by the Russian 11th Red Army in 1921 created the South Ossetian Autonomous Oblast (i.e., district) in April 1922. Although the Ossetians had their own language (Ossetian), Russian and Georgian were administrative/state languages.[17] Under the rule of Georgia's government during Soviet times, it enjoyed some degree of autonomy including speaking the Ossetian language and teaching it in schools.[17]

South Ossetia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 10, 2008)

JugBR said:


> since 1991 theres conflicts between south ossetians and georgia central government. seems like south ossetians dont wanna be part os georgia. the ethiny of s. ossetians, their language and culture also are diferent of georgia. they are ore near to north ossetia wich stays inside russia. thats the reason of too many russian passports.



Yes but Russia has no right to issue passports to citizens of another country (If that is what is happening. It is still rather unclear to me).


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

"The fog of war"


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 10, 2008)

I apologize for starting my own thread about this, I didn't know that there was a thread on this subject.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 10, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> "The fog of war"



Exactly.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 10, 2008)

Milos Sijacki said:


> I apologize for starting my own thread about this, I didn't know that there was a thread on this subject.



No need to apologize.


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 10, 2008)

I think that this is all about that hideous looking sticky fluid we call oil.

The oil must flow, but not to everyone.

Today I heard that Russians have pushed the Georgians completely out of combat zone and that the fighting is spreading to Abkhazia.

I also read that some people blame USA for this and, indirectly, the Republic of Kosovo. That is what I read when I googled this up.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 10, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Yes but Russia has no right to issue passports to citizens of another country (If that is what is happening. It is still rather unclear to me).



As far as I know it is ligitemate to have dual citizenship in such countries as Russia, Canada, US. 
If you (or me) ever decide to seek a refugee status in Russia you'll get it and you'll get a russian passport eventually as well if you apply.
As I understand those Ossetians spent years in refuge in Russia and granting them with russian citizenship is not something abnormal.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 10, 2008)

Milos Sijacki said:


> I also read that some people blame USA for this and, indirectly, the Republic of Kosovo. That is what I read when I googled this up.



Yes I saw the same thing on the news as well.

That is normal though, whenever there is a conflict the USA will take the blame for it. Unfortunatly it is true. In this conflict if it had been USA instead of Russia, the world would be hooten and holloring and calling the USA the evil witch of the west. 

It is sort of a fad to blame the US for everything or to find a way to put atleast some of the blame on the US.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 10, 2008)

stasoid said:


> As far as I know it is ligitemate to have dual citizenship in such countries as Russia, Canada, US.
> If you (or me) ever decide to seek a refugee status in Russia you'll get it and you'll get a russian passport eventually as well if you apply.
> As I understand those Ossetians spent years in refuge in Russia and granting them with russian citizenship is not something abnormal.



Yes dual citizenship is one thing. The way this seems though is that Russia was handing out the citizenships like candy to gain a foothold back in Georgia.

Again though I do not fully understand all of this just yet.

As for the dual citizenship, I am fully aware of that. I used to hold American and German citizenship. I only hold American citizenship now.


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 10, 2008)

I think, Adler, no offense, just something that is obvious, it is because USA always sticks its nose where it doesn't belong to and that USA really has a weird foreign policy from time to time.

US should be quiet now because of the Russians or there will be trouble

Oh, and one more thing, the Osetians are descendents of Alans who lived the for a loooong time.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

Milos Sijacki said:


> I think, Adler, no offense, just something that is obvious, it is because USA always sticks its nose where it doesn't belong to and that USA really has a weird foreign policy from time to time..



Okay Milos, I'm biting. Other than the dead horse of Iraq, please enlighten us US citizens of where we are effing up the world with our foreign policy? This should be rich.


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 10, 2008)

Ok, why did U go to Iraq, how did Sadam threaten you? Kosovo-- Osetia is a legal part of Georgia although they did exactly the same thing Kosovars did, they had a referendum on independence and it passed with flying colors. Why is Kosovo special? Why can't Osetia and Abkhazia declare their independence from Georgia when it is obvious that they can't live together in peace?

And sometimes it seems that you support Balkan muslims while Middle East ones are being openly attacked and criticized and these in Balkans are no less fanatical than those in the Middle East.

That is what I think and how I see things, hate me for that for it is Your right, but then I can hate you for it is also my right and I have my rights.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

Easy there Mongo. Never insult the customer. I only asked a question. Hate never came into the game.



Milos Sijacki said:


> Ok, why did U go to Iraq, how did Sadam threaten you? .



I said that was a dead horse. We have another thread for that. Enjoy it.



Milos Sijacki said:


> Kosovo-- Osetia is a legal part of Georgia although they did exactly the same thing Kosovars did, they had a referendum on independence and it passed with flying colors. Why is Kosovo special? Why can't Osetia and Abkhazia declare their independence from Georgia when it is obvious that they can't live together in peace?
> 
> And sometimes it seems that you support Balkan muslims while Middle East ones are being openly attacked and criticized and these in Balkans are no less fanatical than those in the Middle East..



I, nor the US, has weighed in on the legitimacy of the Georgian conflict. In fact, if you read my post I am inclined to agree with Russia with their reaction. This is the third or fourth time you have wrapped yourself emotionally around your own plight and jaded your arguments. Like an elephant (and I am an elephant), I have a long memory.



Milos Sijacki said:


> That is what I think and how I see things, hate me for that for it is Your right, but then I can hate you for it is also my right and I have my rights.



Let's just chalk that portion of your post up to the language barrier and move on. No hate here, Milos. You may hate, but you have no rights on this forum.


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 10, 2008)

Kosovo, kosovo, I'm really getting tired of all this. I don't care what happens down there. I live in Vojvodina and we are also pissed with how Belgrade treats us from time to time. I'm not emotional about it, if U google this conflict, U will find that there are people who hold the Kosovo solution responsible for this conflict. 

You are a Republican, so what. Here Republicans are our Radicals and they sometimes behave like elephants with a memory of an elephant. I'm a Democrat and I don't allow anything from the past to interfere with my life, but that can prove very hard. What did U mean by this that I don't have any rights on this forum?


----------



## stasoid (Aug 10, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> The way this seems though is that Russia was handing out the citizenships like candy to gain a foothold back in Georgia.



We dont know exactly how it was in fact, but we know for sure that having a russian passport is more attractive then the georgian one. 
I know, it sounds funny from western perspective but for many people from the ex-soviet states, now, Russia with it's booming economy and political stability, is a land of opportunity.
I dont have statistics on current immigration to Russia, but I've heard it's tens of thousands per year.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

Milos Sijacki said:


> You are a Republican, so what. Here Republicans are our Radicals and they sometimes behave like elephants with a memory of an elephant. I'm a Democrat and I don't allow anything from the past to interfere with my life, but that can prove very hard.




Again the language barrier. I never said I was a policital Republican. My reference to being an elephant was metaphorical related to ... nevermind. Drop it.



Milos Sijacki said:


> What did U mean by this that I don't have any rights on this forum?



My comment was in context with your statement of "hate". You can hate all you want. But your comment about having "rights" does not apply to this forum. You want to hate on this forum? I assure you, you have ZERO rights. And the moderators will all back me up on that one.

Any other questions about hating and rights WRT this forum?


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 10, 2008)

Ok, I was wrong with You being a Republican, sorry.

Sometimes I say things I don't mean, but those things that I said in my post are not my opinions. I was completely objective and I said what I hear from others and what I see on the news. 

Yes, sometimes I think that USA plays a strange game- political game. I'm not the only one.

My opinion is-- Kosovo, let them have their independence, good luck to them.
-- Russia is not to be blamed for this conflict, alone that is. Both states should sit down and discuss this and find an end to it once and for all.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

Yes yes yes. I agree!!!

Let's chalk the misunderstanding up to you being better at speaking multiple languages than me.


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 10, 2008)

Ok, and now something completely different....

What do You think is the best solution for this matter?


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

The US keeps out of it... for now. This looks to be a prime candidate for political discussion. And perhaps Europe could take the lead on this for a change.


----------



## davparlr (Aug 10, 2008)

There is danger looming here. I understand that a critical oil pipeline goes through this area. Russia has tried to bomb it, unsuccessfully. This pipeline provides the only access to old USSR nations that is not affected by either Russia or Iran. Russia would like nothing more than to control its old subjugates in the oil market. So, stand by. As oil gets more and more critical in the world, you will see more and more aggressive activity. This is why it is critical for the US, and the West, to wean itself off of imported oil or we all will be dragged into these conflicts.

I think Russia would like nothing better than to have Europe dependent on it for energy.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

davparlr said:


> I think Russia would like nothing better than to have Europe dependent on it for energy.



I think that is extremely obvious. Look at Bulgaria. They too have suffered from Russia metering energy to them, and then claiming innocence.

On area that makes me nervous is France and her buddying up with Russia on numerous technological fronts. Not to bash France, but rewarding Russia with
technology transfer with all her faults is in Europe's best interest.

And before forum members jump on me, I too am critical of my own nation's companies doing the same, especially in the aeronautical world.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 10, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> I think that is extremely obvious. Look at Bulgaria. They too have suffered from Russia metering energy to them, and then claiming innocence.
> 
> On area that makes me nervous is France and her buddying up with Russia on numerous technological fronts. Not to bash France, but rewarding Russia with
> technology transfer with all her faults is in Europe's best interest.
> ...



so why do not investing on alternatives of oil ? theres ethanol, theres biodiesel, theres that new tech, the hidrogen...

theres a lot of african nations that need investiments where people are poor but have waste lands. they could plant sugar cane, or mamona and also increase the cultivation of food, and they could suply europe and usa with biodiesel and ethanol easily.

also ethanol is less polluant than oil, whatever the global warmin is true or a hoax, the ethanol is good for decrease the pollution in great metropolis.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

JugBR said:


> so why do not investing on alternatives of oil ? theres ethanol, theres biodiesel, theres that new tech, the hidrogen....



Yep. But to date, world economy is such that they are not cost/benefit effectual. But that does not mean they are not being invested in. Jug, your economy is MUCH different than the US and thus ethanol is not a viable alternative for the majority of US needs. In fact, it has been proven that substituting food crops for ethanol actually has dire consequences for the world.



JugBR said:


> theres a lot of african nations that need investiments where people are poor but have waste lands. they could plant sugar cane, or mamona and also increase the cultivation of food, and they could suply europe and usa with biodiesel and ethanol easily..



If they could grow sugarcane, they could grow food. Both are a commodity that is not available and is causing the death of millions in Africa. Your idea is not realistic. 



JugBR said:


> also ethanol is less polluant than oil, whatever the global warmin is true or a hoax, the ethanol is good for decrease the pollution in great metropolis.



Perhaps, but with crops forced (socio-economically) to be used for ethanol has been proven to result in additional world hunger by driving food prices up. Especially when supported by gov't subsides at the expense of not growing cheap food for the masses. And decreasing pollution?? You can't really believe that unless you are not subject to the US emission requirements. In the US, emissions are at such low levels compared with other world economies that air pollution is not near the levels that you might predict. That even holds true for the US black dog city of Los Angeles. Compared to Bejing, Los Angeles is a vacation spot with respect to air pollution.

I think your "decrease in pollution metropolis" statement is balderdash.


----------



## machine shop tom (Aug 10, 2008)

Ethanol uses just as much or more petroleum to produce with today's technology as the same amount of gasoline does. You have to figure in the cost of planting, fertilizing, and harvesting the crop used for ethanol, as well as the cost of transporting it and producing the ethanol from it. Plus, the mileage with ethanol is less than with gasoline so any mileage gain is pretty much a wash.

tom


----------



## pbfoot (Aug 10, 2008)

Sawgrass is a viable alternative it is a plentiful plant that grows naturally all over is much easier to process and more cost efficient then corn


----------



## machine shop tom (Aug 10, 2008)

pbfoot said:


> Sawgrass is a viable alternative it is a plentiful plant that grows naturally all over is much easier to process and more cost efficient then corn



Plus, it's not a food crop. BUT, if it is grown instead of corn for fuel, will that not also drive up the price of corn? There is only so much saw grass much that can be economically harvested. Plus, access to saw grass can be a can of bureaucratic and political worms.

tom


----------



## stasoid (Aug 10, 2008)

JugBR said:


> so why do not investing on alternatives of oil ? theres ethanol, theres biodiesel, theres that new tech, the hidrogen...




Current US administration is not interested in developing alternative sources of energy. If Bush and Cheney can personally benefit from high oil prices why bother looking for alternatives.

This is how they end up in Iraq. If Iraq fails, Cheney's Halliburton puts its hands on Iraqy's oil. If the war continues and oil price is going up, Bush's family is pumping Texas oil and profits from there. It's a win win situation.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

Sounds wonderful. Now let's see this gem of an energy source harvested and processed without gov't intervention.

If it was such an abundant energy wonder, private industry would have lobbied for tax breaks and begun the process.

Me? I say BS. Not with the currentn energy market. Just like wind, solar and geothermal, the market does not support it.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

stasoid said:


> Current US administration is not interested in developing alternative sources of energy. If Bush and Cheney can personally benefit from high oil prices why bother looking for alternatives.
> 
> This is how they end up in Iraq. If Iraq fails, Cheney's Halliburton puts its hands on Iraqy's oil. If the war continues and oil price is going up, Bush's family is pumping Texas oil and profits from there. It's a win win situation.



Current Russian Politburo is not interested in developing alternative sources of energy. If Putin and Medvedev can personally benefit from high oil prices why bother looking for alternatives.

This is how they end up in Chechnya and Georgia. If Chechnya and Georgia fails, Putin's Gazprom puts its hands on the Caucacus' oil pipelines. If the war continues and oil price is going up, Putin's crony's are pumping Russian oil and profits from there. It's a win win situation.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

Hmmm... smells like BS


----------



## stasoid (Aug 10, 2008)

Matt, what are you talking about? How much oil is in Chechnya and Georgia? None. It doesnt exist. All chechen oil was pumped out in early 70th. All Caucasian oil reserves is less then 1% of what Russia has in Siberia and on the Far East.

Russia is preparing for 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi. That city is less then 50 miles from the border with Georgia. A war in that region is the last thing that Russia wants.


----------



## javlin (Aug 10, 2008)

stasoid said:


> Current US administration is not interested in developing alternative sources of energy. If Bush and Cheney can personally benefit from high oil prices why bother looking for alternatives.
> 
> This is how they end up in Iraq. If Iraq fails, Cheney's Halliburton puts its hands on Iraqy's oil. If the war continues and oil price is going up, Bush's family is pumping Texas oil and profits from there. It's a win win situation.



I have read all ten pages then this nothing to do with the conflict then back to biofuels and GW please.Not that I have a right to harp but someone just tried to derail the train.
Now Jug the part about SO wanting there independence because they are Russian citizens "hay move to Russia".This no different than if Canadians started pouring into some N state and wanted it annexxed to Canada(I know not apples to apples) it isn't going to happen.Like many in here I am interested in how much planning by both sides happened here.I wonder how Russis got supposedly 100's of tanks across the border in such short time with troop support??Something is afoot probably by both parties but I do not trust Putin one ioda.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

stasoid said:


> Matt, what are you talking about? How much oil is in Chechnya and Georgia? None. It doesnt exist. A war in that region is the last thing that Russia wants.



Its not about how much oil Chechnya nor Georgia has. But rather the instability in the Caucacus region where ENERGY FLOWS THROUGH THE CASPIAN TO WORLD MARKETS. 

Russia can ill afford for those regions to be instable given that Russia's only real commodity on the world market is their oil. Remember, we are talking about trillions of rubles over the course of time. Even a percentage of a percentage is HUGE money that Russia can ill afford to be jeopardized.

That is what I'm talking about, stasiod.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 10, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Current Russian Politburo is not interested in developing alternative sources of energy. If Putin and Medvedev can personally benefit from high oil prices why bother looking for alternative




Russia plans to build 42 new nuclear reactors by 2030 as part of an ambitious program to revive its atomic power industry, the top nuclear official said Tuesday.

Federal Nuclear Agency director Sergei Kiriyenko said at a news conference that Russia would need to build at least two nuclear reactors a year to meet the goal.

Russia now has 31 reactors at 10 nuclear power plants, accounting for 16-17 percent of Russia's electricity generation, and President Vladimir Putin has called for raising the share to 25 percent.

NEI Nuclear Notes: Russia to Build 42 New Reactors by 2030


----------



## stasoid (Aug 10, 2008)

I agree with javlin - it's going off topic. Let's return to humanitarian crisis in South Ossetia.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 10, 2008)

stasoid said:


> I agree with javlin - it's going off topic. Let's return to humanitarian crisis in South Ossetia.




Those were your words. Just the innocent were changed.

I too can post US politicos that are pushing for nuclear power. In fact, Obama wants to to wean the US completely off of oil in his "lifetime" (I assume that is 8yrs of presidency).

So back to the topic. Not that you can separate the topic from world events. I think that was the point of our tangent.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 10, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Yep. But to date, world economy is such that they are not cost/benefit effectual. But that does not mean they are not being invested in. Jug, your economy is MUCH different than the US and thus ethanol is not a viable alternative for the majority of US needs. In fact, it has been proven that substituting food crops for ethanol actually has dire consequences for the world.



i think its not about quit the oil and adopt just ethanol, or just biodiesel. i think the key is work with many kinds of fuel.

its the old theory of "all eggs in one basket". you drop the basket you broke all eggs. but if you put some eggs in one basket and other in another, if you drop just one basket, you still have a omellete for dinner.

if all industry, all veichles uses gasoline, the economy would be strongly dependent of the barrel prices, intead if you combine diferent fuels and have cars that work with ethanol, or biodiesel, or gasoline, or natural gas. it gives to economy a certain and relative independence of the price of barrel. 



Matt308 said:


> If they could grow sugarcane, they could grow food. Both are a commodity that is not available and is causing the death of millions in Africa. Your idea is not realistic.



sugar cane is a tropical plant, also its not that expensive to grow. the only problem that brazil faced in 90´s was the hight of refined sugar price wich leds producers to quit the ethanol production and almost kill the pro-alcool program. 

you dont need to pick a country and fill with suggar cane. you pick 1/10 of lands of angola, for example and cultivates sugar cane on that. then with the money that angola receives they can modernize their production systems and invest in produce more food for their own people. 

the problem of hunger in africa is not lands, they have lands enought to cultivate food, and let lions and other animals lives. the problem is investments and jobs. 



Matt308 said:


> Perhaps, but with crops forced (socio-economically) to be used for ethanol has been proven to result in additional world hunger by driving food prices up. Especially when supported by gov't subsides at the expense of not growing cheap food for the masses. And decreasing pollution?? You can't really believe that unless you are not subject to the US emission requirements. In the US, emissions are at such low levels compared with other world economies that air pollution is not near the levels that you might predict. That even holds true for the US black dog city of Los Angeles. Compared to Bejing, Los Angeles is a vacation spot with respect to air pollution.
> 
> I think your "decrease in pollution metropolis" statement is balderdash.



diferences about crop and cane:

the amount of ethanol that you get from a sugar cane plantation is bigger than crop for example. 

a ton of crop, could make 380 litres of ethanol
a ton of sugar cane, just 70 litres

but the great diference is the produtivity of sugar cane instead ethanol. in fact the amount of areas of sugar cane are small, but you can cultivate more times in a year. 

one hec. of sugar cane plantation, generates around 60 to 120 tons of cane. one hec of corn plantation generates 10 tons of corn.

so, the production of ethanol by hectare of suggar cane is is 8.000 litres, against 4.000 litres of corn.

the problem of corn ethanol is also that you have to broke the molecules of amido to create sugar. in sugar cane the process is direct. the sugar is there is just make the fermentation, wich is a natural process. the process of extract ethanol from corn is more expensive than sugar cane. sugar cane is cheaper and cleaner.

how many sugar cane could be cultivated in 8 or 10 african nations, without harm their local agriculture to suply usa and europe with the actual amount of ethanol that is used today ? and usa would keep free the corn for other purposes instead fuel.

there was proved that the high of prices of food is because people in all world are improving their lifes, specially in china. they are eating more and more diverse. theres lands in world to supply food for everybody. but using with windson. otherwise, ethanol wouldnt be the diference. there was hunger before ethanol, should be after, because theres economy issues and theres lack of investiments in certain regions of globe like africa.

about the air pollution: ethanol is zero. if the american emission requirements are low levels, the ethanol would reduce even more the pollution in great metropolis. isnt that bad ? you cand be safe your economy from the barrel prices, you can develop a poor region, u are polluting less the air in great metropolis

matt, i dont think ethanol is the final solution, but while tey dont develops eficient urine-fueled engines... i think ethanol is quite good for brazil and for everybody else !

regards


----------



## davparlr (Aug 11, 2008)

Just for information.

Georgia: Russia targets key oil pipeline with over 50 missiles - Telegraph

I think this is definately a dangerous situation.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 11, 2008)

they found an american in s. ossetia:

RussiaToday : News : It's America's fault - U.S. citizen in South Ossetia


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 11, 2008)

davparlr said:


> Just for information.
> 
> Georgia: Russia targets key oil pipeline with over 50 missiles - Telegraph
> 
> I think this is definately a dangerous situation.


well that was statement from Georgian officials  . BP who is in control of pipelines couldn't confirm any attack on their pipelines in Georgia


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 11, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Yes dual citizenship is one thing. The way this seems though is that Russia was handing out the citizenships like candy to gain a foothold back in Georgia.



this story is very interesting indeed. In fact the South Ossetians never had a Georgian citizenship , only the Soviet one - after 1993 conflict they were citizens of an nonexisting state. They struggled for the independence from Georgia so the Georgian citizenship as a possible alternative wasn't been discussed at all. After all , most of South Ossetians have very close ties with North Ossetia which is part of the Russia so they choosed the Russian citizenship.


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 11, 2008)

Ramirezz, what Abkhazia, what is their story?


----------



## JugBR (Aug 11, 2008)

a nice example to follow:


----------



## Mitya (Aug 11, 2008)

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRl3qArJO-o_
no comments...
On CNN BBC you don't see this...


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 11, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Current Russian Politburo is not interested in developing alternative sources of energy. If Putin and Medvedev can personally benefit from high oil prices why bother looking for alternatives.


about 8 billion rubels are planned to invest in alternative sources of energy this year. It's actually just slightly less than investments into explorations of new oil and gas fields.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 11, 2008)

Milos Sijacki said:


> Ramirezz, what Abkhazia, what is their story?



well they gained their Russian citizenships in a very identical way like Ossetians


----------



## evangilder (Aug 11, 2008)

Mitya said:


> _View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRl3qArJO-o_
> no comments...
> On CNN BBC you don't see this...




One guy's opinion. Did he back any of that up with any verifiable facts? I sure as hell didn't see anything factual.


----------



## rochie (Aug 11, 2008)

Mitya said:


> _View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cRl3qArJO-o_
> no comments...
> On CNN BBC you don't see this...




i was watching russia today as all this started they had a big banner headline "THE WAR IS ON".
but i expect it was the same on the georgian side.
the more i see on this situation the more it seems pre planned from both sides and not something that just kicked off overnight !
i've heard reports of 4 georgian navy ships being sunk by the russians
just saw this on sky not sure this is gonna stop any time soon 
Georgia-Russia Fighting Over Province Of South Ossetia Claims More Lives | World News | Sky News


----------



## timshatz (Aug 11, 2008)

It's the US's fault?! Right. Might as well blame it on Martians. 

Question is, will the Russians stop after taking South Ossetia or will they go straight into Georgia. If they stop at the S.O. border, then this thing is over and not much else (beyond the usual diplomatic mumbo jumbo) will happen.

But if they go into Georgia, then it gets sticky. No idea where it will end there. Don't think there is much Georgia can do about this. The Russians are way more powerful.


----------



## rochie (Aug 11, 2008)

i think they've already gone past the border into georgia timshatz


----------



## timshatz (Aug 11, 2008)

rochie said:


> i think they've already gone past the border into georgia timshatz



Oh boy. If that is true, it would be very bad for Georgia.


----------



## javlin (Aug 11, 2008)

Well starting to look like Russia may want Georgia back I guess the Ukraine could be next in a few years ,if they look to join NATO?Russia is outside of disputed areas now.

In Tbilisi, Georgia, a Defense Ministry spokeswoman says Russian armored vehicles have rolled into a Georgian military base in western Georgia.

Spokeswoman Nana Intskerveli told the Associated Press that Russian armored vehicles seized the Georgian military base in the town of Senaki.

The statement indicates Russian troops have entered Georgia beyond the disputed territories and that they arrived from separatist province of Abkhazia.

FOXNews.com - Russia Reportedly Seeks NATO Meeting Over Georgia Crisis - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News

Another indication of the same motive all SO was a reason to go that's why the troops and tanks were present I think

He charged that Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, had said as much Sunday morning in a telephone conversation with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, telling her “that the democratically elected president of Georgia ‘must go,’ ” Mr. Khalilzad said. Mr. Khalilzad said the comment was “completely unacceptable.” 

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/11/w...partner=MYWAY&ei=5065&oref=slogin&oref=slogin


----------



## timshatz (Aug 11, 2008)

There really isn't much to stop the Russians going pretty much anywhere they please. Georgia, as I understand it from a couple of ex-military that trained their forces, really doesn't have much with which to fight. 

I also don't think anyone is going to get involved much beyond the diplomatic front. 

The only force that can stop the Russians right now is the Russians themselves. IMHO.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 11, 2008)

timshatz said:


> Question is, will the Russians stop after taking South Ossetia or will they go straight into Georgia. If they stop at the S.O. border, then this thing is over and not much else (beyond the usual diplomatic mumbo jumbo) will happen



I think their objective is to make as much damage to the Georgia's army and military installations as possible. So far it doesent sound like Russians want to capture all Georgia's territory and control it. They just want to either disarm or destroy georgian troops to prevent future agressions on Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
Is a fact that Georgia has recently been filled with all sorts of weaponry and become the most militarized country in the region that gave them a feeling of superiority and sparked wiolence on 08.08.08


----------



## Mitya (Aug 11, 2008)

timshatz said:


> It's the US's fault?! Right. Might as well blame it on Martians.
> 
> Question is, will the Russians stop after taking South Ossetia or will they go straight into Georgia. If they stop at the S.O. border, then this thing is over and not much else (beyond the usual diplomatic mumbo jumbo) will happen.
> 
> But if they go into Georgia, then it gets sticky. No idea where it will end there. Don't think there is much Georgia can do about this. The Russians are way more powerful.



The Russian armies do not pass territory of Georgia, according to the application of the Joint Staff. Bases, warehouses, an infrastructure of the Georgian army are exposed to bombardments only.
Yesterday 4 Georgian boats have crossed a safety zone and have intruded territorial waters of Abkhazia. They attacked the Russian ships. As a result of reciprocal fire one boat has been destroyed, and others 3 have disappeared. Boats belonged to navy fleet of Georgia.
That you have told, if the ships of Iran fleet the USA, for example, attacked? You would not began to answer fire? Yes they would answer them on the approach. Our fleet operated according to an item 51 United Nations.

And now to martians.
And who you think began war? How many Russia warned Georgia, what the force decision of the conflict can result in accident? South Ossetia and Abkhazia a part of the Georgian territory? You are sure in it? More than 90 % of citizens of these not recognized republics - Citizens of Russia. We cannot and we have no the right to protect the citizens? If Mexico will tell, what the state Texas their territory and will intrude on territory the USA it how to name? Марсианство? Why Georgia has opened fire on peacefully sleeping city at night? You saw the staff of Tskhinvali? Cities are not present... And they shot not from automatic devices and machine guns, and with GRAD's and heavy artillery. It is normal? Normally, when armed forces of Georgia finished the wounded Russian peacemakers? Normally, when our peacemakers shot from tanks of a straight line наводкой? And if it were peacemakers of the NATO? Then you at once would howl: how so it is possible? And all in this spirit. Why the mass-media of the West were silent in the first 2 days of the Georgian approach? And now, when the Georgian army is superseded by the Russian army abroad safety zones, it already aggression of Russia? Why those parts which aggressors have come to the aid of peacemakers who operate according to the mandate of the United Nations? Territory of Georgia who did not grasp. And would present that was, if on a place of the Russian peacemakers there were peacemakers of the NATO? You would not answer with impact for death of the peacemakers? Or you thought, what our peacemakers at a kind of the opponent would run up as yours in 1999 in former Yugoslavia? So it when will not be!
And now ask at своеого managementsas tax bearers: and how many our money cunningly on support of Georgia? The military budget of Georgia has grown in 30 times!!! All means, arms, the form and other are bought on the American money. At Ukraine, Poland, Czechia, Israel... The USA 10 years delivered arms and an ammunition to Georgia, trained her army. And money whence? In fact not for simple so all this is made... It refers to democracy? When from 100 thousand osset for some days of fights it is killed more than 2000 person, 34000 became refugees, many villages are destroyed... It is democracy? So Georgia subordinates to itself territory? In South Ossetia and Abkhazia passed not how many referenda on which more than 90 % of the population have supported independence. Why the osset and Abkhasians Georgia does not take into account opinion? Why Russia has not the right to protect the citizens as a result of aggression of Georgia? Unless it not a genocide? When the purposes of the Georgian aircraft and artillery are not armed forces of Ossetia, and city and village? It how to name?
And video which was distributed by Georgians? Where soldiers shoot at the unarmed person, but do not get and shoot at a dog? It that? It how to name? 
And as you estimate that orthodox Georgians сожгли in Хетагурово a temple with people. In village Hetagurovo of South Ossetia temple Пресвятой of the Virgin is burnt. This unique orthodox temple of X century was a monument of a history of South Ossetia, one of its{her} spiritual centers. Inside a temple remains of old men are found out. On August, 8, as a result of fierce resistance all defenders of village have fallen. During fight old men from village have decided to be covered in a temple. People, probably, hoped the Divine protection, that the Georgian soldiers who too, like, count itself orthodox people, do not touch them in a temple. However it was found out, that the Georgian armies alive сожгли people together with a temple. The Georgian soldiers have taken away the big group of young women of village Hetagurova in a unknown direction. Участь them it is unknown. As informed REGNUM referring to eyewitnesses earlier, the Georgian soldiers have outraged upon group of girls. In the same settlement pressed people caterpillars{tracks} of tanks. The part of the inhabitants which have escaped in a wood was rescued only. In total sat totaled 170 court yard. We shall remind, it was earlier informed, that the Georgian militarians have destroyed a chapel and a memorial cemetery in a court yard of high school № 5. As eyewitness Inal Puhaev has told, the Georgian tank has purposefully stopped opposite to school in which court yard defenders Tshinvali of 1992 are buried and began shooting. " The tank shots has literally ploughed the ground, разворотил tombs, has tumbled down memorial stones, in a court yard of school has destroyed a chapel. Then he destroyed разворотил all under wheels of the tracks ", - has told Inal Puhaev. It refers to democracy? These are armed forces of a democratic civilized country? Why West does not count it for a genocide? What then to consider a genocide? Captured Georgian militarians have declared, that at them the order to destroy all was. They also destroyed: women, children, old men... It not ethnic cleanings? This establishment of democracy yes?
Why after all what has conceived a management of Georgia, has no right to protect the citizens?
You think Russia war at her borders is necessary?
Ten years of the country of the West armed and prepared for Georgia for war. And what for? For what? Can to clear territory of Abkhazia and South Ossetia of citizens? 
And now Georgia poor lamb which has attacked a furious bear?
Why till now any country of the West has not offered even rendering of the humanitarian help Southern - Ossetiya? Why?

To you of a picture. Can so it becomes clear...


----------



## JugBR (Aug 11, 2008)

timshatz said:


> Oh boy. If that is true, it would be very bad for Georgia.



russians claims that georgia announce a cease-fire once then disrespected the agreement. so now russians only will accept the cease-fire over their own conditions wich means the total evacutation of georgian security forces from s. ossetia.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 11, 2008)

Milos Sijacki said:


> I think, Adler, no offense, just something that is obvious, it is because USA always sticks its nose where it doesn't belong to and that USA really has a weird foreign policy from time to time.



 



Milos Sijacki said:


> US should be quiet now because of the Russians or there will be trouble







Milos Sijacki said:


> That is what I think and how I see things, hate me for that for it is Your right, but then I can hate you for it is also my right and I have my rights.



Woh now! Who said anything about hate here. Man you really are showing your true colors!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 11, 2008)

stasoid said:


> We dont know exactly how it was in fact,



No ****, what are you trying to prove? If you go back and read all my posts I am not blaming the Russians here. I said I am not going to pass any judgement until I know all the facts, and right now I do not know all the facts. Neither do you...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 11, 2008)

Milos Sijacki said:


> Both states should sit down and discuss this and find an end to it once and for all.



I am sure if you would sit down and actually read what everyone is saying, they are saying the same thing. Dont jump to conclusions my friend.

No one here is point the finger at anyone, yet...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 11, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> this story is very interesting indeed. In fact the South Ossetians never had a Georgian citizenship , only the Soviet one - after 1993 conflict they were citizens of an nonexisting state. They struggled for the independence from Georgia so the Georgian citizenship as a possible alternative wasn't been discussed at all. After all , most of South Ossetians have very close ties with North Ossetia which is part of the Russia so they choosed the Russian citizenship.



Interesting thanks. It is great to havesome over in that region with a bit more perspective. Keep up posted on knews and your thoughts.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 11, 2008)

Let's put this in perspective....

Mitya brings up some good points of what's happening and I just read another article backing up his post.

Georgia - 200 years of Russian rule, part of the former Soviet Union, breaks away when the Soviet Union breaks up. Georgians probably not always treated that well by the Russians and shows defiance by embracing the west (NATO membership request, cozying up to the US, etc.)

South Ossetia – predominately Russian and seems to want to stay aligned with Russia. As stated, residents never granted Georgian citizenship and was basically in limbo since 1993 - possible strategic territory. Russia may be inflaming the situation by handing out passports.

Georgia - rolls military hardware into South Ossetia unprovoked, not a smart move.

Russia retaliates - what would one expect?

US and Western European Politicians rattling swords and rhetoric are high.

Personally I think its a regional issue - I have no problem with the US supporting or arming a former Soviet republic, but when one of those republics engages in an "offensive" action against Russia, for what ever reason, I think it shows a large amount of stupidity.

The situation could of been handled better by both sides but in all honesty the cartoon with the bear posted by Mitya sums it up. I would not blame Georgia for defending itself if it was first attacked by Russia but it was Georgia who took the first aggressive step, a mis-step in my opinion and now Georgia will pay the price.

Everyone else needs to keep clear of this clearly regional issue IMO.


----------



## timshatz (Aug 11, 2008)

There is some speculation that the Russians are trying to build a buffer zone between Ossetia and Georgia (using Georgian territory to do it). If so, this thing will not have much longer to go. 

Depends on how much further into Georgia the Russians continue. Should know in a couple of days.


----------



## Mitya (Aug 11, 2008)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Let's put this in perspective....
> Mitya brings up some good points of what's happening and I just read another article backing up his post...



It is impossible to solve such problems force. I about a situation with South Ossetia and Georgia. In fact will not send, for example, U.K. to Ireland the armies completely to destroy the population of that territory. Or Spain with Basques. The Spanish management does not give an order to destroy the population of that territory. All occurs in a peace channel, and the president of Georgia has acted, we shall softly tell, silly, having tried to untie the next war on Caucasus. Very silly.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 11, 2008)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Let's put this in perspective....
> 
> Mitya brings up some good points of what's happening and I just read another article backing up his post.
> 
> ...



hey flyboy, lets see your knowloges about international history:

do you know what important soviet person born in georgia ?

clue: when young, he studied to be priest. people in west hate him, but needed him once.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 11, 2008)

JugBR said:


> hey flyboy, lets see your knowloges about international history:
> 
> do you know what important soviet person born in georgia ?
> 
> clue: when young, he studied to be priest. people in west hate him, but needed him once.



Easy - Iosef Vissarionovich Dzhugashvili - AKA Stalin... 8)


----------



## Juha (Aug 11, 2008)

Hello Flyboyj
I would not say that Georgian invasion to SO was unprovocated. How much there was provocation, i don't know. Anyway, Georgian attack was very stupid move.

If one wants info on the conflict, day by day timeline and some reasons to the slide to the war, here is one version:
2008 South Ossetia war - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Juha


----------



## rochie (Aug 11, 2008)

georgia definatly underestimated the russian reaction to them using force on south ossetia, but russia seems to be making the most of its help for its citizens in south ossetia by grabbing as much territory in georgia as it can


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 11, 2008)

Juha said:


> Hello Flyboyj
> I would not say that Georgian invasion to SO was unprovocated. How much there was provocation, i don't know. Anyway, Georgian attack was very stupid move.
> 
> If one wants info on the conflict, day by day timeline and some reasons to the slide to the war, here is one version:
> ...



Oh - both sides did "stir the pot" if you will, but the Georgians were very stupid to immediately use military force. Agree.

Good link - amazing how fast things get on Wikipedia.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 11, 2008)

timshatz said:


> There is some speculation that the Russians are trying to build a buffer zone between Ossetia and Georgia (using Georgian territory to do it).


yes, the situation looks pretty much like that.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 11, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> yes, the situation looks pretty much like that.


And in all honesty I can't blame them (Russia) for doing so. The price that will be paid for stupidity.


----------



## Erich (Aug 11, 2008)

sadly correct Joe, Russia will crush the opposition as it has to, to save it's face, no matter what the US or the rest of the world does or cares and makes silly comments as to whether Russia is in the right or wrong ...........


----------



## davparlr (Aug 11, 2008)

There is a concern that Russia will depose of the democracy and install a puppet government. This would be very dangerous. Ukraine could be next. I am sure that NATO will be pressured to quickly accept Ukraine. Had NATO accepted Georgia, Russia would likely not have invaded Georgia.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 11, 2008)

Well as I said, based upon what limited information I have, I believe the US would have acted similarly. What is most suprising is how our Forum members have been so quick to villify the US in this situation. That is disheartening. And VERY telling.

Now, having said that, let's see how russia mops up their action. Latest I heard was that they were implying a scorched earth policy for T'bilisi, warning citizens to evacuate as they pushed towards the city, and indicating bombing/shelling was on its way. Hopefully that was nothing more than propaganda to minimize casualties. Can russia police this effort or will they use this opportunity to install a puppet gov't and assume control of the Georgian lands like past Soviet expansions?

And with respect to Ukraine and the insertion into NATO. In my opinion, this is NOT the time for NATO to accept Ukraine, and I suspect that the European nations would never allow Ukraine entrance given the volatility that would inject into the situation. The bear is pissed off. You don't poke him in the eye while he's pissed. Besides, there is too much Western monies tied up in russian ventures. Wouldn't want to jeopardize western monies over proper ideals now would we.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 11, 2008)

davparlr said:


> There is a concern that Russia will depose of the democracy and install a puppet government. This would be very dangerous. Ukraine could be next. I am sure that NATO will be pressured to quickly accept Ukraine. Had NATO accepted Georgia, Russia would likely not have invaded Georgia.



if georgia shouldnt attacket the people of the s. ossetia privince... maybe...

i think its time that we make a chronology of the happends.

day 7 - whats happened...
day 8 - whats happened...
day 9 ||
day 10 - ||
.
.
.


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 12, 2008)

Adler, ignore that ''HATE'' thing I said earlier, and I'm reading posts.


----------



## Kruska (Aug 12, 2008)

Not quite,

South Ossetia is recognized by the United Nations as part of Georgia. As such Russian forces have no right at all to intervene on behalf of South Ossetia, unless such a move would be sanctioned by the UN. Moving Russian troops into SO and even attacking Georgian forces is an open act of war by Russia against Georgia.

The SO conflict needs to be solved by the UN and as such it was indeed very unwise for the Georgian Government to order a military action against a separatist movement in its own country.

Maybe the Georgians should not have listened too much to the Blackwater boys and other “unofficial” US support, who obviously totally underestimated the reaction of the “sleepy bear”.  or even deliberately used the Georgians as Guinea Pigs??  

Regards
Kruska


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 12, 2008)

When I said those things in my post, Adler, I was objective and I'm not showing my true colors for I never will show them to anyone, because if I do, especially in my country at the moment, I will be exposed to large amounts of hatred.

Maybe I am emptional about certain things but that is what kind of a person I am in my everyday life and I blame 7 years of lost childhood due to psychological torment that I endured in primary school. But that is past, I have many people to hate, with a DAMN good reason, but I forgive them.


I have also read all other posts and I'm not pointing fingers at anyone but I think that Georgians started this whole thing and that Russians can do whatever they want for they are far superior.

VAE VICTUS as Julius said. That is all I can do.


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 12, 2008)

Kruska, I agree with you, especially with Your last lines.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 12, 2008)

You see, sometimes there is no time to seek UN's approval. Georgia's army advace was quick and ferocious. They shelled the city for several hours in a row destroing 90% of its buildings and killing few thousands of its inhabitants. Russia's response was swift and justifyed in that situation.

Saddam Hussein killed several thousands of his people (Kurds) with gas and was later hanged up for doing that.
Saakashvili killed several thousands of his people (Ossetians) overnight with an artillery barrage and he is still alive, giving interviews on CNN.
Interesting, isnt it?


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 12, 2008)

Yes it is interesting, but I don't want judge for it seems that I'm bad at it.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 12, 2008)

Kruska said:


> Not quite,
> 
> South Ossetia is recognized by the United Nations as part of Georgia. As such Russian forces have no right at all to intervene on behalf of South Ossetia, unless such a move would be sanctioned by the UN. Moving Russian troops into SO and even attacking Georgian forces is an open act of war by Russia against Georgia.
> 
> ...



welcome back kurska ! yes, S.O. is really recognized by UN as part of georgia. and i´m totally agree with you. BUT, since some time ago, the UN opinion´s about foeign interventions appears to be totally insignificant.

seems like people says the UN is a band of CORRUPT, LIARS, SURRENDER MONKEYS, WEASELS... so, who cares about what thinks UN loosers ? you know ?

also, a bad example generates another bad examples !

also, acording our russian friends, seems like the UN wasnt so much motivated to look for the situation of S.O. like they was for kosovo. there was some negligency about recognizing the statement of S. Ossetians in dont be part of georgia. 

like you i would like that the conflict in S.O. should be resolved by UN mission. but i think its not possible. now, the only person who have the power to ends that conflict is geaorgia´s president.

he must say: - i assume we attacked first, i want put a end in this war. georgia surrender and ask for russia whats the conditions that russia demands to accept our surrender.

_"when attacked by a bear, the best thing to do is dont react, pretend to be dead"_

man, that georgia´s president make everything wrong !!! a boy scout would be better, serious !!!

he surrender now, the war ends in next 30 min. would be fair ? i dont know, but now russia have the knife and the cheese in their hands. the georgian strategy was almost like suicide. 

otherwise, he could still triyng to resist and take the bombs and everything, until this war become impopular also in russian public opinion. but i gess georgia wouldnt resist that much.

anyway, the guy, the president of georgia should think in the best solution for his people. and the best for georgians now is the peace. keep your people alive, most possible.

i think the bear is not sleeping, and also is very angry. hitler and napoleon tried to kill that bear once time ago but they didnt. it just made the bear more angry.

what some of our american and european friends of nato and european union dont see is that russia feels like hated by them. surounded by enemies. russia shouldnt see the western powers like enemys. but for somekind of pride and hipocrisy, the west is uncapable to "give a sweet for the bear", maybe fear of loose an arm... but the idea of invest more in friendly relations with russia, would be proof a great deal if adopted and also would prevent situations like that.

i should hear the opinion of ramirezzz and mitya about that, but i think the BIG MISTAKE of nato and european union was dont try to be more friendly with russians since soviet union falled in 92. 

should we fear the bear ?


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 12, 2008)

Should we fear the bear? I know I do. Russia's military power scares me and fascinates me at the same time.

Just heard on the news that Russians are stopping with all military actions in Georgia. Medvedev confirmed that information stating that the agressor has been punished with both military and civilian losses. BBC and CNN confirmed this information.

It seems that the war is over for now, if the right solution to this issue is not reached.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 12, 2008)

some fresh pictures from Tshinvali, the town that practically has ceased to exist:
.Ru ,


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 12, 2008)

Milos Sijacki said:


> Should we fear the bear? I know I do.



Milos that bear was the one who went to rescue Serbia in 1914, and fought side by side with Serbs many times against common enemies. That bear was the only one who took Serbia's side during NATO bombings in 1999. 
I believe the bear is not the animal you should be scare of.


----------



## timshatz (Aug 12, 2008)

Looking more and more like Russia got what it wanted and now is ending it's operations in Georgia. Nothing the Georgians can do about it. The thing looks pretty much over. 

Read a good article from Ralph Peters on this one. He's got some very good points. Posting it below. 


RUSSIA GOES ROGUE 
By RALPH PETERS 

August 12, 2008 -- 

IT'S impossible to overstate the importance of what's unfolding as we watch. Russia's invasion of Georgia - a calculated, unprovoked aggression - is a crisis that may have more important strategic implications than Iraq and Afghanistan combined. 

We're seeing the emergence of a rogue military power with a nuclear arsenal. 

The response of our own government has been pathetic - and our media's uncritical acceptance of Moscow's version of events is infuriating. 

This is the "new" Russia announcing - in blood - that it won't tolerate freedom and self-determination along its borders. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is putting it bluntly: Today, Georgia, tomorrow Ukraine (and the Baltic states had better pay attention). 

Georgia's affiliation with the European Union, its status as a would-be NATO member, its working democracy - none of it deterred Putin. 

Nor does Putin's ambition stop with the former Soviet territories. His air force has been trying (unsuccessfully) to hit the new gas pipeline running from the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean. The Kremlin is telling Europe: We not only have the power to turn off Siberian gas, we can turn off every tap in the region, any time we choose. 

Let's be clear: For all that US commentators and diplomats are still chattering about Russia's "response" to Georgia's actions, the Kremlin spent months planning and preparing this operation. Any soldier above the grade of private can tell you that there's absolutely no way Moscow could've launched this huge ground, air and sea offensive in an instantaneous "response" to alleged Georgian actions. 

As I pointed out Saturday, even to get one armored brigade over the Caucasus Mountains required extensive preparations. Since then, Russia has sent in the equivalent of almost two divisions - not only in South Ossetia, the scene of the original fighting, but also in separatist Abkhazia on the Black Sea coast. 

The Russians also managed to arrange the instant appearance of a squadron of warships to blockade Georgia. And they launched hundreds of air strikes against preplanned targets. 

Every one of these things required careful preparations. In the words of one US officer, "Just to line up the airlift sorties would've taken weeks." 

Working through their mercenaries in South Ossetia, Russia staged brutal provocations against Georgia from late July onward. Last Thursday, Georgia's president finally had to act to defend his own people. 

But when the mouse stirred, the cat pounced. 

The Russians know that we know this was a setup. But Moscow's Big Lie propagandists still blame Georgia - even as Russian aircraft bomb Georgian homes and Russian troops seize the vital city of Gori in the country's heart. And Russian troops also grabbed the Georgian city of Zugdidi to the west - invading from Abkhazia on a second axis. 

Make no mistake: Moscow intends to dismember Georgia. 

This is the most cynical military operation by a "European" power since Moscow invaded Afghanistan in 1979. (Sad to say, President Bush seems as bewildered now as President Jimmy Carter did then.) 

This attack's worse, though. Georgia is an independent, functioning democracy tied to the European Union and striving to join NATO. It also has backed our Iraq efforts with 2,000 troops. (We're airlifting them back home.) 

This invasion recalls Hitler's march into Czechoslovakia - to protect ethnic Germans, he claimed, just as Putin claims to be protecting Russian citizens - complete BS. 

It also resembles Hitler's invasion of Poland - with the difference that, in September '39, European democracies drew the line. (To France's credit, its leaders abandoned their August vacations to call Putin out - only Sen. Barack Obama remains on the beach.) 

Yet our media give Putin the benefit of the doubt. Not one major news outlet even bothers to take issue with Putin's wild claim that the Georgians were engaged in genocide. 

I lack sufficiently powerful words to express my outrage over Russia's bloody cynicism in attacking a small, free people, or to castigate our media for their inane coverage - or to condemn our own government's shameful flight from responsibility. 

Just as Moscow has reverted to its old habit of sending in tanks to snuff out freedom, Washington has defaulted to form by abandoning Georgia to the invasion - after encouraging Georgia to stand up to the Kremlin. 

Reminds me of 1956, when we encouraged the Hungarians to defy Moscow - then abandoned them. And of 1991, when we prodded Iraq's Shia to rise up against Saddam - then abandoned them. We've called Georgia a "friend and ally." Well, honorable men and states stand by their friends and allies. We haven't. 

Oh, we sure are giving those Russians a tongue-lashing. I'll bet Putin's just shaking as he faces the awesome verbal rage of Condi Rice. President Bush? He went to a basketball game. 

The only decent thing we've done was to reveal, at the UN, that the Russians tried to cut a deal with us to remove Georgia's president. 

Shame on us. 

Ralph Peters' latest book, "Looking for Trouble," details his own adventures in Georgia. 

THE BEAR'S MILITARY MESS 

Russia's military is succeeding in its invasion of Georgia, but only because Moscow has applied overwhelming force. 

This campaign was supposed to be the big debut for the Kremlin's revitalized armed forces (funded by the country's new petro-wealth). Well, the new Russian military looks a lot like the old Russian military: slovenly and not ready for prime time. 

It can hammer tiny Georgia into submission - but this campaign unintentionally reveals plenty of enduring Russian weaknesses. 

The most visible failings are those of the air force. Flying Moscow's latest ground-attack jets armed with the country's newest precision weapons, pilots are missing far more targets than they're hitting. 

All those strikes on civilian apartment buildings and other nonmilitary targets? Some may be intentional (the Russians aren't above terror-bombing), but most are just the result of ill-trained pilots flying scared. 

They're missing pipelines, rail lines and oil-storage facilities - just dumping their bombs as quickly as they can and heading home. 

Russia's also losing aircraft. The Kremlin admits two were shot down; the Georgians claimed they'd downed a dozen by Sunday. Split the difference, and you have seven or more Russian aircraft knocked out of the sky by a tiny enemy. Compare that to US Air Force losses - statistically zero - in combat in all of our wars since Desert Storm. 

As one US officer observed to me, the Russian pilots are neither professionally nor emotionally toughened for their missions. Their equipment's pretty good (not as good as ours), but their training lags - and their pilots log far fewer flight hours than ours do. 

Russia has been planning and organizing this invasion for months. And they're pulling it off - but the military's embarrassing blunders must be infuriating Prime Minister Putin.


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 12, 2008)

Ramirezz, I fear the might, what it can do. We are friends and I'm a big fan of Russian military, especially airplanes and tanks.

Cheers

We are thankful for the historical help.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 12, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> Milos that bear was the one who went to rescue Serbia in 1914, and fought side by side with Serbs many times against common enemies. That bear was the only one who took Serbia's side during NATO bombings in 1999.
> I believe the bear is not the animal you should be scare of.



that bear also combated hitler in the biggest militar operation in history and have a important role(i think the most important) in the fall of 3 reich.

but for the western powers, russia still beign the old ussr. i dont know if is ignorance, politics, somekind of racism, rivality... but seems like the nato and the european union dont trust in russia.

does russia trust in west, or the russians think they are surrounding by enemies triyng to desintegrate their country and make that weakest as possible ?

came from the west, russians saw the napoleonic army, the german army, the cold war missiles near borders, the political game to isolate russia from former ussr rebublics... does russians think from the west just comes bad news ?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 12, 2008)

Personally I don’t fear “The Bear” but I think we have to differentiate between the “Russian Bear” and that of the old Soviet Union. In the cold war years I did have concern because there were people running the Soviet Union who believed in the Communist Manifesto and sought to follow it through – I could still remember Khrushchev saying that capitalism would eventually be crushed.

In today’s world I see Russia still seeking dominance over its regional neighbors. They may be justified because of the suspicion and mistrust from the west and in many cases I can’t blame them.

Do I fear “The Bear” militarily? Not in the sense of an attack on the US but I would have concerns if the US got involved militarily in regions around Russia. Although I believe the US still outclasses Russia militarily I would never underestimate “The Bear” especially in a conflict close to its borders.

I think within the next generation Russia and the US will eventually become more trusting of each other, especially when many of the old “Cold War Guard” goes out to pasture. Again I repeat, I think many in the west fail to differentiate between “The Bear” that made up the former Soviet Union and “The Bear” that makes up Russia today. They are two very different animals.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 12, 2008)

timshatz said:


> Looking more and more like Russia got what it wanted and now is ending it's operations in Georgia. Nothing the Georgians can do about it. The thing looks pretty much over.
> 
> Read a good article from Ralph Peters on this one. He's got some very good points. Posting it below.



which points actually? This article is the most biased , one-sided article which was ever published during the last four days, overshadoved even the masterpieces from some American neoconservatives.



> IT'S impossible to overstate the importance of what's unfolding as we watch. Russia's invasion of Georgia - a calculated, unprovoked aggression


that explains it all.



> The response of our own government has been pathetic - and our media's uncritical acceptance of Moscow's version of events is infuriating.


Almoust all what I've red in UK and US press was a reflection of the georgian point of view.


> This is the "new" Russia announcing - in blood - that it won't tolerate freedom and self-determination along its borders. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is putting it bluntly: Today, Georgia, tomorrow Ukraine (and the Baltic states had better pay attention).


gonna tell them my friends in Kiev and Donezk - they better gotta find a new hiding place.



> Nor does Putin's ambition stop with the former Soviet territories. His air force has been trying (unsuccessfully) to hit the new gas pipeline running from the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean.


BS. Even the BP confirmed no air attacks were commited on the pipelines.




> Let's be clear: For all that US commentators and diplomats are still chattering about Russia's "response" to Georgia's actions, the Kremlin spent months planning and preparing this operation.


this guy simply doesn't have a clue. Of course Russia planned a response to any possible Georgian attack on Ossetia or Abkhazia, that's why military exersices were executed in that region two months ago.


> Any soldier above the grade of private can tell you that there's absolutely no way Moscow could've launched this huge ground, air and sea offensive in an instantaneous "response" to alleged Georgian actions.





> As I pointed out Saturday, even to get one armored brigade over the Caucasus Mountains required extensive preparations. Since then, Russia has sent in the equivalent of almost two divisions - not only in South Ossetia, the scene of the original fighting, but also in separatist Abkhazia on the Black Sea coast.





> Every one of these things required careful preparations. In the words of one US officer, "Just to line up the airlift sorties would've taken weeks."


same here.




> The Russians also managed to arrange the instant appearance of a squadron of warships to blockade Georgia.


no blockade was actually commited, warships stayed in the vinicity of Abkhazian shores.



> Working through their mercenaries in South Ossetia,


well these South Ossetia mercenaries somehow managed to defend their land against Georgian military in 1990ies even without any Russian help.



> and Russian troops seize the vital city of Gori in the country's heart.


not a single Russian soldier was even in the vinicity of this city. 



> Make no mistake: Moscow intends to dismember Georgia.


that's why its (Russian) troops are withdrawing to their prewar positions according to the Sarcosy-Medvedev agreement 



> It also has backed our Iraq efforts with 2,000 troops. (We're airlifting them back home.)


well it looks like USAF will airlift them back to Iraq very soon.


> This invasion recalls Hitler's march into Czechoslovakia - to protect ethnic Germans, he claimed, just as Putin claims to be protecting Russian citizens - complete BS.


tell that the citizens of Tshinvali, some 1500 of them are dead after Georgian bombardment. Hell I can give this guy a telephone number of a good friend of mine , a journalist, who saw all this mess with his own eyes.



> THE BEAR'S MILITARY MESS


lol let's come to the funniest part of all



> Russia's military is succeeding in its invasion of Georgia, but only because Moscow has applied overwhelming force.


as I said -this guy hasn't a clue. In fact there were less Russian troops in South Ossetia than opposing Georgian troops.



> Well, the new Russian military looks a lot like the old Russian military: slovenly and not ready for prime time.


slovenly? That was a hell of bold action demonstrated!



> The most visible failings are those of the air force. Flying Moscow's latest ground-attack jets


these "latest" jets were actually aged Su-24 and Su-25 some of them saw the action even in Afganstan.


> armed with the country's newest precision weapons, pilots are missing far more targets than they're hitting.


well he certainly has a source in North Kaukazus Military District who provides him with a classified information.



> but most are just the result of ill-trained pilots flying scared.


the Georgian air defence was practically wiped out on a second day by these scared ill-training pilots.


> They're missing pipelines, rail lines and oil-storage facilities - just dumping their bombs as quickly as they can and heading home.


lol this guy is a true warfare operations expert !


> Russia's also losing aircraft. The Kremlin admits two were shot down; the Georgians claimed they'd downed a dozen by Sunday.


four losses confirmed.



> As one US officer observed to me, the Russian pilots are neither professionally nor emotionally toughened for their missions. Their equipment's pretty good (not as good as ours), but their training lags - and their pilots log far fewer flight hours than ours do.


combat sorties were mostly flown by Chechen war veterans with over than a 200 flying hours per year. 


> And they're pulling it off - but the military's embarrassing blunders must be infuriating Prime Minister Putin.


in fact it was one of the most effective operations the Russian army ever combined in its newest history - bold, fast , good planned and executed against some good trained army which even had a numerical advantage.

this BS is written by some conservative Cold War "analysist" who hasn't a clue in the issue. Biased allegations, totally amateurish military analysis.

Video: Georgian army flees in disarray as Russians advance - Times Online


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 12, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> this BS is written by some conservative Cold War "analysist" who hasn't a clue in the issue. Biased allegations, totally amateurish military analysis.



Agree 100%


----------



## timshatz (Aug 12, 2008)

Disagree with you on this one guys. Peters has been around for a while and pegged events in the Middle East pretty much on the nose. He is very good. If you have the time and the inclination, you should read his books. They are excellent, if sometime a little on the intense side. 

While we can disagree on the targeting of the Russian aircraft and the start of the war (he said/she said on who did what first), his point that the attacks into Georgia were planned has to be taken at face value. He is right about the logistics of moving the equivelent of 2 divisions into an attack. It doesn't happen overnight. It takes weeks, if not months to do something like that. A lot of foresight and planning. As the old adage says, "Amatuers study tactics, proffessionals study logistics". There is no way this thing was pulled off in less than a month of planning. 

Another point which brings in the point of planning. There were two columns into Georgia. One directed at Ossentia, the other in the West. Pretty smart and pretty good move. Force the Georgians to deal with two threats at the same time. Something they just don't have the forces to do. 

We are getting only tidbits of information about this thing but what I have seen come out (and I'm getting about the same stuff everyone else on this board is getting) shows some pretty smart moves by the Russians in their actions. Attacking in two different locations, cutting the main highway, seizing the main tunnel into Ossentia, all are smart and methodical moves. 

It shows a decent amount of planning, if anything.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 12, 2008)

i think that article of ralph peters expose very well some kind of ignorance, or some resentment by old events when russia was the ussr and the world was about to explode.

the title, "russia goes rogue", says everything, since russia became a democratic country and ehir are open for business, investments and also a capitalist nation, some part of west still associate russia with countries like iran and n. korea.



timshatz said:


> RUSSIA GOES ROGUE
> By RALPH PETERS
> 
> August 12, 2008 --
> ...



ralph demands that russia invasion was "calculated, unprovoked aggression", but he forget to say, there was about 1.600, S. Ossetians killed before russia invades georgia. and most of them, russian citzens.

He mentions iraq, maybe because some ressentment about russia was against the invasion, like france and germany, besides the only thing in commom between both situations was really the fact russia and usa didnt care about the security council´s decision.

he said the response of usa was pathetic, but i readed in this forum, many americans thinks the best of usa could do was been out of this conflict.



timshatz said:


> This is the "new" Russia announcing - in blood - that it won't tolerate freedom and self-determination along its borders. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is putting it bluntly: Today, Georgia, tomorrow Ukraine (and the Baltic states had better pay attention).
> 
> Georgia's affiliation with the European Union, its status as a would-be NATO member, its working democracy - none of it deterred Putin.



once again, he talks about blood, but forgets until now, what we know is the georgian army killed 1600 people instead russia focused more over military bases and strategical points, making less civilian deaths.

he forgets that russia is a free country and agree with the self-determination of their former republics, he also hurries to predict a disater: "Today, Georgia, tomorrow Ukraine (and the Baltic states had better pay attention)".

he also subverts the meaning of the word "democracy" to a state of alliance with western powers. democracy isnt free voting, isnt freedon of expression, is about you allie with western powers, to opposes puttin. 

now, whos the rogue ?



timshatz said:


> Nor does Putin's ambition stop with the former Soviet territories. His air force has been trying (unsuccessfully) to hit the new gas pipeline running from the Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean. The Kremlin is telling Europe: We not only have the power to turn off Siberian gas, we can turn off every tap in the region, any time we choose.



he said that russian air force "unsuccessfully" bombs a pipeline, but until now, no pictures of this attempt or videos was shown. also russias didnt confirmed any kind of action like that. he also wants to associate russia with terrorism. for russians its not interesting sell natural gas for europe, but use that as a weapon of terror. 



timshatz said:


> Let's be clear: For all that US commentators and diplomats are still chattering about Russia's "response" to Georgia's actions, the Kremlin spent months planning and preparing this operation. Any soldier above the grade of private can tell you that there's absolutely no way Moscow could've launched this huge ground, air and sea offensive in an instantaneous "response" to alleged Georgian actions.



now we see whos responsible for the "pathetic response" of usa: the diplomats !

also, in a unbelievable gessing, he affirms that kremlin spent months preparing this operation, he also claim have sources for such issue. wich is quite strange since ralph peters shows to be a russian hater.

how could be possible ? georgia calls kremlin and says: - we gonna attack S. Ossetia, should you be there ? - yes. kremlin answers. - so lets make some noise !

mr peters is impressed with the instantaneus russian response, does he knows that russia makes frontier with georgia ? or he thinks is the state of georgia in usa ?



timshatz said:


> As I pointed out Saturday, even to get one armored brigade over the Caucasus Mountains required extensive preparations. Since then, Russia has sent in the equivalent of almost two divisions - not only in South Ossetia, the scene of the original fighting, but also in separatist Abkhazia on the Black Sea coast.



does mr. peters knows that s. ossetia and Abkhazia are by a long time, since ussr falls(does he know that) a very problematic regions and russia, as any other country that makes frontier with problem zones have troops on his side of border ? or is it illegal ? 



timshatz said:


> The Russians also managed to arrange the instant appearance of a squadron of warships to blockade Georgia. And they launched hundreds of air strikes against preplanned targets.
> 
> Every one of these things required careful preparations. In the words of one US officer, "Just to line up the airlift sorties would've taken weeks."



mr. peters is scared because he dont know where those ships came from, from nowhere ? where those ships came from ? 



timshatz said:


> Working through their mercenaries in South Ossetia, Russia staged brutal provocations against Georgia from late July onward. Last Thursday, Georgia's president finally had to act to defend his own people.
> 
> But when the mouse stirred, the cat pounced.



another case of biased, rogue statement. call an entire population "mercenaries", those who dont want to be part of georgia, forget or dont know that russia and georgia was in a joint peace mission to reduce the conflicts in the zone since a long time.

and also, dont mention that "georgia defence of his own people" implicated in the death of 1600 s. ossetians ? these dont matter ? maybe because have russian passports...



timshatz said:


> The Russians know that we know this was a setup. But Moscow's Big Lie propagandists still blame Georgia - even as Russian aircraft bomb Georgian homes and Russian troops seize the vital city of Gori in the country's heart. And Russian troops also grabbed the Georgian city of Zugdidi to the west - invading from Abkhazia on a second axis.
> 
> Make no mistake: Moscow intends to dismember Georgia.



once again, distorting fact for his own interests. why blame georgia ? should the ossetians can diverts from georgian bullets "matrix style" ? when a bombing mission in iraq missed a target and hit a house was a mistake. when russians do the same, was intentional ? why russians seize gori ? because there was a georgian army there ready to attack s. ossetia ? or because russians are evil ?



timshatz said:


> This is the most cynical military operation by a "European" power since Moscow invaded Afghanistan in 1979. (Sad to say, President Bush seems as bewildered now as President Jimmy Carter did then.)
> 
> This attack's worse, though. Georgia is an independent, functioning democracy tied to the European Union and striving to join NATO. It also has backed our Iraq efforts with 2,000 troops. (We're airlifting them back home.)



once again, somekind of "racism" and call russia "european", like just geographic near to europe. also he tell about the afghanistan, like soviet union still exists. 

again, the only democratic countries are the countries that dont go against the interests of nato. elections are just a figurative aspect.what really matters is support the west.



timshatz said:


> This invasion recalls Hitler's march into Czechoslovakia - to protect ethnic Germans, he claimed, just as Putin claims to be protecting Russian citizens - complete BS.



yeah, you know what is BS and what is not !



timshatz said:


> It also resembles Hitler's invasion of Poland - with the difference that, in September '39, European democracies drew the line. (To France's credit, its leaders abandoned their August vacations to call Putin out - only Sen. Barack Obama remains on the beach.)
> 
> Yet our media give Putin the benefit of the doubt. Not one major news outlet even bothers to take issue with Putin's wild claim that the Georgians were engaged in genocide.



then he urges the western world for a cruzade in the east, to defend the georgians that wild russians accuses unreasonably making genocyde. how could a free democratic nation(aka nato friend) make such a thing ? we cant tolerate this ! 

then he repeat in a very boring way all that he talked before...

russia is evil
russia plannet invaded georgia
russia military is a mess depsite the invasion was planned
russia is evil
russia is killing georgia
nobody do nothing
russia is evil
russia bombs inocent citzens
the ossetia is full of mercenaries and russians, wasnt a big deal 1600 deaths so
did i said russia is evil ?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 12, 2008)

Don't jump too harshly on Tim folks; he's relaying the view by one American Journalist, not necessarily his view or the view of the majority of US citizens who have been watching this.

Peters may have been around for a while but I think he jumped into this too prematurely and without gaining all the facts. His comment about "Flying Moscow's latest ground-attack jets armed with the country's newest precision weapons, pilots are missing far more targets than they're hitting" tells me he's still stuck in the 80s. I wonder if he has a mullet hair cut? 

I'm sure the Russians had this planned as this crisis has been simmering for quite a while but with that said I bet the Georgians also had this action in mind for a very long time. Bottom line the whole thing could have been handled different but Georgia choose to act with force - now that could only reap the consequences of their actions.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 12, 2008)

timshatz said:


> Disagree with you on this one guys. Peters has been around for a while and pegged events in the Middle East pretty much on the nose. He is very good. If you have the time and the inclination, you should read his books. They are excellent, if sometime a little on the intense side.


well he may be a good writer and I believe I've heard his name some time ago but particulary this analysis here is of some painfully low quality. He overlooks here some elementary facts.



> While we can disagree on the targeting of the Russian aircraft and the start of the war (he said/she said on who did what first), his point that the attacks into Georgia were planned has to be taken at face value. He is right about the logistics of moving the equivelent of 2 divisions into an attack. It doesn't happen overnight. It takes weeks, if not months to do something like that. A lot of foresight and planning. As the old adage says, "Amatuers study tactics, proffessionals study logistics". There is no way this thing was pulled off in less than a month of planning.


that's definately true ,but Peters made wrong conclusions from the correct facts . Of course the operation was planned some time ago, and there were several military exercises conducted , but does it mean it was a preplanned agression? Remember the famous Cold War exercise "Reforger"? Pretty the same thing I believe.
After all it was not SOO many troops redeployed in Abkhazia and Ossetia - some 8000 in Abkhazia and even less in Ossetia. 12000 men - some three American airborne divisions I believe? Does it take much hours to deploy them to any point on Earth?
As for tanks and motorized infantry, it does take some 3 or 4 hours to reach South Ossetia from North Ossetia where they were stationed.


> Another point which brings in the point of planning. There were two columns into Georgia. One directed at Ossentia, the other in the West. Pretty smart and pretty good move. Force the Georgians to deal with two threats at the same time. Something they just don't have the forces to do.


strictly speaking there wasn't any second column directed in the West - there were about 5000 troopers brought by transport ships and some 3000 airborne troops brought by planes.


> We are getting only tidbits of information about this thing but what I have seen come out (and I'm getting about the same stuff everyone else on this board is getting) shows some pretty smart moves by the Russians in their actions. Attacking in two different locations, cutting the main highway, seizing the main tunnel into Ossentia, all are smart and methodical moves.
> 
> It shows a decent amount of planning, if anything.


absolutely true. But that doesn't mean a preplanned agression at all .If you look at the actions taken by Georgia some last months or even years (Adzharia and Kodori pass) - no wonder Russians've planned an operation like this.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 12, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Well as I said, based upon what limited information I have, I believe the US would have acted similarly. What is most suprising is how our Forum members have been so quick to villify the US in this situation. That is disheartening. And VERY telling.



Agreed 100%, but I did not expect anything different.



Matt308 said:


> Latest I heard was that they were implying a scorched earth policy for T'bilisi, warning citizens to evacuate as they pushed towards the city, and indicating bombing/shelling was on its way.



If that is the case, that is not the right thing to do.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 12, 2008)

Kruska said:


> or even deliberately used the Georgians as Guinea Pigs??
> 
> Regards
> Kruska



Please explain? Seriously? How did the US use Georgia as guinea pigs? This should be interesting...


----------



## Erich (Aug 12, 2008)

just to tweak this but something for us to consider

do you think Israel has been watching this with a close eye ?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 12, 2008)

Milos Sijacki said:


> I have also read all other posts and I'm not pointing fingers at anyone but I think that Georgians started this whole thing and that Russians can do whatever they want for they are far superior.



First let me say again that I am not taking sides in the war between Georgia and Russia.

Okay now that I have asked that, let me just change a few words in your post and you tell me what you think. I am not trying to pick a fight, I just want your opinion on it.

Okay here goes:

"I think that Serbs, Bosnians and Kosovars started this whole thing and that the United States and NATO can do whatever they want for they are far superior."

Again I just want to hear your thoughts.


----------



## timshatz (Aug 12, 2008)

To throw another log on the fire, here is the Op Ed from the Wall Street Journal. 

If we are just talking opinions (and that is the basis of this board, to post our opinions and those of respected individuals), thought I'd post opinions of others with a little more experience. 



Vladimir Bonaparte
August 12, 2008; Page A20
The farther Russia's tanks roll into Georgia, the more the world is beginning to see the reality of Vladimir Putin's Napoleonic ambitions. Having consolidated his authoritarian transition as Prime Minister with a figurehead President, Mr. Putin is now pushing to reassert Russian dominance in Eurasia. Ukraine is in his sights, and even the Baltic states could be threatened if he's allowed to get away with it. The West needs to draw a line at Georgia.

No matter who fired the first shot last week in the breakaway Georgian region of South Ossetia, Moscow is using the separatist issue as an excuse to demolish Georgia's military and, if possible, depose its democratically elected government. Russian forces moved ever deeper into Georgia proper Monday. They launched a second front in the west from another breakaway province, Abkhazia, and took the central city of Gori, which lies 40 miles from the Georgian capital of Tbilisi. These moves slice the country in half and isolate its ports, most of which Russia has bombed or blockaded. Moscow dismissed a cease-fire drawn up by European nations and signed by Georgia.

Russian bombers have also hit residential and industrial areas, making a mockery of Moscow's charge that Georgia is the party indiscriminately killing civilians. Russian claims of Georgian ethnic cleansing now look like well-rehearsed propaganda lines to justify a well-prepared invasion. Thousands of soldiers and hundreds of tanks, ships and warplanes were waiting for Mr. Putin's command.

While the rape of Chechnya was brutal, this is the most brazen act of Mr. Putin's reign, the first military offensive outside Russia's borders since Soviet rule ended. Yet it also fits a pattern of other threats and affronts to Russia's neighbors: turning off the oil or natural-gas taps to Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia, and even to NATO-member Lithuania; launching a cyberassault on Estonia; opposing two antimissile sites in NATO members in Eastern Europe that couldn't begin to neutralize Russia's offensive capabilities.

Our emphasis on NATO here is no coincidence. The Georgia invasion is a direct slap at the Western alliance. Tbilisi, like Kiev, has been pushing for NATO membership. Mr. Putin decided to act while some alliance members, led by Germany, dallied over their applications. Georgia was first. Ukraine, which has been pushing Russia to move its Black Sea fleet's headquarters out of the Crimea, could be next.

The alliance needs to respond forcefully, and it can start today. NATO officials have granted Russia a special meeting before deciding what to do about Georgia -- though we don't recall Russia briefing NATO about its plans in the Caucasus. The meeting is an opportunity to relay to Moscow that Georgian and Ukrainian membership is back on the table and that the alliance is considering all options for Georgia, from a humanitarian airlift to military aid, if Russia doesn't withdraw immediately.

Mr. Putin is betting that the West needs him for oil and deterring Iran's nuclear ambitions more than he needs the West. He's wrong -- not least since his "cooperation" on Iran consists of helping Tehran stall for time and selling the mullahs advanced antiaircraft missiles. Russia also needs the West's capital and especially its expertise in developing its oil and gas fields at least as much as the West needs Russian energy supplies.

The U.S. and Europe need to make all of that clear. Forcing Russia to veto a strong condemnation of its own actions at the U.N. Security Council would be one way to turn the pressure up. And speaking of pressure, where are all the peace protesters during this war? They can't all be in China.

As for the U.S., this is perhaps the last chance for President Bush to salvage any kind of positive legacy toward Russia, amid what is a useful record elsewhere in Eurasia. While Mr. Bush has championed the region's fledgling democracies, he and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice badly misjudged Mr. Putin. Now would be a good moment for Mr. Bush to publicly acknowledge his misjudgment and rally the West's response.

John McCain had the Russian leader pegged better, which speaks well of his foreign-policy instincts. The Republican Presidential candidate has long said that Russia should be booted from the G-8 and yesterday he outlined a forceful Western strategy on Russia that stops short of military action. Barack Obama has in the past indicated support for the Georgia and Ukraine NATO bids, but the Democratic candidate has yet to explain in any detail how he would respond to the current conflict.

There's one other way the U.S. could hit Russia where it hurts: by strengthening the dollar. The greenback's weakness has contributed greatly to the record oil prices that have in turn made Russia flush with petrodollars and fueled Mr. Putin's expansionist ambitions. Crude prices continued to fall yesterday, below $115 a barrel, and further deflating that bubble would do more to sober up an oil-drunk Kremlin than would any kind of economic sanctions.

* * *
Vladimir Putin's Russia isn't the former Soviet Union, bent on ideological confrontation around the world. But it is a Bonapartist power intent on dominating its neighbors and restoring its clout on the world stage. Unless Russians see that there are costs for their Napoleon's expansionism, Georgia isn't likely to be his last stop.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 12, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> this BS is written by some conservative Cold War "analysist" who hasn't a clue in the issue. Biased allegations, totally amateurish military analysis.
> 
> [/url]



I am not going to argue with you that it is a biased piece, but please be honest with yourself. I am sure there is just as much BS (as you call it) written coming out of your Russia that is written about the US and Nato. Very biased and frankly BS. Just be honest...


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 12, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Agreed 100%, but I did not expect anything different.



well the USA reaction was predictable and understandable regarding the fact that Georgia is one of their closest alliels. What could they do else rather than defending its actions and puting a pressure on Russians?
But as I've said before it seems that USA themselfes were caught pretty much by surprise by Georgia's actions in Ossetia , which gave the USA diplomacy pretty bad time.



> If that is the case, that is not the right thing to do.


that was a Georgian claim , one of many. Of course some civilian buildings were undeliberately hit , but it's seems an inevitable thing in a modern conflict...


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 12, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I am not going to argue with you that it is a biased piece, but please be honest with yourself. I am sure there is just as much BS (as you call it) written coming out of your Russia that is written about the US and Nato. Very biased and frankly BS. Just be honest...


So what?I'm not denying that, very true - a lot of BS is written in Russia as well. Just like a lot of BS was written about the performance of coalition troops in the Second Gulf War . But it doesn't mean THIS particulary article isn't a BS. This guy shows an apalling lack of knowlege of some basic facts of the conflict.


----------



## timshatz (Aug 12, 2008)

Another opinion piece from a Paper I am not a big fan of (actually strongly dislike it, but hey, it has a good reputation), this one is from the New York Times. While there are disparities in all the opinions posted, you will see they all seem to agree on the details of this thing. 

I should also note that I am not, personally, committed to either side of this thing. But I have a hard time believing Georgia attacked Russia (S.O. in this case) as a matter of aggression or territorial ambition. 

My apologies in advance to the Russian readers on this board for this and the last two op-eds I posted as they are not complimentary of the Russian position.

Anyway, here's the view from the American Lefties....

Op-Ed Contributor
Russia Blames the Victim 


By SVANTE E. CORNELL
Published: August 11, 2008 


RUSSIA is portraying its war in Georgia as a legitimate response to Georgia’s incursion last week into its breakaway region of South Ossetia. Many in the West, while condemning the disproportionate nature of Russia’s response, are also critical of Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili for his attempts to bring South Ossetia back under Georgian rule, and of the United States for supposedly encouraging Mr. Saakashvili’s risk-taking by pushing NATO membership for Georgia. 

But the truth is that for the past several months, Russia, not Georgia, has been stoking tensions in South Ossetia and another of Georgia’s breakaway areas, Abkhazia. After NATO held a summit in Bucharest, Romania, in April — at which Georgia and Ukraine received positive signs of potential membership — then-President Vladimir Putin of Russia signed a decree effectively treating Abkhazia and South Ossetia as parts of the Russian Federation. This was a direct violation of Georgia’s territorial integrity. 

It came after years of growing Russian efforts to assert control over these regions, for example, by distributing Russian passports to citizens and arranging the appointment of Russians to the territories’ governments. Mr. Putin, who is now Russia’s prime minister, oversaw a build-up of Russian “peacekeeping” forces in Abkhazia, which was clearly intended to provoke Georgia into a military response. 

Yet Georgia showed restraint — in large part because Mr. Saakashvili understood that military adventurism would harm his NATO prospects. Moscow, in turn, transferred its efforts to South Ossetia, where pro-Russian rebels carried out attacks on Georgian forces and villages, finally provoking the response that Moscow had sought as a pretext to intervene.

Now Moscow has sent out the Black Sea fleet to Georgia’s coast and broadened the war into Abkhazia and Georgia proper, showing that Moscow’s war is not just about South Ossetia. In any case, Moscow’s own treatment of separatism — killing tens of thousands of Chechens over the past decade — says volumes about its claims that it is just trying to protect a minority population.

This war is about making an example in Georgia, about the consequences post-Soviet countries will suffer for standing up to Moscow, conducting democratic reforms and seeking military and economic ties with the West. No Eurasian country has come so far as Georgia in recent years in terms of democratization and reform. Georgia has the third-largest contingent of forces in Iraq, and before this crisis it had pledged to send forces to Afghanistan.

If Georgia is allowed to fall, governments across Eurasia will certainly take note, especially those — such as Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and Ukraine — that have built ties with the West and sought closer integration in European institutions, drawing Moscow’s ire.

Should we allow Russia to occupy Georgia or even just depose the Saakashvili government, the implications for America’s standing in Eurasia would be dire. We would risk losing the support of the post-Soviet states of Central Asia that are cooperating with the American mission in Afghanistan, along with hopes of westward exports of more Central Asian energy.

Many who might agree with this analysis nonetheless shrug their shoulders over solutions. Indeed, we have no real military options against Russia. But we can put together a meaningful comprehensive reaction, attaching real costs to Russia for its policies.

America must hit where it hurts: Russia’s international prestige, an obsession of Mr. Putin’s. To begin with, we must do everything possible to see Russia’s membership in the Group of 8 industrialized nations be suspended (something the Republican presidential hopeful John McCain called for even before this crisis). 

Once the fighting is over, America must step up its campaign for NATO membership for Georgia and Ukraine. Should European countries reject the idea, America could designate them “major non-NATO allies,” along the lines of Israel and Pakistan. This would involve more American military trainers in Georgia, intelligence-sharing, joint exercises and other steps, if not a full pledge by Washington to defend the country in case of attack. 

Finally, in a measure of fitting symbolism, America must note that Russia started this war on the opening day of the Olympics, while it plans to hold its own Winter Olympics only a dozen miles from the victim of its aggression. America should seriously consider announcing a boycott of the 2014 Sochi Olympics. We owe our Georgian allies nothing less.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 12, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I am not going to argue with you that it is a biased piece, but please be honest with yourself. I am sure there is just as much BS (as you call it) written coming out of your Russia that is written about the US and Nato. Very biased and frankly BS. Just be honest...



Adler I suppose you can read German so here is some good analysis from an independend source:

Osteuropa-Experte Segbers zum Georgien-Krieg: "Saakaschwili hat sich verkalkuliert" - Politik - SPIEGEL ONLINE - Nachrichten


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 12, 2008)

Yea Tim - I think there more BS there as well - "Moscow’s own treatment of separatism — killing tens of thousands of Chechens over the past decade — says volumes about its claims that it is just trying to protect a minority population." Is nothing being said about Chechen rebels and their ties to Islamic terrorism?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 12, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> So what?I'm not denying that, very true - a lot of BS is written in Russia as well. Just like a lot of BS was written about the performance of coalition troops in the Second Gulf War . But it doesn't mean THIS particulary article isn't a BS. This guy shows an apalling lack of knowlege of some basic facts of the conflict.



Just reminding you that there are always two sides to the coin.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 12, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> Adler I suppose you can read German so here is some good analysis from an independend source:
> 
> Osteuropa-Experte Segbers zum Georgien-Krieg: "Saakaschwili hat sich verkalkuliert" - Politik - SPIEGEL ONLINE - Nachrichten



I agree with a lot of that article.


----------



## timshatz (Aug 12, 2008)

For all concerned, I'm kinda stuck into being the defacto defender of the Georgian position on this thing and would really rather not have the job. Posted the Op-Ed pieces to show there is a measure of consistency in the general reaction to the current conflict between Georgia and Russia. I could've posted plenty more but figured the point was made with the three that I threw up. 

I figure we are all too far away to see the details of what is happening here. Hope it all settles down as the long term ramifications are not good for anyone involved.


----------



## timshatz (Aug 12, 2008)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Yea Tim - I think there more BS there as well - "Moscow’s own treatment of separatism — killing tens of thousands of Chechens over the past decade — says volumes about its claims that it is just trying to protect a minority population." Is nothing being said about Chechen rebels and their ties to Islamic terrorism?



Hence my point about not liking the NYT. Way too liberal for me. 

From what I saw of the Chechen War, Russia was pretty much reacting more than acting. The Chechens attacked Russia proper, blowing up an apartment block, attacking subway stations, taking hostages at a theatre and attacking a school in Breslan. As brutal as that war was, I do not see any solution but the ones the Russians came up. It was brutal in response and just as effective. In truth, considering the situation, the Russians had no real options.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 12, 2008)

timshatz said:


> To throw another log on the fire, here is the Op Ed from the Wall Street Journal.


First of all, WS Journal is not known as a magazine friendly towards Russia but whatsoever..



> The farther Russia's tanks roll into Georgia, the more the world is beginning to see the reality of Vladimir Putin's Napoleonic ambitions. Having consolidated his authoritarian transition as Prime Minister with a figurehead President, Mr. Putin is now pushing to reassert Russian dominance in Eurasia. Ukraine is in his sights, and even the Baltic states could be threatened if he's allowed to get away with it. The West needs to draw a line at Georgia.
> 
> No matter who fired the first shot last week in the breakaway Georgian region of South Ossetia, Moscow is using the separatist issue as an excuse to demolish Georgia's military and, if possible, depose its democratically elected government.


I do believe it makes a difference who fired the first shot. And it looks like the Georgian goverment is still there on its place , not been overtrown.


> Russian forces moved ever deeper into Georgia proper Monday. They launched a second front in the west from another breakaway province
> 
> , Abkhazia, and took the central city of Gori, which lies 40 miles from the Georgian capital of Tbilisi.


as I've said, its not true. They hadn't captured that city. 


> These moves slice the country in half and isolate its ports, most of which Russia has bombed or blockaded. Moscow dismissed a cease-fire drawn up by European nations and signed by Georgia.


Timshatz all articles you've put here for discussion are based on unconfirmed claims which were partially demented by Georgians themself. Moscow had not isolated any of Georgian port, while some installements there were in fact been bombed.
And after all - Russian troops are about to be pulled out of Georgia, arent they? Breathe normally guys  So much about the alleged Moscow wish to overtrow Saakashvili. 



> Russian claims of Georgian ethnic cleansing now look like well-rehearsed propaganda lines to justify a well-prepared invasion.


No comments here. I suppose some 1500 of Ossetians were shelled and killed by Marsians.



> Thousands of soldiers and hundreds of tanks, ships and warplanes were waiting for Mr. Putin's command.


the autor may be unaware of the fact that only the President of Russian Federation can give such orders.


> While the rape of Chechnya was brutal, this is the most brazen act of Mr. Putin's reign, the first military offensive outside Russia's borders since Soviet rule ended. Yet it also fits a pattern of other threats and affronts to Russia's neighbors: turning off the oil or natural-gas taps to Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia, and even to NATO-member Lithuania; launching a cyberassault on Estonia; opposing two antimissile sites in NATO members in Eastern Europe that couldn't begin to neutralize Russia's offensive capabilities.


keep going.



> Our emphasis on NATO here is no coincidence. The Georgia invasion is a direct slap at the Western alliance. Tbilisi, like Kiev, has been pushing for NATO membership. Mr. Putin decided to act while some alliance members, led by Germany, dallied over their applications. Georgia was first.


Well that's a well known truth that Russia doesn't want Georgia to be in NATO, so what? What particulary role that played in Georgia's wish to attack the Ossetians?


> Ukraine, which has been pushing Russia to move its Black Sea fleet's headquarters out of the Crimea, could be next.


40 percent of the Ukraine are ethnic Russians. The war between Russia and Ukraine is something what would never come to mind to any person who's familiar with a history of two countries.



> The alliance needs to respond forcefully, and it can start today. NATO officials have granted Russia a special meeting before deciding what to do about Georgia -- though we don't recall Russia briefing NATO about its plans in the Caucasus. The meeting is an opportunity to relay to Moscow that Georgian and Ukrainian membership is back on the table and that the alliance is considering all options for Georgia, from a humanitarian airlift to military aid, if Russia doesn't withdraw immediately.


I believe Georgia can say farewell to its NATO integration plans after this conflict. Germany and France are against it more than ever. Nobody needs an unpredictably acting member which actions could cause a WW3. As for Ukraine, the majority of its population is against an Ukrainan NATO membership.


> Russia also needs the West's capital and especially its expertise in developing its oil and gas fields at least as much as the West needs Russian energy supplies.


I would not be that sure on this one .Of course Russia cooperates a lot with Western companies in that issue but I believe it is far more critical to the West to have Russia as a reliable gas&oil supplier.



> As for the U.S., this is perhaps the last chance for President Bush to salvage any kind of positive legacy toward Russia, amid what is a useful record elsewhere in Eurasia. While Mr. Bush has championed the region's fledgling democracies, he and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice badly misjudged Mr. Putin. Now would be a good moment for Mr. Bush to publicly acknowledge his misjudgment and rally the West's response.





> John McCain had the Russian leader pegged better, which speaks well of his foreign-policy instincts. The Republican Presidential candidate has long said that Russia should be booted from the G-8 and yesterday he outlined a forceful Western strategy on Russia that stops short of military action. Barack Obama has in the past indicated support for the Georgia and Ukraine NATO bids, but the Democratic candidate has yet to explain in any detail how he would respond to the current conflict.


well THAT's a kind of politics why USA "lost" Russia in recent years. Clinton administraton was much wiser.




> There's one other way the U.S. could hit Russia where it hurts: by strengthening the dollar.


I highly doubt the US economics is in a condition do to that.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 12, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Just reminding you that there are always two sides to the coin.



freakin A man!


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 12, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> I believe Georgia can say farewell to its NATO integration plans after this conflict. Germany and France are against it more than ever. Nobody needs an unpredictably acting member which actions could cause a WW3.



*BINGO!*


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 12, 2008)

timshatz said:


> Another opinion piece from a Paper I am not a big fan of (actually strongly dislike it, but hey, it has a good reputation), this one is from the New York Times. While there are disparities in all the opinions posted, you will see they all seem to agree on the details of this thing.
> 
> I should also note that I am not, personally, committed to either side of this thing. But I have a hard time believing Georgia attacked Russia (S.O. in this case) as a matter of aggression or territorial ambition.
> 
> My apologies in advance to the Russian readers on this board for this and the last two op-eds I posted as they are not complimentary of the Russian position.





> Anyway, here's the view from the American Lefties....


I believe Putin is hated even more among them.  


Timshatz let me explain it , I can put more than 10 articles with a points of view which are in strong contradiction to those published in the newspapers you've reffered to, mostly from European magazines. That doesn't though affect the whole picture - there're many different points of view been expressed regarding this issue, both prorussian, antirussian and those which try to differ.
You've selected the most radical ones which are not backed by the facts enough. These articles are clearly antirussian inspired what does not necessary contribute to the objectivity.


----------



## timshatz (Aug 12, 2008)

Ramirezz, it would be good if you posted a couple of them. It is better to get a third side opinion on this thing. Just a couple, no need to go to ten, of reputable Op-Eds showing the Russian point of view. 

I've never heard anyone call the Wall Street Journel radical. That's a first.


----------



## rochie (Aug 12, 2008)

article on bbc website i found interesting.
BBC NEWS | World | Europe | Early lessons from S Ossetia conflict


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 12, 2008)

timshatz said:


> Ramirezz, it would be good if you posted a couple of them. It is better to get a third side opinion on this thing. Just a couple, no need to go to ten, of reputable Op-Eds showing the Russian point of view.



here are some articles written in English, I could provide you with even more written in German and Spanish:

Editorial: South Ossetia - Prisoner of the Caucasus | Comment is free | The Guardian
Has Georgia Overreached in Ossetia? - TIME
Georgia President Mikheil Saakashvili's 'calculated gamble' - Los Angeles Times


> I've never heard anyone call the Wall Street Journel radical. That's a first.



well I mean radical towards Russia


----------



## timshatz (Aug 12, 2008)

rochie said:


> article on bbc website i found interesting.
> BBC NEWS | World | Europe | Early lessons from S Ossetia conflict



Good read.


----------



## rochie (Aug 12, 2008)

also the more i see of the georgian president the more he looks like he's enjoying all this, i hope this is just a mannerism and he's not as dumb as he seems


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 12, 2008)

JugBR said:


> does russia trust in west, or the russians think they are surrounding by enemies triyng to desintegrate their country and make that weakest as possible ?


quite frankly I must admit this belief is a wide spread opinion among Russian people and mass media mostly shares this point of view as well. But look , what should we expect from an average Russian? As the Berlin Wall came down and USSR ceased to exist we rightfully expected NATO to being disbanded as there wasn't any plausible reason to continue with its existence. Instead of that in 1997 we became some new NATO member states close to our borders. Then Baltic states joined this organisaton as well. So there were and are serious concerns in the Russian administration and among people , why West actually still needs to expand their military presence up to the Russian borders.Then came this missile shield issue and the tensions began to rise real quick. No one in the country believes these missiles were installed to counter the Iran threat.


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 12, 2008)

Adler, lol very funny. Judging by a poor reaction by western nations and by USA in which Georgia really had its trust, I would say that Russians are far superior. If they are not, why didn't NATO and USA react a bit more than just condemning the whole conflict?

And let me ask you one thing, just to see your opinion. USA considers South Ossetia and Abkhazia as parts of Georgia's sovereign territory. Kosovo is not considered as a part of territory of Serbia. If Kosovo never was ours, as many polticians claim, although history books disagree, how come there are churches and monasteries which stood there long before USA existed even as an idea? How come my family has medieval roots down there. There was never a kingdom of Kosovo, but there was Serbia.

Russians did exactly what NATO and USA did to us, and they said that. NATO bombed the entire Serbia because of Kosovo, so did the Russians bomb the entire Georgia because of the South Ossetia.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 12, 2008)

Milos Sijacki said:


> Judging by a poor reaction by western nations and by USA in which Georgia really had its trust, I would say that Russians are far superior. If they are not, why didn't NATO and USA react a bit more than just condemning the whole conflict?



Why should we? If we had gotten involved it would have turned into a much more devastating conflict. Is that something you would want?

Also what was so poor about our reaction? Please explain...

I guess next time Serbia and Kosovo start shooting at each other we should just nuke the place and then never have to worry about it again. Would that reaction be more for your liking?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 12, 2008)

Milos Sijacki said:


> Judging by a poor reaction by western nations and by USA in which Georgia really had its trust, I would say that Russians are far superior. If they are not, why didn't NATO and USA react a bit more than just condemning the whole conflict?



Poor reaction? In what way? By not doing anything or condemning Russia without out all the facts? And how is Russia superior? I don't think allowing this problem to fester since 1993 shows any kind of superiority.

If Russia was "superior" they would have went in front of the UN Security counsel - given Georgia 48 hours to remove its troops. If there was no response then go in as they did - that's really the only thing I could fault Russia on and to be honest I think had they gone that route there would have been a lot less condemnation from the west....

But then again, going in front of the UN would of been more for theatrics than any thing else.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 12, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I guess next time Serbia and Kosovo start shooting at each other we should just nuke the place and then never have to worry about it again.


lol Adler you are a natural born peacekeeper!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 12, 2008)

Milos Sijacki said:


> And let me ask you one thing, just to see your opinion. USA considers South Ossetia and Abkhazia as parts of Georgia's sovereign territory. Kosovo is not considered as a part of territory of Serbia. If Kosovo never was ours, as many polticians claim, although history books disagree, how come there are churches and monasteries which stood there long before USA existed even as an idea? How come my family has medieval roots down there. There was never a kingdom of Kosovo, but there was Serbia.



Lets see the USA was not discovered yet.... 

Please stick to something that pertains to the subject.



Milos said:


> Russians did exactly what NATO and USA did to us, and they said that. NATO bombed the entire Serbia because of Kosovo, so did the Russians bomb the entire Georgia because of the South Ossetia.



Again you are preaching to the choir. You are getting all bent out of shape for nothing, when no one disagrees with the fact. Stop being so personal and and actually try and understand what everyone is saying. Again no one here said that Russia was unjust for attacking Georgia. 

Seriously man, dont take things so personal. There is no need to do so.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 12, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> lol Adler you are a natural born peacekeeper!



I try! 

I guess Milos would have loved to have the West go to war with Russia over this (even though there was no need to) and destroy each other because that would have been the proper way to react to the situation!


----------



## timshatz (Aug 12, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> here are some articles written in English, I could provide you with even more written in German and Spanish:
> 
> Editorial: South Ossetia - Prisoner of the Caucasus | Comment is free | The Guardian
> Has Georgia Overreached in Ossetia? - TIME
> ...




More good reads.

Read as many of the Op-Eds as possible and you probably get a good idea of what is going on.


----------



## Torch (Aug 12, 2008)

Milos did you really want Nato and the US to get involved? It's ugly now and I can't immagine how ugly it would be if we got involved in a head to head punch out. I've been reading everything here and "both" sides make good points. But could this of been avoided If Russia did go to the UN(I know it's theatrics) and protest and give Georgia 48 hrs to knock it off, atleast give a chance for Nato and the US to slap Georgia upside the head before they reacted? Alot of people dead on both sides of this one. Hell I never heard of what was going on in SO before this, could Russia not of told the UN hey I'm recognizing SO as one of us like we(Europe) did to Kosovo, not too much bloodshed there.


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 12, 2008)

If Russia said-- We recognize SO as a part of Russia and Abkhazia as an independent state in its own right-- would UN and NATO go and accept that, because we are talking about Georgia not some sheethole in the Balkans like my country.


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 12, 2008)

And for the final TIME, I'm not getting personal and I'm only mentioning Kosovo in order to compare the Georgian situation with what happened down there. 

No, I would not like to see war between NATO, USA and Russia because then the entire world would perish in a big mushroom.


----------



## The Basket (Aug 12, 2008)

The Russians have won in all of their aims.

So what happens now...

Can the West deal with a very pro active Kremlin...They do have some more fish to fry...


----------



## Torch (Aug 12, 2008)

Hey Milos relax, this is conversation. No intent off slamming, Kosovo,Russia, Georgia,etc. Just shooting the breeze to get a little more knowledge from across the pond. Like I said I never heard about SO and the conflict that has been going on there. That's why I'm finding the different point of views pretty interesting...


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 12, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> That bear was the only one who took Serbia's side during NATO bombings in 1999.
> I believe the bear is not the animal you should be scare of.




In contrast to that statement Milos, fear NATO and the US. They have such a rich history of destroying nation states and oppressive rule.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 12, 2008)

Milos Sijacki said:


> No, I would not like to see war between NATO, USA and Russia because then the entire world would perish in a big mushroom.



Okay but you said that the US and NATO responded in a weak manner, and I am asking you again how else should we have reacted?

If you think that was weak what do you think would have been a more stronger action? I think it was responded in the only way possible short of getting into a war that neither the US, NATO or Russia needs.

In todays world Russia is still a strong military, but I do not think they can defeat the combined forces of the US and NATO and probably a slew of other nations that would join in because of there relations with Russia. In the end all sides would be hurting and probably Russia even more.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 12, 2008)

timshatz said:


> From what I saw of the Chechen War, Russia was pretty much reacting more than acting. The Chechens attacked Russia proper, blowing up an apartment block, attacking subway stations, taking hostages at a theatre and attacking a school in Breslan. .



Tim, I liked your post because that too was my reaction...specifically that Russian was suffering from these Islamofascists blowing their civilians up too. However, I recently read that the apartment building destruction was now deemed to have been accomplished by Russian intelligence. I don't profess to know the truth, and certainly there are enough US wackos that believe the US intelligence blew up the buildings on 9/11, but makes you wonder. Russia has committed worse attrocities against its own civilians.

As the saying goes, you can only cry wolf so many times before the village no longer believes a word you say.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 12, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> In contrast to that statement Milos, fear NATO and the US. They have such a rich history of destroying nation states and oppressive rule.


Almost as bad as the dreaded UN!


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 12, 2008)

Milos Sijacki said:


> Russians did exactly what NATO and USA did to us, and they said that. NATO bombed the entire Serbia because of Kosovo, so did the Russians bomb the entire Georgia because of the South Ossetia.



That's an interesting comment. And contrary to every pro-russia post made to date.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 12, 2008)

Kruska said:


> The SO conflict needs to be solved by the UN and as such it was indeed very unwise for the Georgian Government to order a military action against a separatist movement in its own country.
> 
> 
> Regards
> Kruska



Does anybody else find offense to this statement? The most innefectual organization on the planet is espoused to be able to solve issues such as this.  When will this utopian madness end.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 12, 2008)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Almost as bad as the dreaded UN!



You beat me to it FlyboyJ. I was just looking up one of our past gems for exactly that reason. See above.


----------



## Torch (Aug 12, 2008)

Only reason I brought up the issue of the UN which I know is basically useless in so many ways was that if Russia wanted to do this to really protect their "peacekeepers" without alternate motives they could of brouched the subject and let Georgia's "allies" call the dogs back. We did it with Iraq/Kuwait for example and when Iraq did not back down we went in and took care of business. I think Russia pulled a beauty on this issue.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 12, 2008)

Torch, I didn't post that because of your post.

The UN is an ugly reality of this world. I thought your post was spot on. Give 'em 24-48hrs and then kick the $hit out of them. But to defer the issue to the innefectual UN while shelling continues is like asking for an instant replay review while the game goes on.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 12, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Torch, I didn't post that because of your post.
> 
> The UN is an ugly reality of this world. I thought your post was spot on. Give 'em 24-48hrs and then kick the $hit out of them. But to defer the issue to the innefectual UN while shelling continues is like asking for an instant replay review while the game goes on.



Yup!


----------



## Kruska (Aug 12, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Please explain? Seriously? How did the US use Georgia as guinea pigs? This should be interesting...



Hello D.A.I.G.,

I am sure that you do know what I am implying. 

It is a very basic undertaking of any country or alliance to probe an opposing or neighboring political setup, alliances and their respective military capability.

It has become increasingly difficult to judge upon Russia’s (Putin’s) political ambitions in regards to “regain” certain former USSR territories and the actual or factual capability of the Russian Armed Forces.

The US and NATO are therefore most interested into analyzing the Georgian/Russian conflict in perspective to a likely Ukraine scenario and others. Chechnya has given a clear picture about Russia’s ambitions, so has Serbia amongst others. The military aspect is recognized as a feature of “unknowns” in regards to capability, command structure and situational behavior on behalf of the Russian Forces.

Certain circles within the US and NATO forces have a very clear picture about the “ambitions” of Georgia’s President and the imminent possibility of him willing to implement force to solve the SO conflict, due to the Georgian Army being trained and armed by the US and Blackwater as well as by other NATO detachments. 

Now “using” a third party in order to probe onto a second party is nothing new, it actually happens every day on this planet.
It takes little for NATO and the US to “infiltrate” and manipulate the minds of people or governments such as that of Georgia. A ‘small” and “unofficial” hint is enough to start of or even encourage this government to provoke an incident which is indeed very useful to gather information.
Bush and NATO where very fast and determined indeed in their reaction to stop an expanding conflict whilst gaining a lot of information out of it. 

A very interesting feature about this conflict was the recognition of a functional command structure, the obedience and commitment factor of military ranks towards Moscow the deployment setup/planning and the political voicing/behavior of neighboring countries and UN member countries.

Simply said; indeed the Russian Armed Forces have changed by far since Chechnya, and the western UN members are seeking/accepting dispute settlements more and more through NATO and the US.

Regards
Kruska


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 12, 2008)

Man, how is it that such intelligent people fall into the conspiracy theory mindset.

So in your scenario, Kruska, the US dupes russia into showing its tactical hand. And russia is too stoopid to do anything other than react, reveal is most intimate strategic planning secrets and suffer world condemnation.

Nice try at villifying the US. I aint buying it. No more than I believe that the Jews are responsible for bringing down the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11. You are better than this Kruska.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 13, 2008)

Georgia´s women beach volley team defeated Russia by 2, 1

curiosity: both mens and womens georgiam beach volley teams are made by brazilian naturalized georgians !!!

take that bad bear !!!









... and you guys wasting time talking about american support to georgians... tsk tsk tsk... how abut the *BRAZUCAS* support huh ?


----------



## Kruska (Aug 13, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Man, how is it that such intelligent people fall into the conspiracy theory mindset.
> 
> So in your scenario, Kruska, the US dupes russia into showing its tactical hand. And russia is too stoopid to do anything other than react, reveal is most intimate strategic planning secrets and suffer world condemnation.
> 
> Nice try at villifying the US. I aint buying it. No more than I believe that the Jews are responsible for bringing down the World Trade Center Towers on 9/11. You are better than this Kruska.



Come on Matt308, try to get of your one-sided track. This has nothing to do with conspiracies theories, or vilifying the US or NATO, but is a well known fact that occurs daily. Probably you might want to tell me that the Hainan incident was unprovoked by the US and China was soo stupid to show their response and capability.

It is conducted routinely, for example by provoked air space intrusions or more openly via military maneuvers. Or encourage Israel to strike at Iraq, Iran or others, before the US or NATO get themselves involved.

BTW, Russia did not bluntly strike back as you might suggest, but acted accordingly to a well ahead prepared plan – knowing about the Georgian ambitions.

When will people start to realize that there is no “unforeseen incident” or “unforeseen war”?? Why do countries spend billions of $$ in intelligence and arming themselves or others?? This world is a controlled world; controlled by a few countries and its respective leaders for their interests and anyone out of control or in contra to the ruling interest “Saddam” gets his butt kicked.

But before you kick butt, you should know who you kick and if the bastard might kick back. 

Regards
Kruska


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 13, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> That's an interesting comment. And contrary to every pro-russia post made to date.



where is the contradiction? Nobody denies there were targets in "continental" Georgia being bombed by Russian planes.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 13, 2008)

timshatz said:


> More good reads.
> 
> Read as many of the Op-Eds as possible and you probably get a good idea of what is going on.



I prefer European magazines. At least they tend to be neutral. Beside that I have my own sources in the conflict area.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 13, 2008)

some fresh pictures from Georgia:

sirjones: ÐŸÐ¸ÑÑŒÐ¼Ð¾ Ð¾Ñ‚ Ð”Ñ€Ð°Ð±ÐºÐ¸Ð½Ð°. Ð¤Ð¾Ñ‚Ð¾Ð³Ñ€Ð°Ñ„Ð¸Ð¸ Ð¸Ð½ÑÐ°Ð¹Ð´.

highway Gori-Tbilisi ,abandonded Georgian military vehicles and artillery pieces, destroyed APC , damaged bridge


----------



## SoD Stitch (Aug 13, 2008)

Kruska said:


> .
> 
> BTW, Russia did not bluntly strike back as you might suggest, but acted accordingly to a well ahead prepared plan – knowing about the Georgian ambitions.
> 
> ...



Yes, a "well prepared plan". I have it on good authority that Russia has been planning an invasion of Georgia for weeks, if not months. Russia has attempted (unsuccessfully) in the past to provoke Georgia into intiating hostilities so that they would have an excuse to invade Georgia. They first tried to provoke Georgia in Ahkazia and failed; so they provoked Georgia in South Ossetia (and succeeded). Go here for a live feed:

http://www.theworld.org/audio/0812088.mp3


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 13, 2008)

some good read about the Georgian prewar fleet:

Russian Navy Blog: A Russian Mil Blogger turns his gaze on the Georgian Navy


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 13, 2008)

SoD Stitch said:


> They first tried to provoke Georgia in Ahkazia and failed;


GEORGIA REGAINS CONTROL OVER BATTLE IN KODORI - Eurasia Daily Monitor

in 2006 Georgians entered the Kodori Valley, part of the Abkhazia, which was violation of the 1994 Moscow cease-fire agreement. Russia kept silence.
so much about the alleged Abkhazian provocation.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 13, 2008)

SoD Stitch said:


> http://www.theworld.org/audio/0812088.mp3[/URL]



nothing new, just some old Georgian "provocation" claims.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 13, 2008)

SoD Stitch said:


> Yes, a "well prepared plan". I have it on good authority that Russia has been planning an invasion of Georgia for weeks, if not months. Russia has attempted (unsuccessfully) in the past to provoke Georgia into intiating hostilities so that they would have an excuse to invade Georgia. They first tried to provoke Georgia in Ahkazia and failed; so they provoked Georgia in South Ossetia (and succeeded).



Oh, here is an expert in Russia's-Georgian relations.
And what were those objectives of the russian invasion? 
Had they been achieved or mother Russia's plan failed?


----------



## JugBR (Aug 13, 2008)

ramirezzz, what your opinion about hows gonna be the relationship between georgians and russians after conflict ?

and do you think the politicians could reach the solution for the issue of s. ossetia ?

i have a feeling that the situation after conflict will remains the same or even worst. do you agree or disagree ?

-----------------------------

very interesting !

i saw in internet pics of russians protesting in moscow against the conflict. do you believe in soviet times this could be possible ? russia is not soviet union.

-----------------------------

ramirezzz, mitya, a question for you two:

lets pretend that today, south ossetia became independent. if south ossetia and north ossetia decided to become one independent nation(republic of ossetia), what do you think should be the reaction of puttin and the public opinion of russia ?

-----------------------------

i believe that conflict wasnt an prelude of another cold war, but its very clear that is not the problem former soviet republics approach the west. is not a problem georgia or ukraine enter in european union. they are independent nations, they do what they want.

i think the problem is that europen union and the nato didnt approach enought to russia. if you straight relations with ukraine or georgia, you should also straight relations with russia, because is the strongest country in the region and the russian support and cooperation is very important.

and russia needs to overcome the past and also join the europen community, maybe not as part of european union yet, but take part and participate of eropean decisions and solutions. its very important to europe have russia as friend, also very important to russia, the european markets, the investments, because russia is growing their economy, to be the "next asian tiger".


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 13, 2008)

Well I think it was Georgian president who said that USA and NATO responded weakly, I think that the only way to respond was the way it was, if we don't want a major war and crisis in our hands.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 13, 2008)

stasoid said:


> Oh, here is an expert in Russia's-Georgian relations.
> And what were those objectives of the russian invasion?
> Had they been achieved or mother Russia's plan failed?



SoD Stitch, no offence here, but the Russian - Georgian relation issue as an every Kaukasus issue is indeed a very complex one and has a long history. Someone who wants to understand what's going on needs to get through a lot of reading. For example for my part I hesitate to make any radical statements on the US-Colombian or Salvadorian relations since my knowlege here is very limited. Let us dig a little bit deeper.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 13, 2008)

JugBR said:


> ramirezzz, what your opinion about hows gonna be the relationship between georgians and russians after conflict ?


I believe despite what's going on between our two countries Georgians remain a very close nation to the Russians, there about 1,5 million of Georgians in Russia and about 1 million in particulary Moscow. I have some very good friends in Georgia , they are all extremly warm and good people and I dont think our different opinions would spoil our relationship much. So for the much of Russians. 


> and do you think the politicians could reach the solution for the issue of s. ossetia ?


I believe Russia and EU will have a very hard time to convince Georgia in executing the cease-fire agreement in the proposed form. But the compromise is possible though. But it will take time.Both sides and some "third" parties are still very affected by the events of last four days.


> i have a feeling that the situation after conflict will remains the same or even worst. do you agree or disagree ?


well that depends from which point of view you see it. From Ossetian or Abkhazian that means a complete victory - I do not believe Georgia will try to retake these provinces in the nearest future. For Georgia that means a defeat and complete loss of any chance to regain control on those two regions and for Saakashvili himself it is a very personal loss because of his promises made some years ago .For Russia the outcome is rather mixed - they achieved all goals in the military operation, politically gained much prestige in the local Caukasus area. But the relationship to the US is hopeless damaged, if not destroyed , the relations between Russia and EU though aren't much affected.



> i saw in internet pics of russians protesting in moscow against the conflict.


I believe some Georgians in Moscow protested against the war. 95 % of Russians support the goverment's actions.


> do you believe in soviet times this could be possible ? russia is not soviet union.


no , it couldn't. in 1968 three or four dissidents tried to express their protest at the Red Square against the invasion in Czechoslovakia but were quickly arrested.



> ramirezzz, mitya, a question for you two:
> 
> lets pretend that today, south ossetia became independent. if south ossetia and north ossetia decided to become one independent nation(republic of ossetia), what do you think should be the reaction of puttin and the public opinion of russia ?


If North Ossetia will unite with the South Ossetia that means the South Ossetia is goingt to be a part of Russia  As for peoples opinion, the very latest public poll showed more than a half of Russians support the idea of integration of SO into the Russian Federation. But I honestly don't think the goverment will make any steps at this directon in the nearest future. 




> i think the problem is that europen union and the nato didnt approach enought to russia. if you straight relations with ukraine or georgia, you should also straight relations with russia, because is the strongest country in the region and the russian support and cooperation is very important.


the funniest thing is that Ukraine for the most part doesn't want to integrate itself to the Europe. Almost 60 percent of the Ukrainans are against NATO membership.


> and russia needs to overcome the past and also join the europen community, maybe not as part of european union yet, but take part and participate of eropean decisions and solutions.


they do it already for a long time. There're a lot of cooperative teamwork between EU and Russia on many issues.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 13, 2008)

good article in the Times Online

Georgia loses the fight with Russia, but manages to win the PR war - Times Online

I must admit I'm completely unsatisfied with the Russian PR policy in this war. They allowed Georgians to maintain the Russia's image as an agressor and opressor with the help of twisting and reversing the facts. Russian PR was much too slow. And the georgian president in contrast spent much more time making one statement after another for western medias. That's the thing Russia still should learn.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 13, 2008)

12 Ñ‡Ð°ÑÐ¾Ð² Ð´Ð¾ ÑÐ¼ÐµÑ€Ñ‚Ð¸ (Ð¤ÐžÐ¢Ðž, Ð’Ð˜Ð”Ð•Ðž) — "ÐœÐ¾ÑÐºÐ¾Ð²ÑÐºÐ¸Ð¹ ÐšÐ¾Ð¼ÑÐ¾Ð¼Ð¾Ð»ÐµÑ†"
for those who can read Russian - a journalist account of the first day close combat. Pretty much disorder around. Some videos are there as well .
some horrible scene here - Russia initially sent just a motorifle battalion against Georgian troops who already've captured Tshinvali. A single battalion with 32 APC and 2 tanks with only one combat rate (half of their ammuniton was mock) of against two or three Georgian regiments, Russians were repulsed with very severe casulties.
At the same time Saakashvili told the world about 150 russian tanks invading Ossetia.


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 13, 2008)

Ram, can't load the post


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 13, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> where is the contradiction? Nobody denies there were targets in "continental" Georgia being bombed by Russian planes.




Try the total annihilation part, Ramerezzz. That has not occurred. And russia isn't going to go there.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 13, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> SoD Stitch, no offence here, but the Russian - Georgian relation issue as an every Kaukasus issue is indeed a very complex one and has a long history. Someone who wants to understand what's going on needs to get through a lot of reading. For example for my part I hesitate to make any radical statements on the US-Colombian or Salvadorian relations since my knowlege here is very limited. Let us dig a little bit deeper.



Yeah SoD Stitch, you are not qualified nor capable of making intelligent posts about this ancient conflict.  I think I'm gonna leave this thread to you folks. The continued defensive posture by our russian members is disturbing. US posts made in a neutral fashion are quickly dismissed as irrelevant, based upon western propoganda, or are veiled support by state sponsored disinformation. Even US member posts in support of russian actions are met with disdain, mistrust, and suspect. I tire of the barriers that exist.

So as a moderator, I'll let you guys get back to your discussion. But I caution you, keep it civil. Later.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 13, 2008)

don't twist my words Matt. if you don't like my posts - then throw some facts into the fire. Or arguments. Or anything. But based on facts, not claims.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 13, 2008)

stasoid said:


> Oh, here is an expert in Russia's-Georgian relations.



And you are?

Just as you are entitled to state you opinions in posts, he is as well. Dont forget that...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 13, 2008)

Milos Sijacki said:


> Well I think it was Georgian president who said that USA and NATO responded weakly, I think that the only way to respond was the way it was, if we don't want a major war and crisis in our hands.



Dont back out of this. You said that the US and NATO responded in a weak manner, now back it up.


----------



## Erich (Aug 13, 2008)

did I read this right on some news thing this morn ? Bushy is sending aide to Georgia ?


----------



## SoD Stitch (Aug 13, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> And you are?
> 
> Just as you are entitled to state you opinions in posts, he is as well. Dont forget that...



Thanks, DA.

I don't pretend to be an expert, but I do pay attention to international news, particularly the BBC, which is usually impartial, and consider myself an "informed" listener reader; I certainly don't know everything about international relations (even though I do have a BA in International Relations from a California State University), but I do try and keep an open mind, and attempt to keep myself informed on world events. For what it's worth, I also subscribe to Foreign Affairs, so I am not completely uninformed on world events.

Matt - I normally respect you and your opinions and, the majority of the time, I actually agree with you. However, I think you might have been a little harsh this time; I don't normally insult members on this board, and I don't think you should start, either. You may be right, I may not be capable or qualified of making posts on this "ancient conflict", but please don't insult my intelligence again. Thank you.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 13, 2008)

SoD Stitch said:


> Matt - I normally respect you and your opinions and, the majority of the time, I actually agree with you. However, I think you might have been a little harsh this time; I don't normally insult members on this board, and I don't think you should start, either. You may be right, I may not be capable or qualified of making posts on this "ancient conflict", but please don't insult my intelligence again. Thank you.



Woh Woh hey slow down there. Go back and read his post. It was sarcasm. He was actually siding with you. That post was in response to what Ramirezzz said to you. Go back and read it again. 

It was like a "You should know better to post about this stuff, you are an ignorant American!"  That was it...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 13, 2008)

*US plans aid to Georgia as Russia rolls into city *

By CHRISTOPHER TORCHIA and MATTI FRIEDMAN, Associated Press Writer 
19 minutes ago



OUTSIDE GORI, Georgia - Russian troops and paramilitaries rolled into the strategic Georgian city of Gori on Wednesday, apparently violating a truce designed to end the conflict that has uprooted tens of thousands and scarred the Georgian landscape. 

ADVERTISEMENT

Email:
ZIP / Postal Code:




In Washington, President Bush said the United States planned a massive humanitarian effort involving American ships and aircraft, includiung a C-17 military cargo plane loaded with supplies that landed on Wednesday.

He said Russia must ensure that "all lines of communication and transport, including seaports, roads and airports," remain open to let deliveries and civilians through.

Georgian officials said Gori, a central hub on Georgia's main east-west highway, was looted and bombed by the Russians before they left later in the day and camped nearby.

Moscow denied the accusations, but it appeared to be on a technicality: a BBC reporter in Gori reported that Russians tanks were in the streets as their South Ossetian separatist allies seized Georgian cars, looted Georgian homes and then set some homes ablaze.

"Russia has treacherously broken its word," Georgia's Security Council chief Alexander Lomaia said Wednesday in Tbilisi, the capital.

An AP reporter saw dozens of trucks and armored vehicles leaving Gori, roaring southeast. Soldiers waved at journalists and one soldier jokingly shouted to a photographer: "Come with us, beauty, we're going to Tbilisi!"

But the convoy turned north and left the highway about an hour's drive from the Georgian capital, and set up camp a mile off the road. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said Russian troops were near Gori to secure weapons left behind by the Georgians.

To the west, Russian-backed Abkhazian separatists pushed Georgian troops out of Abkhazia and even moved into Georgian territory itself, defiantly planting a flag over the Inguri River and laughing that retreating Georgians had received "American training in running away."

The developments came less than 12 hours after Georgia's president said he accepted a cease-fire plan brokered by France. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said Tuesday that Russia was halting military action because Georgia had paid enough for its attack last Thursday on South Ossetia.

Bush said he was skeptical that Moscow was honoring the cease-fire.

"To begin to repair the damage to its relations with the United States, Europe and other nations and to begin restoring its place in the world, Russia must keep its word and act to end this crisis," Bush said.

The EU peace plan calls for both sides to retreat to the positions they held prior to the outbreak of fighting late Thursday. That phrasing apparently would allow Georgian forces to return to the positions they held in South Ossetia and Abkhazia and clearly obliges Russia to leave all parts of Georgia except South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

Georgia's President Mikhail Saakashvili criticized Western nations for failing to help Georgia, a U.S. ally that has been seeking NATO membership.

"I feel that they are partly to blame," he said Wednesday. "Not only those who commit atrocities are responsible ... but so are those who fail to react. In a way, Russians are fighting a proxy war with the West through us."

Russian at first denied that tanks were even in Gori but video footage proved otherwise.

About 50 Russian tanks entered Gori in the morning, according to Lomaia. The city of 50,000 lies 15 miles south of South Ossetia, where much of the fighting has taken place.

Some of the Russian units that later left to camp outside the city were camouflaged with foliage. The convoy was mainly support vehicles, including ambulances, although there were a few heavy cannons. There were about 100 combat troops and another 100 medics, drivers and other support personnel. 

About six miles away from the camp, about 80 well-equipped Georgian soldiers were forming what appeared to be a new frontline, armed with pistols, shoulder-launched anti-tank rockets and Kalashnikovs. 

Sporadic clashes continued in South Ossetia where Russians responded to Georgian snipers. 

Georgia borders the Black Sea between Turkey and Russia and was ruled by Moscow for most of the two centuries preceding the 1991 breakup of the Soviet Union. Russia has handed out passports to most in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, and stationed peacekeepers in both regions since the early 1990s. Georgia wants the Russian peacekeepers out, but Medvedev has insisted they stay. 

Russia's Lavrov lashed back after Bush's comments Wednesday, calling Georgia's leadership "a special project of the United States. And we understand that the United States is worried about its project." 

He was quoted by Russian news agencies as saying that at some point, the United States will have to choose: "either support for a virtual project, or real partnership on issues that really demand collective action," referring to U.S. cooperation with Russia in the U.N. Security Council on Iran and other world tension spots. 

Meanwhile, Georgia's security chief also said Russian forces targeted three Georgian Coast Guard boats in the Black Sea port of Poti, and Georgian television showed boats ablaze in the harbor. 

Bush expressed concern that Russian forces have entered and taken positions in Poti, that Russian armored vehicles are blocking access to that port, and that Russia is blowing up Georgian vessels. 

Lavrov denied that Russian troops were anywhere near the city. 

In the west, Georgian troops acknowledged Wednesday they had completely pulled out of a small section of Abkhazia they had controlled. 

"This is Abkhazian land," one separatist told an AP reporter over the Inguri River, saying they were laying claim to historical Abkhazian territory. 

The fighters had moved across a thin slice of land dotted with Georgian villages. 

"The border has been along this river for 1,000 years," separatist official Ruslan Kishmaria told the AP on Wednesday. He said Georgia would have to accept the new border. 

Nogovitsyn admitted Wednesday that Russian peacekeepers had disarmed Georgian troops in Kodori — the same peacekeepers that Georgia wants withdrawn. 

Abkhazia lies close to the heart of many Russians. Its Black Sea coast was a favorite vacation spot in Soviet times and the province is just down the coast from Sochi, the Russian resort that will host the 2014 Olympics. 

For several days, Russian troops held the western town of Zugdidi near Abkhazia, controlling the region's main highway. An AP reporter saw a convoy of 13 Russian tanks and armored personnel carriers in Zugdidi's outskirts Wednesday. Later in the day, Georgian officials said the Russians pulled out of Zugdidi. 

"They just don't want freedom, and that's why they want to stamp on Georgia and destroy it," he declared to thousands at a jam-packed square in Tbilisi. 

Leaders of five former Soviet bloc states — Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Ukraine — also appeared at the rally and spoke out against Russian domination. 

Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko issued a decree Wednesday saying that Russian navy ships deployed to the Georgian coast will need authorization to return to the navy base Russia leases from Ukraine. 

The World Food Program sent 34 tons of high-energy biscuits Wednesday help the tens of thousands uprooted by the fighting. 

Russia has accused Georgia of killing more than 2,000 people, mostly civilians, in South Ossetia. The claim couldn't be independently confirmed, but witnesses who fled the area over the weekend said hundreds had died. 

Georgia says at least 175 Georgians have died in Russian air and ground attacks. 

The Russia-Georgia dispute also reached the international courts, with the Georgian security council saying it had sued Russia for alleged ethnic cleansing. 

The rights group Human Rights Watch said Wednesday it has witnessed South Ossetian fighters looting ethnic Georgians' houses and has recorded multiple accounts of Georgian militias intimidating ethnic Ossetians. The report was important independent confirmation of the claims by each side in the Russia-Georgia conflict. 

At the Beijing Olympics, Georgian women rallied Wednesday to beat their Russian counterparts in beach volleyball, the first head-to-head clash of the two nations. 

"Russia and Georgia are actually friends. People are friends," said the Georgian beach volleyball team leader, Levan Akhtulediani. "But you know, it's not, in the 21st century, to bomb a neighbor country, it's not a good idea." 

"I say once again, its better to compete on the field rather than outside the field," he added. 
US plans aid to Georgia as Russia rolls into city - Yahoo! News


----------



## SoD Stitch (Aug 13, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Woh Woh hey slow down there. Go back and read his post. It was sarcasm. He was actually siding with you. That post was in response to what Ramirezzz said to you. Go back and read it again.
> 
> It was like a "You should know better to post about this stuff, you are an ignorant American!"  That was it...



Oops! Sry . . . . guess I took it a little too personally . . . . Boy, do I feel stupid!

I get it now. Very tongue in cheek, Matt; I like it. Sometimes I can't "read between the lines". I guess quotation marks or something would've been too obvious . . . . .


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 13, 2008)

SoD Stitch said:


> Matt - I normally respect you and your opinions and, the majority of the time, I actually agree with you. However, I think you might have been a little harsh this time; I don't normally insult members on this board, and I don't think you should start, either. You may be right, I may not be capable or qualified of making posts on this "ancient conflict", but please don't insult my intelligence again. Thank you.



SoD, I was being facetious (see rolling of eyes). I was interpreting Ramirezzz' words. Even Ramerezzz got it. He insulted you. I was coming to your defense dummy. And that was the final straw. Your post has just further confirmed why I must stay out of this. I'm not gonna lose forum member friends over this stupid thread.

Enjoy.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 13, 2008)

Just now saw your reply, SoD. Hakuna Matada. I wouldn't have responded if I had saw it.


----------



## Torch (Aug 13, 2008)

Well it looks like Russia continues to twist the knife,so be it. Can you imagine if Russia plays nice with the west how far they would get?. Instead of invading they could of worked this a different way and could of been a diamond in the eye of the world. I can't believe that any country does not think that Russia is powerful to begin with. Yes they had a rough start to a "democracy" but how much cash was thrown at Russia to help it's "democracy" grow. I think Putin thinks he's another Stalin in the making. So Putin thinks Russia is powerful, so whats he afraid of a missle defense system which would be monitored by them. If your so powerful why are you afraid of the Ukraine? Poland?they will give you a tough fight. Russia is in a position to make a ton of money, why would you invade Georgia with such a vengence and have everybody look at you and say woohoo you invaded a poor country with overwhelming forces. I don't get it. Russia can have the world at their finger tips and everybody could play nice. Oh well history in the making.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 14, 2008)

Torch said:


> Well it looks like Russia continues to twist the knife,so be it. Can you imagine if Russia plays nice with the west how far they would get?. Instead of invading they could of worked this a different way and could of been a diamond in the eye of the world. I can't believe that any country does not think that Russia is powerful to begin with. Yes they had a rough start to a "democracy" but how much cash was thrown at Russia to help it's "democracy" grow. I think Putin thinks he's another Stalin in the making. So Putin thinks Russia is powerful, so whats he afraid of a missle defense system which would be monitored by them. If your so powerful why are you afraid of the Ukraine? Poland?they will give you a tough fight. Russia is in a position to make a ton of money, why would you invade Georgia with such a vengence and have everybody look at you and say woohoo you invaded a poor country with overwhelming forces. I don't get it. Russia can have the world at their finger tips and everybody could play nice. Oh well history in the making.



torch, you can throw all the cash in the world but if the country havent an eficient leadership it is useless.

i believe russia improved a lot with putin, the cash throw in russia would be a investment in a huge market, since russia dont go back to economic crisis and supernatural inflation like in yeltsin times. 

putin is a very controversial stateman, but as a president, i think he silently make russia improves their economy and also he is fighting against russian mafia.

i believe his background as kgb officer should make an image of discipline, but the real deal is that he is not comunist, he is a right wing russian nationalist. so, he dont wanna ussr go back or recover the lost republics(russia still the major land in the world, and full of natural resources), he wants to defend russia. 

besides all his controversial biography, very know by many people here in west. i think he is the right man in the right time, because russia needs a iron fist to combat the internal problems and keep the nation united.

my opinion is about what i read from russia last years in western and russian media. and i think for the worldwide investitors, russia is more attractive now than yealtsin times.

do you remember ? clinton era ? yeltisin drink some galons of vodka and said he wanted to bomb usa with nukes ? remember the reaction of clinton ? almost laughting so terrible drunk was yeltsin...

im for putin, im a "putinist"


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 14, 2008)

Erich said:


> did I read this right on some news thing this morn ? Bushy is sending aide to Georgia ?



humanitarian aide, C-17s've already landed yesterday in Tbilisi


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 14, 2008)

SoD Stitch said:


> Oops! Sry . . . . guess I took it a little too personally . . . . Boy, do I feel stupid!
> 
> I get it now. Very tongue in cheek, Matt; I like it. Sometimes I can't "read between the lines". I guess quotation marks or something would've been too obvious . . . . .



Ok SoD Stitch sorry if you've misunderstood me but I never insulted you and never intended to do so. What I want to say is that this (indeed ancient) conflict has very deep roots just as every caucasian conflict. To understand what's going on there we must have a whole retrospective picture and not base our opinion on some hasty comments from some "experts" . That was my idea. No offence here indeed.


----------



## javlin (Aug 14, 2008)

The declaration from Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov came simultaneously with the announcement that Russian President Dmitry Medvedev was meeting in the Kremlin with the leaders of Georgia's two separatist provinces.

"One can forget about any talk about Georgia's territorial integrity because, I believe, it is impossible to persuade South Ossetia and Abkhazia to agree with the logic that they can be forced back into the Georgian state," Lavrov told reporters.

FOXNews.com - Georgia: Explosions Heard in Gori as Russian Forces Enter - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News

Sounds like Good Ole Russia ready to go the rest of the way and take over Georgia probably and put in a puppet guberment.Cease fire is quite shakey and with comments buy Russian leaders like that to the press only leads one to believe they want control.Didn't BP sink a ton of money in Russia and pipline infrastucture only to be told "it's ours now get out"this happened in the last 12 months I think?


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 14, 2008)

javlin said:


> "One can forget about any talk about Georgia's territorial integrity because, I believe, it is impossible to persuade South Ossetia and Abkhazia to agree with the logic that they can be forced back into the Georgian state," Lavrov told reporters.
> Sounds like Good Ole Russia ready to go the rest of the way and take over Georgia probably


so why they stopped their actions in Georgia when they could relatevely easy take Tbilisi?


----------



## javlin (Aug 14, 2008)

The strategically located city is 15 miles south of South Ossetia, the separatist region where Russian and Georgian forces fought a brutal five-day battle. Russian troops entered Gori on Wednesday, after the two sides signed the cease-fire that called for their forces to pull back to the positions they held before the fighting started.

Georgia early Thursday said the Russians were leaving the city, but later alleged they were bringing in additional troops. Georgian government officials who had gone into the city for a possible handover left unexpectedly around midday, followed by a confrontation at a Russian checkpoint on Gori's outskirts that ended when Russian tanks sped toward the area and Georgian police forces retreated
FOXNews.com - Georgia: Explosions Heard in Gori as Russian Forces Enter - International News | News of the World | Middle East News | Europe News

Article makes it sound like Russia continued to move in troops under cease-fire then you here a statement like that.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 14, 2008)

javlin said:


> Georgia early Thursday said the Russians were leaving the city, but later alleged they were bringing in additional troops. Georgian government officials who had gone into the city for a possible handover left unexpectedly around midday, followed by a confrontation at a Russian checkpoint on Gori's outskirts that ended when Russian tanks sped toward the area and Georgian police forces retreated
> 
> 
> Article makes it sound like Russia continued to move in troops under cease-fire then you here a statement like that.



a Georgian statement, you mean. Georgians told three or four times that Gori was captured by the Russians .  During the whole war the CNN has supported every Georgian claim without any confirmation. 
Russians actually never entered that city before cease-fire was signed. They advanced some 12 kilometers away and stopped there. Later they destroyed the ammunition stockpile at the abandoned Georgian military base and searched for any city autorities to negotiate, what was later confirmed even by Georgians, but never by the CNN. At the same time Saakasvhili told us the horrifying stories about the russian tanks encircling Tbilisi. 
CNN and Georgia told us about russian troops in Cenaki and Poti, but even local bloggers didn't confirm that information.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 14, 2008)

Georgia: Russian tanks in Gori to help withdrawal - CNN.com

now look, even the CNN has denied that


----------



## Pisis (Aug 14, 2008)

1968 Czechoslovakia - 2008 Georgia.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 14, 2008)

Pisis said:


> 1968 Czechoslovakia - 2008 Georgia.


I don't see it the same way - the 1968 invasion was a blatant aggression by the Soviet Union to keep one of its satellites in place. Czechosloviakia did nothing but bring on reforms that probably would of seen her leave the iron curtain.

Georgia acted first in this incident and that's been confirmed by all sides. It was just plain dumb to roll troops into South Ossetia and think Russia wasn't going to do anything about it.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 14, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> Ok SoD Stitch sorry if you've misunderstood me but I never insulted you and never intended to do so. What I want to say is that this (indeed ancient) conflict has very deep roots just as every caucasian conflict. To understand what's going on there we must have a whole retrospective picture and not base our opinion on some hasty comments from some "experts" . That was my idea. No offence here indeed.




Dont you base your opinion on so called "experts" as well?

I mean I think the only people that can a true perspective on what is going on, are those that are there.


----------



## Mitya (Aug 14, 2008)

This bloody massacre was conceived not by Russia, and not Georgia. She was conceived in the White House by the USA. Also it is not necessary to me to tell about democracy now. In 1999 NATOs (USA) bombed Yugoslavia. Bombed Belgrade, which in several hundreds kilometers from Kosovo. Bombed peace inhabitants. Though one somebody has told something against? No. The same establishment of democracy! Aha. Now. Russia warned, than unilateral acceptance of independence of Kosovo can end? Warned. Also receive now, that have made. You (West) have created dangerous precedent from Kosovo. There there were no citizens the USA. Simply Americans have decided to distract from internal scandals (Clinton and Monica) by destruction of Serbs. Georgia is necessary for America? Yes. As a platform for rockets and air bases. Now their purpose - Iran. Who can remind you owns southern Caspian sea? First Georgia, Ossetia, Abkhazia... So you and up to Murmansk will reach. Who pushed Georgia to war? The USA armed and trained its army almost 10 years. For what? For democracy? A horse-radish about two! As you has told Condomlisa Rise: Russia has too big stocks of resources in comparison with other countries. It is not fair. We correct this position. All your democracy. The USA it is possible to bomb Yugoslavia, it is possible for England бесчинствовть in Iraq. And Russia for protection of the citizens that it is impossible? And from what it? The west plays under double standards? Plays. Also receive now. To you it is fashionable. And too it is possible for us. Also what you will make? From G8 expel? In WTO do not let? Yes to us poh. Putin has told: Georgia will answer that she has killed the Russian peacemakers and Russifn citizens. *Putin tells - Putin has made*. To the Kremlin now on хер, that yours Кондомлиза and George mutter in Washington. In South Ossetia and Abkhazia there were some referenda. On which people has told, that does not want to be a part of Georgia. Why his opinion is not taken into account? Why the primordial ground of Serbs is taken away by Americans and given Albanians? That is why? And how Russia protects the citizens then bark?
Now about mass-media. Why CNN and the BBC deform the information? It refers to democracy? A freedom of speech? I have an opportunity both CNN, and BBC to look. Also that I see. The USA (South Ossetia) shows the staff destroyed Tchinval and gives out their that for Georgian Potu, Gori... It is democracy in operation?
*The prime minister of Russia Vladimir Putin has accused the USA of cynicism and unwillingness to reach peace settlement in a zone of the conflict.* " It is a pity, that some our partners do not help us, and try to prevent. I have in a kind and take the United States of America by the military - transport planes of a military contingent of Georgia from Iraq actually in a zone of the conflict ", - Putin at presidium of the government has declared. As he said, it " movement in the return side from settlement of a situation ".
" Surprises not cynicism of such politics, surprises scale of this cynicism. Surprises skill to give out white for black, black for white, skill dexterously to expose an aggressor as victims of aggression., as is known, that he has destroyed a little villages, it was necessary to hang up Saddam Husejna, certainly. And present Georgian governors who suddenly have simply wiped out 10 ossetic villages which tanks pressed children and old men who alive in sheds burnt peace citizens - these figures, certainly, need to be taken under protection " - Putin has declared.
However CNN for some reason cut out this moment: " *And present Georgian governors who suddenly have simply wiped out 10 ossetic villages which tanks pressed children and old men who alive in sheds burnt peace citizens - these figures, certainly, it is necessary to take under protection* ".
*It is objectivity of illumination by free press? *
Georgia has disconnected for the citizens the domain *.ru, the Russian telechannels. All have kept silent. If Russia has made too most would rise such say about defence freedom of speech. Tell still what not so.
Tell, than SuckAshvili differs from Milosevic, and Ossets and Abhazs - from Kosovan Albanians?
Why Serbia could be forced to the world with Albans by bombardments, and Georgia to force by bombardments to the world with Ossetia - it is impossible?


----------



## Mitya (Aug 14, 2008)

Certificates from our rescuer:
" Our person from Ossetia Has returned. A muzzle green, though behind back Афган, the Chechen Republic two times.. Has drained in a bubble wiski and has remained sober.
About that there:
Such did not see. Abstracting from any nationalist definitions. That speak on a box and show are at all half... There Were to Tskhinvali mercenaries. Any creatures on pairs. Created something unimaginable.
Small children have jumped out to machines. Have allured them, have collected... Also have started to cut. Mothers have jumped out, have rushed. Him in a mouth began to thrust children's fragments of bodies and internal bodies. Than muzhiks and boys is more senior brought down without analysis. The others. Women, old men, children have tired outin Church and fire. At attempt to jump out shot. Forced young women..., and then cut on pieces. Alive.
Were knocked on cellars. Ossetic know many. People opened. At the best simply shot or stopped to a pomegranate. Children cut children on eyes at mothers. Mothers cut on eyes at children and old men. That muzhiks could not be entered, raked him or have cut off hands... 
Gorgian peacemakers of ours on posts cut and finished Wounded, at a withdrawal from Tchinval, even prior to the beginning of bombardment.
It is a lot of still that.
The version, that one of overall objectives - was a task to destroy population S-O, proves to be true. 
How all this will be used - nobody knows. Our losses are exact while nobody knows. Many simply yet have not found. Whether at rodents sit, whether... still understand. But from those who was on remote posts and from those who was on base in Tchinval a little who has remained. While confusion. Who in hospitals, who... Therefore figures are not present.
In forces of including losses it is not enough.
As it cynically would not sound, militarians will understand. Much below expected.
Civil... Them while too count. How many under blockages? How have already buried? Rodents how many have stolen? It is a lot of questions. Answers are not present. But the sounded figure 2000 raises the doubts. 
The resume. All resulted in stories on TV, etc. the truth. Much still should be learned. And something we learn hardly.
Such affairs.
And still. Now works go on clearing of corpses of city. Because already position critical. Especially do not understand at all. Bury all together.
Here about coffins spoke... Do not wait for them. Whom family have identified, it yes. And so... A canvas and bleaching powder.
On war as on war. "
Who in it is guilty? Russia? The USA how many irrevocable credits for an establishment of such "democracy" have allocated? And? One more war on Caucas is not necessary for Russia. Simply someone in the White house has decided to check up us on порчность. Also have received. But yet all.
At you in the West people for which it is absolutely not important that has taken place with our country for last 15 years sit. To them the communism is unimportant, or for any amendment. By It any changes or curtseys are unimportant. To them you will not explain, that the country another. At them in a head plays body - Russia should be killed. All your songs about that you kind and fluffy all this appeared lie. The situation around of South Ossetia has shown the valid person of the West concerning Russia.
Know as operation of the Georgian army in Ossetia referred to? " The pure field ". And who now will answer for a genocide the osset? Yes who! Europe will keep silent in cloth, the USA the international laws and rules at all do not concern. If benefit is, cries at once begin: the United Nations! WTO! G8!... 
And SuckAshvili too dandy. Addresses to the nation. To the nation as the president in English! You can To present to yourselves, what Bush has addressed to Americans in Spanish, for example? It how in general to name? To me on mind it comes only, that beforehand Planned the action directed on the western televiewer. I do not find other explanations.
I shall finish A.S. Pushkin's by verses (I shall not translate. For I can not. Read in Russian. So all Clearly):

*КЛЕВЕТНИКАМ РОССИИ*

О чем шумите вы, народные витии?
Зачем анафемой грозите вы России?
Что возмутило вас? *волнения Литвы*?
Оставьте: это спор славян между собою,
Домашний, старый спор, уж взвешенный судьбою,
Вопрос, которого не разрешите вы.

Уже давно между собою
Враждуют эти племена;
Не раз клонилась под грозою
То их, то наша сторона.
Кто устоит в неравном споре:
*Кичливый лях, иль верный росс?
Славянские ль ручьи сольются в русском море?
Оно ль иссякнет? вот вопрос.*

Оставьте нас: вы не читали
Сии кровавые скрижали;
Вам непонятна, вам чужда
Сия семейная вражда;
*Для вас безмолвны Кремль* и Прага;
Бессмысленно прельщает вас
Борьбы отчаянной отвага -
И ненавидите вы нас...

За что ж? ответствуйте: за то ли,
Что на развалинах пылающей Москвы
*Мы не признали наглой воли
Того, под кем дрожали вы?*
За то ль, что в бездну повалили
Мы тяготеющий над царствами кумир
И нашей кровью искупили
Европы вольность, честь и мир?..

*Вы грозны на словах - попробуйте на деле!
Иль старый богатырь, покойный на постеле,
Не в силах завинтить свой измаильский штык?
Иль русского царя уже бессильно слово?*

*Иль нам с Европой спорить ново?
Иль русский от побед отвык?*
Иль мало нас? Или от Перми до Тавриды,
От финских хладных скал до пламенной Колхиды,
*От потрясенного Кремля
До стен недвижного Китая,
Стальной щетиною сверкая,
Не встанет русская земля?*..
Так высылайте ж нам, витии,
Своих озлобленных сынов:
Есть место им в полях России,
Среди нечуждых им гробов.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 14, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Dont you base your opinion on so called "experts" as well?


I would say no, or at least not to 100 percent. There's a lot of decent literature regarding the Russ-Georgian relations available in Russian language ,and I'm looking now for some good English stuff.
As for actual development of the situation in Georgia, I must admit nobody has a complete picture, neither in Georgia nor in Russia.
The problem is we don't have any objective coverage from a third party. All information is gained either from russian or from georgian sources. 



> I mean I think the only people that can a true perspective on what is going on, are those that are there.


yes and actually some of them are my information sources as well, on both sides.


----------



## Juha (Aug 14, 2008)

So that this will not come wholy Russian show, some links on what some Western journalist have seen around Gori:
Amid promise of peace, Georgians live in terror | World news | The Guardian
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4525573.ece
Arms drawn in tense Georgian stand-off - Times Online
Georgia: Refugees flee after Russian military breaches ceasefire - Times Online

Juha


----------



## Mitya (Aug 14, 2008)

And to you a photo not from Georgia, and from South Ossetia.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 14, 2008)

Mitya said:


> This bloody massacre was conceived not by Russia, and not Georgia. She was conceived in the White House by the USA.



     

I honestly can not think of anything else to write. Oh well you are entitled to you opinion. That is all it is, since it is nothing more than an obsurd claim.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 14, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> I would say no, or at least not to 100 percent. There's a lot of decent literature regarding the Russ-Georgian relations available in Russian language ,and I'm looking now for some good English stuff.
> As for actual development of the situation in Georgia, I must admit nobody has a complete picture, neither in Georgia nor in Russia.
> The problem is we don't have any objective coverage from a third party. All information is gained either from russian or from georgian sources.
> 
> ...



You see that is the funny thing.

When someone from the West (particularly from the US) uses the same arguement you are using when it pertains to the US, you all quickly dismiss it and say that it is either biased.

If a member of this forum says they were there (lets use Iraq for example), they are told that is not good eneogh and what they are saying can not be believed.

Lets be honest here...


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 14, 2008)

FLYBOYJ said:


> I don't see it the same way - the 1968 invasion was a blatant aggression by the Soviet Union to keep one of its satellites in place. Czechosloviakia did nothing but bring on reforms that probably would of seen her leave the iron curtain.
> 
> Georgia acted first in this incident and that's been confirmed by all sides. It was just plain dumb to roll troops into South Ossetia and think Russia wasn't going to do anything about it.



Flyboy, I couldn't agree with you more. Two completely different scenarios.


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 14, 2008)

Gruesome photos. The faces of war.


----------



## Erich (Aug 14, 2008)

of all wars Milos, Viet Nam, the mid-east in it's many facets, Sudan, everywhere

people and usually the innocents ............ DIE 

there is never anyway of getting around it


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 14, 2008)

Mitya said:


> This bloody massacre was conceived not by Russia, and not Georgia. She was conceived in the White House by the USA.


You know Mitya, up to now I could agree with a lot of your points but that statement is flat out ignorant to the point where If I start seeing more absurd bullshit like that posted here, not only will I close this thread but I will ban people as well - I'm only saying this once.

And no - the CIA is not making me do this!


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 14, 2008)

Dima, very touching pictures, but thanks for posting anyway. War is hell.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 14, 2008)

Erich said:


> of all wars Milos, Viet Nam, the mid-east in it's many facets, Sudan, everywhere
> 
> people and usually the innocents ............ DIE
> 
> there is never anyway of getting around it



Agreed.

I could post pics here that would make people puke for the next 2 hours.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 14, 2008)

FLYBOYJ said:


> You know Mitya, up to now I could agree with a lot of your points but that statement is flat out ignorant to the point where If I start seeing more absurd bullshit like that posted here, not only will I close this thread but I will ban people as well - I'm only saying this once.
> 
> And no - the CIA is not making me do this!




well I must say to our American members not all Russians share Mitya's point of view. Even if USA has clearly supported Georgian goverment since quite a long time, they warned him many times not to escalate the situation in South Ossetia. It was solely Saakashvili decision.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 14, 2008)

FLYBOYJ said:


> You know Mitya, up to now I could agree with a lot of your points but that statement is flat out ignorant to the point where



Agreed.

When people make statements like that, they lose a lot of their credibility in my eyes.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 14, 2008)

Well I must say to our American members that not all Russians share Mitya's point of view. Even the USA has clearly supported the Georgian goverment since quite a long time the invasion in South Ossetia was solely Saakashvilis decision. In fact they warned him about the possible consequences.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 14, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> Well I must say to our American members that not all Russians share Mitya's point of view. Even the USA has clearly supported the Georgian goverment since quite a long time the invasion in South Ossetia was solely Saakashvilis decision. In fact they warned him about the possible consequences.


Point taken and thank you!


----------



## timshatz (Aug 14, 2008)

About the pics.

It looks like the jeep type vehicle with the body next to it is the same vehicle that is burned out in later pictures. 

Just an observation.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 14, 2008)

timshatz said:


> About the pics.
> 
> It looks like the jeep type vehicle with the body next to it is the same vehicle that is burned out in later pictures.
> 
> Just an observation.



yes it's clearly the same scene. Looks like a burned out UAZ vehicle .


----------



## Mitya (Aug 14, 2008)

Situation on Caucas in the picture


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 14, 2008)

some kind of provocative pictures here.  Gents, lets keep this tread civilized.


----------



## Pisis (Aug 14, 2008)

FLYBOYJ said:


> I don't see it the same way - the 1968 invasion was a blatant aggression by the Soviet Union to keep one of its satellites in place. Czechosloviakia did nothing but bring on reforms that probably would of seen her leave the iron curtain.
> 
> Georgia acted first in this incident and that's been confirmed by all sides. It was just plain dumb to roll troops into South Ossetia and think Russia wasn't going to do anything about it.



I don't agree. Maybe the acts are not the same but very similar, especially as seen from Central European perspective. 

The Soviet invasion to Czechoslovakia in August 21st 1968 was a very clear message, as well as this is a clear message. The Russians are looking for every occasion to expand their area of influence...

As well as in 1968, where the excuse was "fighting the Contra-Revolution", in 2008 they say they need to "defend Russian civilians" (to wit holder of passports of the Russian Federation). Nothing about that - I agrre - if this would be only honest. It is quite obvious that this is an inderict reacton to Kosovo and US radar base in the Czech Republic and Poland. 

The Gerogians were just trying to keep order in their sovereign territory = South Osetia and it's not Russia's business.

I'm very neutral in this conflict, becauee none of the sides have the right to act as they had acted but I'm quite sceptic to Russia. The 40th anniversary of ocuppation of my country is coming (21st Aug) and it is still alive here...


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 14, 2008)

Pisis said:


> I don't agree. Maybe the acts are not the same but very similar, especially as seen from Central European perspective.
> 
> The Soviet invasion to Czechoslovakia in August 21st 1968 was a very clear message, as well as this is a clear message. The Russians are looking for every occasion to expand their area of influence...
> 
> ...


Sorry Pisis - I remember the 1968 invasion vividly - Alexander Dubcek was a reformer and everything that was going on was done with out any violence until the Soviet Union rolled tanks into Czechoslovakia. I have some of my L-29 friends who were there and to this day they absolutely hate Russians. In South Ossetia we could argue and debut who was in the right and where the people of the region really should of been representative, but what threw everything off was Georgia's initial actions.

I agree, the whole thing could of and should of been handled different. Had the Georgian President sought a peaceful solution and then been invaded, we would not be having this conversation.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 14, 2008)

...


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 14, 2008)

I think the main problem is that the Western world looks at this conflict from global , and not from local Caucasian point of view. I believe if there were some attempts to spread the message across the Europe that was only a secondary if not a third intention of the Russian actions there. 
The primary geopolitical goal was to save the still existing Russian influence in that region. If Saaakashvili had succeed with establishing control of the South Ossetia the whole Caucasus (even the Russian provinces) would probably see Russia as a weak player and as a betrayer of their allies there. That would lead to some catastrophic consequences for the Russian politics in that region.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 14, 2008)

Mitya said:


> Situation on Caucas in the picture



You were warned by FlyboyJ to quit with these kind of postings and stick to the topic. Even Ramierezzz has told you to be civil.

Since you can not do so, you have recieved an infraction. You will only recieve one from me, next time you are gone...


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 14, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> I think the main problem is that the Western world looks at this conflict from global , and not from local Caucasian point of view.



I think that sums it up perfectly!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 14, 2008)

JugBR said:


> if you disagree of mitya, would you explain what george w bush is doing there ?



His posts was ignorant, nothing else. Mitya does not wish to discuss this in a civil manner. He has an adgenda and does not wish to discuss facts.

He wishes to make ignorant accusations and not back them up.

I have no problem with other peoples opinions, but lets keep them civil.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 14, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> I think the main problem is that the Western world looks at this conflict from global , and not from local Caucasian point of view.



I can see that, and I think that is what happens with most conflicts.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 14, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> I think the main problem is that the Western world looks at this conflict from global , and not from local Caucasian point of view. I believe if there were some attempts to spread the message across the Europe that was only a secondary if not a third intention of the Russian actions there.
> The primary geopolitical goal was to save the still existing Russian influence in that region. If Saaakashvili had succeed with regaining control of the South Ossetia the whole Caucasus (even the Russian provinces) would probably see Russia as a weak player and as a betrayer of their allies there. That would lead to some catastrophic consequences for the Russian politics in that region.



i could be wrong(not new stuff), but russia should end quickly the conflict besides georgian provocations. i believe if georgian president didnt surrended until now, the best thing is sign an cease-fire. even taking the risk that georgia again brokes the cease-fire, but the best is avoid more casualties and put the Saaakashvili on a negotiations table face to face with putin.

but i could be wrong, wich is nothing new...


----------



## Pisis (Aug 14, 2008)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Sorry Pisis - I remember the 1968 invasion vividly - Alexander Dubcek was a reformer and everything that was going on was done with out any violence until the Soviet Union rolled tanks into Czechoslovakia. I have some of my L-29 friends who were there and to this day they absolutely hate Russians. In South Ossetia we could argue and debut who was in the right and where the people of the region really should of been representative, but what threw everything off was Georgia's initial actions.
> 
> I agree, the whole thing could of and should of been handled different. Had the Georgian President sought a peaceful solution and then been invaded, we would not be having this conversation.


Well, Czechoslovakia's initial actions back in 1968 were, as you write, just peaceful reforms, and it led to occupation anyway. 

I think the Georgian units were only trying to keep order in what from their perspective is their territory. I just can't help myself but I perceive the Russian behavior as an agression and a tendency to dictate their own rules in the region, and hence I see it as an interference.

I just don't think that the Russian practics have changed so much since the Cold War... Putin is a great sample of that.


----------



## timshatz (Aug 14, 2008)

Pisis said:


> Well, Czechoslovakia's initial actions back in 1968 were just these reforms. I think Gergian units were just trying to keep order in what from their perspective is theirs. I just can't help myself but I perceive the Russian behavior as an agression and a tendency to dictate their own rules in the region.



Nothing to apologize for. Idealism increases with distance. You've lived under an occupation, we haven't (well, at least most of us). Such an event tends to give you perspective we don't have (and hopefully never will).


----------



## comiso90 (Aug 14, 2008)

* Ukraine vows to implement orders on Russia fleet*

IEV (Reuters) - Pro-Western Ukraine vowed on Thursday to make Russia seek official permission for movements of its warships based in the ex-Soviet state despite Moscow's objections, placing the neighbors on a collision course.
ADVERTISEMENT

Russia's Black Sea Fleet is based on Ukraine's Crimea peninsula under an agreement signed by the two ex-Soviet states. Kiev's jurisdiction over the area remains a highly sensitive issue among Russian nationalists and in the peninsula dominated by ethnic Russians.

Ukraine's plans for tougher rules on Russian naval moves, announced by President Viktor Yushchenko on Wednesday, are the latest affront to Moscow after Kiev's sharp criticism of its military incursion into Georgia in support of breakaway regions South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

Tension between the two states had already been simmering due to Moscow's opposition to Kiev's efforts to join NATO, and past disputes over gas prices and property.

On Thursday, Georgian Chief of Staff Serhiy Kirichenko said Yushchenko's decree would be carried out, no matter what.

"There is a presidential decree and it will, naturally, be implemented," Interfax Ukraine quoted him as saying. "I guarantee that we will do everything to ensure the president's decree is carried out."

Ukraine vows to implement orders on Russia fleet - Yahoo! News

.


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 14, 2008)

On the news I heard that SO and Abkhazia want full independence and that they won't accept any other deal


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 14, 2008)

Pisis said:


> Well, Czechoslovakia's initial actions back in 1968 were, as you write, just peaceful reforms, and it led to occupation anyway.
> 
> I think the Georgian units were only trying to keep order in what from their perspective is their territory. I just can't help myself but I perceive the Russian behavior as an agression and a tendency to dictate their own rules in the region, and hence I see it as an interference.
> 
> I just don't think that the Russian practics have changed so much since the Cold War... Putin is a great sample of that.


And based on conversations with the Czechs I've dealt with I could totally understand that position.


----------



## javlin (Aug 14, 2008)

I agree with Pisis for the most part and the statements by Bush this morning after I am sure hours of intelligence debriefs stated,Russia needs to obey the rules of the ceasefire and acknowledge the boundries,(a close parphrase)that says something in itself.


----------



## Pisis (Aug 14, 2008)

timshatz said:


> Nothing to apologize for. Idealism increases with distance. You've lived under an occupation, we haven't (well, at least most of us). Such an event tends to give you perspective we don't have (and hopefully never will).





FLYBOYJ said:


> And based on conversations with the Czechs I've dealt with I could totally understand that position.


Now the second thing is what kind of personality Skakashvilli is and what his regime tries to do... And the third thing is that from the Russian point of view, this is not interference but international help. The biggest problem comes when both sides are convinced they are right and they have a priveleged right to act so.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 14, 2008)

.....


----------



## JugBR (Aug 14, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> You were warned by FlyboyJ to quit with these kind of postings and stick to the topic. Even Ramierezzz has told you to be civil.
> 
> Since you can not do so, you have recieved an infraction. You will only recieve one from me, next time you are gone...



wait a minute, does that guy really looks like w. bush or the image was phtoshoped ?

i tought was a coincidence he was very looks like bush, but now i see the post of mitya was edited... i dont know if was photoshoped

anyway ill edit my post too


----------



## Kruska (Aug 15, 2008)

I am not an expert on Russian/Slavic race and history into minor detail, but to compare the Czechoslovak crisis with Georgia is IMO completely beside the point.

Georgia is a breakaway province of Russia which it has possessed and ruled for 200/300? years. Czechoslovakia has never been part of Russia, but has been a sovereign state for many centuries - with interruptions.

Russia was in a state of no choice in the 1990’s, and I do have a certain degree of sympathy with Russia’s plight in that period. Such as Germany who had no say neither in 1918 nor in 1945 in regards to having to give up huge parts of its territory.

The West was still in the Cold War mentality and too busy trying to cut down the USSR by acknowledging one separation move after another. Now that Russia is regaining its strength and willpower to act independently or even opposing US global political views, those former Russian republics have all reasons to fear the non tolerance attitude, for previous enforced separation from Russia. 

Maybe now after 15 years of neglect, the US and NATO finally realizes that the danger of war arises from these hastily acknowledged separatist movements resulting in dozens of new countries bordering Russia and not China as pointed out by the US until today.
Instead of constantly infuriating Russia by a continuous expansion of NATO beyond former independent Nations as of before 1939, NATO needs to negotiate together with Russia in regards to these Separatist countries and ensure Russia that NATO has no intention to meddle around along Russia’s borders, but on the other hand will not tolerate a military move by Russia into these “new” countries. 

However if NATO continues to meddle along Russia’s borders, I would not be surprised to see Russia react by military force in order to be one step ahead –see the Georgia – NATO case. 

A further aggravation of the Bear in regards to the Ukraine will result in the same situation, and I do not believe at all that NATO or the US will risk a war in order to safeguard any of these new countries that have become illusionist about their safety in regards to NATO or US interventions and as such miss out the chance to diplomatically and not arrogantly (Ukraine and the Russian navy case) resolve disputes with Russia. 

Regards
Kruska


----------



## JugBR (Aug 15, 2008)

should somebody could comment the technical aspects of this conflict ?

i readed that one of the russian planes that georgians had hits, was a TU 22M. isnt that plane too old ? developed from the early 70´s... for a comparative example, wouldnt be the same as w. bush and rumsfeld decided strikes iraq with thunderchiefs and phantons ? 

otherwise, should the tu-22m a great plane and the failure was to ensure a total air superiority to use him as recognition plane ? or that was a role that tu-22m wasnt able to play, since it is know as nuclear bomber and not recognition plane.






ucranian tu-22m

considering the lack of fighters in georgian airforce, i heard about some "conspiracy theories" inside russia press, to justificate the loss of russian planes. according to these theories, ucranians should been helping georgia with anti-aircraft high-altitude missile systems.

also is suposed that there was killed a su-25 and a mig-29, but the numbers that georgian and russians gave are totally conflitant. georgia says they killed 30 russian planes, instead russia just report 4 losses.

one of the russian missions outside ossetia, in tbilisi, was destroy the georgian radar system to ensure air superiority over battlefield.






also, in the ground, acording to the pictures and the stories, the t-72 has proved again be a very weak armoured thank according the specialists. theres images of many t-72 with reactive armor destroyed, claims that rpg´s destroyed some of those. also, like the t-72, seems like all the georgian army veichles are obsolete russians. wich increased the advantage of russian army even more in battlefield.


----------



## Kruska (Aug 15, 2008)

Hello JugBR,

I don’t quite get the meaning of your statement or question from your post. IMO both, Russia and Georgia mainly possess outdated military hardware. Since they do not have much of anything else what should they use?

I can’t see the picture, but those Russian made tanks were most certainly knocked out with guided missiles or through head on head firing from tank to tank. and conventional ATmines.

Regards
Kruska


----------



## JugBR (Aug 15, 2008)

Kruska said:


> Hello JugBR,
> 
> I don’t quite get the meaning of your statement or question from your post. IMO both, Russia and Georgia mainly possess outdated military hardware. Since they do not have much of anything else what should they use?
> 
> ...



the main idea was just to talk about the weapons used in conflict. i think we are not talking about that too much. and its a very important point.

the georgians have outdated hardware specially the old and very unsafe t-72´s and the mtlb´s, but the russians have a lot of diferent kinds of weapons, some outdated others very moderns, like the su-35´s or the newers t-90´s, those have the latest in warfare technology. 

was the russian knowloge of t-72 weakness, a really decisive point for russians takes very quickly the south ossetia capitol and also defeat the georgians over that territory ?

did russian commanders underestimated the georgian air defence systems ? should that explain the losses in russia airforce ? or the choice of engajed air weapons wasnt the better ?

seems like the russian warfare in ground was very eficient and victorious, but since the georgia have a so small air force and also havent any kind of fighter and russia at least lost 4 aircraft, seems like the air campaign didnt follow the ground´s success.

regards jugbr


----------



## Juha (Aug 15, 2008)

Kruska
Georgia was part of Russia only from 1801 to 1918 after that it was independent appr 2year, ruled by Menseviks, until conquerred by Bolseviks in 1920 IIRC. After that to 1991 it was a SSR, Sosialist Soviet Republic, and part of Soviet Union, not part of the Russian SFSR. And as a SSR it had right to separate from the Union according to the constitution of the Soviet Union (that right was of course only theoretical but the last couple years of existence of SU but it was in the constitution of SU) and it used that right in Apr 91 IIRC and SU accepted Georgia's declaration of independence in Oct 91, a couple months before the dissolution of SU. So all went according to SU constitution and international law or at least more or less according those. Now IIRC areas can be separate from states if the "mother" state accepts that. If "mother" state doesn't accept the separation it had right to use certain amount of force to prevent the separation but not "excessive" force but of course what is "excessive" is a matter of opinion. And even if Georgia had not declared itself independent it would have become automatically independent when SU dissolved in Dec 1991.

And both South Ossetia and Abkhazia were ASSRs inside Georgia ie parts of Georgia SSR during Soviet era. At least most ASSRs belonged to one or other SSRs, for ex many were part of Russian SFSR. 

Juha


----------



## Pisis (Aug 15, 2008)

That's the point!


----------



## Kruska (Aug 15, 2008)

Juha said:


> Kruska
> Georgia was part of Russia only from ..........



Hello Juha,

Thanks for the information; (Georgia’s independence a couple months before the dissolution of SU) basically it matches my knowledge in respect to Russia or Georgia and that these “separatist movements" in majority occurred between 1989 and 1991, at a time were Russia was in no position to do anything about these matters.

That Russia’s attack on Georgia is unlawful in regards to international law is a fact. So was the US/UK attack on Iraq 2003 and many other war occurrences. The primary institution of these laws is the UN, which sadly enough is brushed aside when it comes to clarifying matters peacefully or suddenly embraced when it harbors an advantage for one of the member countries. 

I am however trying to point out, that the ongoing NATO expansion will only infuriate Moscow even more and as such will rather provide a negative sphere and the illusion towards possible new members to feel safe. 

As such these “hopeful members” are not taking the appropriate path of seeking friendly negotiations with Moscow, but indeed tend to flex their non existing muscles towards an angry bear.

BTW, where was the UN or who ever when Stalin attacked Finland and other countries?

Regards
Kruska


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 15, 2008)

Pisis said:


> Well, Czechoslovakia's initial actions back in 1968 were, as you write, just peaceful reforms, and it led to occupation anyway.
> 
> I think the Georgian units were only trying to keep order in what from their perspective is their territory.


firing with MLRS at the city districts is a proper way to keep order?

Interesting that the Czech president Klaus unlike his East European colleagues has recently heavely critisized Georgian goverment and the European approach at the conflict as whole.


----------



## timshatz (Aug 15, 2008)

Russians have admitted losing three SU25 (ground attack) and a TU22. At least that is what I have read. Georgians claim much more. Typical in this type of thing for such claims to be made. All 4 probably went down to SAMs with a lesser chance of AAA on the SU25s. No chance AAA had anything to do with the TU22. Way to high up. Very, very doubtful there was any air to air. 

For now, the Russian claims are probably closer to the truth. Until you can look at the wreckage, claims are just claims.


----------



## Juha (Aug 15, 2008)

Kruska
I don’t have sympathy towards Saakasvili and his government. IIRC states had right to use force to suppress separatist movements but not “excessive” force. And based on the limited info I have IMHO Georgians used “excessive” force in their attack. And then there was the question of firing at Russian peacekeepers. There were firefights before Georgian attack and it is impossible to say who began those. But Georgian attack was really extremely stupid thing to do. And Saakasvili’s attempts to obtain outside military help after that is pathetic. He is like a man who in purpose kicked a bear and now hopes that others would rescue him from consequences. If he was a man he would resign and ask forgiveness from all who had suffered from his blunder(s).

Ramirezzz
“firing with MLRS at the city districts is a proper way to keep order?”

No. IMHO not even when used by Russians in Chechnya. And I mean the first Chechen war, the second was began by Basajev’s attack over border to Dagestan. BTW Shamil Basajev led a couple Chechen battalions in Abkhazia against Georgians in early 90s. So USA and bin Laden is not only case when a superpower had much trouble with ex-ally.

Juha


----------



## Juha (Aug 15, 2008)

Kruska
"BTW, where was the UN or who ever when Stalin attacked Finland and other countries?"

Now Kansainliitto, what that was in English, the League of Nations, kicked SU out because of its attack on Finland and we got some material help from Sweden, France, GB, Italy etc. And some thousands volunteers came to help us, mostly from Sweden.

Juha


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 15, 2008)

JugBR said:


> i readed that one of the russian planes that georgians had hits, was a TU 22M. isnt that plane too old ? developed from the early 70´s... for a comparative example, wouldnt be the same as w. bush and rumsfeld decided strikes iraq with thunderchiefs and phantons ?


it's latest version M3 is actually not that old, introduced in 1983. Quite young for a strategic bomber  


> otherwise, should the tu-22m a great plane and the failure was to ensure a total air superiority to use him as recognition plane ? or that was a role that tu-22m wasnt able to play, since it is know as nuclear bomber and not recognition plane.


it's actually quite capable recce airplane with some very decent SIGINT and SLAR hardware on board. 


> considering the lack of fighters in georgian airforce, i heard about some "conspiracy theories" inside russia press, to justificate the loss of russian planes. according to these theories, ucranians should been helping georgia with anti-aircraft high-altitude missile systems.


quite possible. There were some speculations now and then the Ukranians supplied Georgia with their long-range SAMs S-200. No other SAM in Georgian arsenal could get the Tu-22 at its cruise height (some 13000 meters I believe). But the claims are unconfirmed of course.


> also is suposed that there was killed a su-25 and a mig-29, but the numbers that georgian and russians gave are totally conflitant. georgia says they killed 30 russian planes, instead russia just report 4 losses.


well the Georgians claimed even some Tochka-U tactical surface-surface missile parts as aircraft parts of some Russian plane.




> also, in the ground, acording to the pictures and the stories, the t-72 has proved again be a very weak armoured thank according the specialists. theres images of many t-72 with reactive armor destroyed, claims that rpg´s destroyed some of those. also, like the t-72, seems like all the georgian army veichles are obsolete russians. wich increased the advantage of russian army even more in battlefield.


Georgians had some upgraded T-72 with the GPS pos system, French heat seeking devices and FALCON C&C system. This gave them theoretically some advantage in a night combat but most of them never made a shot at Russian armour because of air attacks.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 15, 2008)

Juha said:


> Kruska
> No. IMHO not even when used by Russians in Chechnya.


agree. A lot of fatal errors were made during the first campaign,both political and military.


> BTW Shamil Basajev led a couple Chechen battalions in Abkhazia against Georgians in early 90s. So USA and bin Laden is not only case when a superpower had much trouble with ex-ally.
> 
> Juha


it's interesting that some Chechen units as the "Vostok" batallion took part in the 2008 campaign as well.


----------



## Mitya (Aug 15, 2008)

Greetings to moderators!  
That the American citizens speak. Only it is strange why to them silence... It is such freedom of speech?


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8XI2Chc6uQ_


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyn9hybRooM_


----------



## Eknapp57 (Aug 15, 2008)

I'm doing research for a painting. With regard to the aircraft being used by the Georgians, which unit or units use the Su-25's? Is there a website with information about Georgian Su-25 units? Are the aircraft refered to in the news reports Skorpion variants?


----------



## Juha (Aug 15, 2008)

Hello Ramirezzz
Quote:"it's interesting that some Chechen units as the "Vostok" batallion took part in the 2008 campaign as well."

I noticed that also, Caucasus is full of surprises if one doesn't know the history of the area. 

Juha


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 15, 2008)

Mitya said:


> Greetings to moderators!
> That the American citizens speak. Only it is strange why to them silence... It is such freedom of speech?
> 
> 
> ...



There are PLENTY of people here in the US speaking about the conflict both in favor of Russia, others in favor of Georgia - In front of the Denver state building last night there were demonstrators on both sides - no one is being silenced here, maybe the majority are no longer interested.

As far as silencing you - you made some ignorant and baseless accusations in your post and you were told to knock it off and you didn't. Just so you know this is a private forum so we have the right to edit as we please. I've been pretty liberal with you and as stated actually agree with you on many counts but if I find you posting baseless and ignorant acquisitions on this forum, I will ban you. Please translate this carefully because I will not give you another warning - I hope I have made myself PERFECTLT clear!!!


----------



## timshatz (Aug 15, 2008)

Mitya said:


> Greetings to moderators!
> That the American citizens speak. Only it is strange why to them silence... It is such freedom of speech?
> 
> 
> ...




Thanks for that piercing analysis of the war in Georgia from a Fat Guy in a hat with a bad sunburn and a 12 year old girl. I'm sure they're studying those clips at the UN.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 15, 2008)

JugBR said:


> like the su-35´s


in this type of conflict you don't need to present the latest hardware you have. Some proven types like Su-25 and Su-24 are more than enough. Beside that Russia deploys their Su-30s (there not many of them in the Russian Army either ) in fighter regiments.



> or the newers t-90´s, those have the latest in warfare technology.


Only units of the North Caucasian Military District were deployed, they haven't any T-90s there. As I said, less sofisticated hardware is still enough for that purposes.


> was the russian knowloge of t-72 weakness, a really decisive point for russians takes very quickly the south ossetia capitol and also defeat the georgians over that territory ?


Russians used T-72s as well. I would say even if Georgians had Challengers instead of T-72 the outcome would be the same. Airstrikes rule.
The decisive point in taking Tshinvali was a good planning and execution, decent air support, good teamwork between tanks, artillery and infantry.


> did russian commanders underestimated the georgian air defence systems ? should that explain the losses in russia airforce ? or the choice of engajed air weapons wasnt the better ?


well even if you've planned your operation good through there's always a chance of being shot down by some well placed Shilka or Igla.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 15, 2008)

double post


----------



## Mitya (Aug 15, 2008)

FLYBOYJ said:


> There are PLENTY of people here in the US speaking about the conflict both in favor of Russia, others in favor of Georgia - In front of the Denver state building last night there were demonstrators on both sides - no one is being silenced here, maybe the majority are no longer interested.
> 
> As far as silencing you - you made some ignorant and baseless accusations in your post and you were told to knock it off and you didn't. Just so you know this is a private forum so we have the right to edit as we please. I've been pretty liberal with you and as stated actually agree with you on many counts but if I find you posting baseless and ignorant acquisitions on this forum, I will ban you. Please translate this carefully because I will not give you another warning - I hope I have made myself PERFECTLT clear!!!



Я не знаю чего ты там написал. Ваще не могу понять. Пипец блин. Завтра на трезвую голову попробую разобраться. Сейяас ваще пох!


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 15, 2008)

Kruska said:


> However if NATO continues to meddle along Russia’s borders, I would not be surprised to see Russia react by military force in order to be one step ahead –see the Georgia – NATO case.
> 
> A further aggravation of the Bear in regards to the Ukraine will result in the same situation, and I do not believe at all that NATO or the US will risk a war in order to safeguard any of these new countries that have become illusionist about their safety in regards to NATO or US interventions and as such miss out the chance to diplomatically and not arrogantly (Ukraine and the Russian navy case) resolve disputes with Russia.
> 
> ...



How did the US and NATO meddle along Russia's borders. If Russias former satelites wish to cozy up to the west that is there god given right. They are a soverign nation and Russia has not right to interfere in that either.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 15, 2008)

Mitya said:


> Я не знаю чего ты там написал. Ваще не могу понять. Пипец блин. Завтра на трезвую голову попробую разобраться. Сейяас ваще пох!



And he does not speak Russian, and you know that! Therefore speak in a language he can understand.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 15, 2008)

Mitya said:


> Я не знаю чего ты там написал. Ваще не могу понять. Пипец блин. Завтра на трезвую голову попробую разобраться. Сейяас ваще пох!




translation for the englishing speaking according to online translator:

Online Translator

"I do not know that you there have written. Ваще I can not understand. Пипец a pancake. Tomorrow on a sober head I shall try to understand. Сейяас ваще пох!"


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 15, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> translation for the englishing speaking according to online translator:
> 
> Online Translator
> 
> "I do not know that you there have written. Ваще I can not understand. Пипец a pancake. Tomorrow on a sober head I shall try to understand. Сейяас ваще пох!"



LMAO   

2 Mitya
эй, тезка, расслабься, а то народ твоего юмора не оценивает  
Hey Mitya, chill out man


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 15, 2008)

Thanks for the input Ramierzzz, hopefully you'll set the example for your fellow countryman!


----------



## Freebird (Aug 15, 2008)

Mitya said:


> This bloody massacre was conceived not by Russia, and not Georgia. She was conceived in the White House by the USA.





DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I honestly can not think of anything else to write.



I guess at least now they can't claim that Bush has no idea where Georgia is...   



Pisis said:


> I don't agree. Maybe the acts are not the same but very similar, especially as seen from Central European perspective.
> 
> The Soviet invasion to Czechoslovakia in August 21st 1968 was a very clear message, as well as this is a clear message. The Russians are looking for every occasion to expand their area of influence...



Not only compared to 1968, but perhaps also the 1938 "Sudeten" crisis?

Joe there is one thing that concerns me, how much of this "crisis" between Georgia/Ossetia could have been manufactured by outside forces {Russia}, by giving out Russian passports encouraging separatism? Then as Gerogia goes in to restore order Russia comes in to "protect" ethnic Russians?



Mitya said:


> Я не знаю чего ты там написал. Ваще не могу понять. Пипец блин. Завтра на трезвую голову попробую разобраться. Сейяас ваще пох!





Matt308 said:


> translation for the englishing speaking according to online translator:
> 
> "I do not know that you there have written. Ваще I can not understand. {I cannot understand you} Пипец a pancake. *{My head is a pancake}* Tomorrow on a sober head I shall try to understand. Сейяас ваще пох!"


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 15, 2008)

freebird said:


> Not only compared to 1968, but perhaps also the 1938 "Sudeten" crisis?


Did Czechs invade Sudetenland with heavy weapons? Did they start a military operation? Did the Sudetendeutschen struggled for their independence with arms against Czechs? And do you really believe the main goal aim of Russians is to overtrow Saakashvili and to conquer Georgia? Like it was with Czechs in 1938?



> Joe there is one thing that concerns me, how much of this "crisis" between Georgia/Ossetia could have been manufactured by outside forces {Russia}, by giving out Russian passports encouraging separatism?


you know , they (Ossetians) fought the war against Georgians in 1991-1993 without any Russian support. Until 2000ies they didn't recieve much aid from Russia either.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 15, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> And he does not speak Russian, and you know that! Therefore speak in a language he can understand.



she said:

"I do not know what you wrote there. Vasche can not understand. Pipets Shoot. Tomorrow sober head to try to understand. Seyyaas vasche stolen!"

Google Tradutor


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 15, 2008)

JugBR said:


> she said:
> 
> "I do not know what you wrote there. Vasche can not understand. Pipets Shoot. Tomorrow sober head to try to understand. Seyyaas vasche stolen!"
> 
> Google Tradutor



Yes I know. I translated it in my own program as well, and 3 other people above you translated it as well.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 15, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Yes I know. I translated it in my own program as well, and 3 other people above you translated it as well.



yeah but i needed to make a google´s marketing !

----------------------------------------------------------------

seems like mikhail saakashvili is annoying their western partners. was needed condolezza rice and nicolas sarkozy goes to georgia to oblige mr. saakashvili sign and obey a cease-fire treaty.

the european union is adopting a more cautious strategy, criticizing both, russia and georgia, but assuming georgia started the problem, instead usa and englandthat sustains russia was the agressor (!?). 

anyway, this guy, the president of georgia, is achieving put the west and the east against each other, and he puts more lumber in the lighter issuing and almost blaming the nato for the invasion of georgia, saiyng that the nato fails to put georgia inside their organization and the western powers should helped georgia to fights against russia.

a very strange guy, the president of georgia... what he really wants ?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 15, 2008)

*NOTE THE DATE OF THIS ARTICLE!!!!*

People power

Nov 8th 2007 | TBILISI
From The Economist print edition
The president tries to face down protests from the opposition

IT WAS exactly four years ago that Mikheil Saakashvili, then a youthful firebrand leader of the opposition to President Eduard Shevardnadze, brought his supporters out into the streets of Tbilisi. The protesters were complaining that Mr Shevardnadze had staged and won a rigged parliamentary election. The demonstrations were peaceful but, because they went on day after day, also intimidating. Within days, Georgia's “rose revolution” had driven Mr Shevardnadze out of power and installed Mr Saakashvili in his place.

Four years on it is Mr Saakashvili who has been confronted by the biggest protests since the rose revolution. The most recent ones, in central Tbilisi and in front of the parliament building, have attracted crowds at least 50,000 strong. The protesters object to Mr Saakashvili's forceful, hands-on style, complain that the benefits of the boom (annual GDP growth is close to 10%) have been too narrowly shared, and demand fresh elections.

Yet unlike Mr Shevardnadze four years ago, Mr Saakashvili seems determined to hang on. He claims the demonstrations are part of a Kremlin-backed putsch against him. “High-ranking officials in Russian special services are behind this,” he said, adding that several Russian diplomats would be expelled. Georgia's ambassador to Moscow has been recalled. 

*Certainly Russia has systematically provoked Georgia, with trade and energy sanctions, harassment of Georgian migrants in Russia, and—most recently—mysterious air raids. But Mr Saakashvili's response will do little to help his country's reputation as a shop window for the West in the former Soviet Union. *

On November 7th police forcefully dispersed the protesters, using tear-gas and water cannon. Scores of people were reported injured. Among those beaten was Georgia's human-rights ombudsman, Sozar Subari. The government then declared a 15-day state of emergency. Riot police stormed the main opposition television station, Imedi, and took it off the air.


*Countries that normally support Georgia against Russian bullying are aghast. Many have been worried privately for some time about cronyism in Mr Saakashvili's inner circle. Last month the secretary-general of NATO, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, underlined the need for greater political transparency and a stricter rule of law if Georgia wants to progress towards membership. Outsiders worry that state influence on the media is too strong. Many think that the government mishandled a spectacular bust-up last month with the firebrand former defence minister, Irakli Okruashvili, now in exile. *


Yet the opposition's stance can sound hysterical and sometimes outlandish (hanging the president in effigy and demanding the restoration of the monarchy after a 200-year interregnum). Given the shambles that Mr Saakashvili took over in 2003, the obstacles he has faced and the progress he has made, criticisms of him may seem harsh. The opposition's motives are open to question too. Badri Patarkatsishvili, a tycoon who fled from Russia, openly bankrolls some of the protesters, no doubt for admirable reasons. That raises questions about the influence of big money in poor countries' politics. An adviser to Mr Saakashvili says those backing the opposition want Georgia to be a weak state that big business can manipulate.


Western countries will be urging Mr Saakashvili to return political life to normal as soon as possible. If he cannot produce proof of Russian involvement, many will feel that he has cried wolf, using his country's geopolitical significance for narrow domestic advantage. Ketevan Tsikhelashvili, a Tbilisi-based analyst, comments that Mr Saakashvili and his government have survived, but adds that “in the longer term I cannot say his perspectives look very good.” At the very least this week's events have shown how disillusioned many Georgians now are with Mr Saakashvili's commitment to the rose revolution's ideals: freedom, legality and international respectability


----------



## stasoid (Aug 16, 2008)

That's what we're talking about. 
Although he is portrayed as a democratic leader in western media, he's not. There is simply no political opposition in Georgia. It's been suppressed by the Saakashvily's regime since day one he came to power. Opposition leaders in Georgia are either in jail, murdered or in exile.

In my opinion it's not enough just to be a free market proponent and a US' ally to be called a democrat. 
That american definition of democracy people in Europe dont always buy.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 16, 2008)

a thing that i believe also could bring mistrust for the westerns is the fact of russian maybe havent a good "international affairs" professionals in government.

one good example of that, when russia start the operation in georgia, the only things we knew, was told by international press. the russian goverment just confirmed or denied the actions related by press or issued by georgian president.

other side, when usa invade iraq(and i didnt agree with that invasion), the american staff, made a press release, bringing maps, infos, hows gonna happend the operation, how many troops, the main targets, the expected duration, the possible casualties... 

so the public opinion have a more realistic look of whats gonna happend in the next weeks and the american government can also prevent some kind of opposition by the senate or congress.

if russia had more focus over the international press and the media, they could also have less mistrust by nato and european union. i know the reaction should had strong and fast as it was, but maybe one day or two after invasion, some russian general or the defence minister could show to the press whats the plan of russia, whats the strategic places they will act and how long the operation will be.

but i also dont know if they did that and the western media didnt show to us here. i also think is a lack of inteligence or knowloge by the west, about contemporany russia. i think behind that chit chat about "the new and improved ussr", hides some kind of ignorance about whats going on in that country.

the use of ussr past as rhetoric by opinion makers, politicians, government leaders, show they dont know too much about russia today and they havent a good information network about the social, military and political issues of eastern europe. 

the own inability to preview the crisis of georgia, talks by itself against the western information institutions. 

how many people in new york times, or bbc do speaks russian ?


----------



## Hunterbunter (Aug 16, 2008)

The bear better beware, they have enough trouble on the home front. Last thing Russia needs is more hardened enemies on the doorstep. Lets see where these little nations are in comparison to the Russian ethnic core in two score years from now. 

Current UN projections have the Russian population dropping to 100 million or less in that near future. Keep playing hardball the same old way with traditional Russian brute force, can you say stand aside and hand your UN security council seat to India in the not so distant future? Nukes or not, a bully who beats the wimps within his own inner circle will never have respect, but always have enemies in ample supply. Just a matter of time for the balance to tilt.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 16, 2008)

stasoid said:


> That's what we're talking about.
> Although he is portrayed as a democratic leader in western media, he's not. There is simply no political opposition in Georgia. It's been suppressed by the Saakashvily's regime since day one he came to power. Opposition leaders in Georgia are either in jail, murdered or in exile.
> 
> buy.



hmm

Did they possibly learn from big brother over the last few decades?


----------



## JugBR (Aug 16, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> hmm
> 
> Did they possibly learn from big brother over the last few decades?



herr adler, the big brother was georgian !!!







 

Saakashvily just keeps the tradition alive.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 16, 2008)

JugBR said:


> herr adler, the big brother was georgian !!!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



True, but I am also talking about the decades after Stalin.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 16, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> hmm
> 
> Did they possibly learn from big brother over the last few decades?



Who they, Alder? In my post I mentioned one particurlar individual who is responsible for everything that his country has gone thorugh.

Stalin just happened to be Georgian as well as his Secret Police Chief and few other Politbureau members. He could have been a Jew, Russian or anyone else it's not relevant to the Georgians as a nation.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 16, 2008)

JugBR said:


> a thing that i believe also could bring mistrust for the westerns is the fact of russian maybe havent a good "international affairs" professionals in government.
> 
> the use of ussr past as rhetoric by opinion makers, politicians, government leaders, show they dont know too much about russia today and they havent a good information network about the social, military and political issues of eastern europe.
> 
> ...




Well, I agree JugBR - that's been one of the Russia's weaknesses in all times. They always underestimated the role of massmedia in any aspects of life.
See, Americans, there is lots to learn from them. They've always been good showmen in whatever they do, weather its a NASA project or a military operation - you need a good PR show to justify your actions for the taxpayers. And this is make sense.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 16, 2008)

stasoid said:


> Who they, Alder? In my post I mentioned one particurlar individual who is responsible for everything that his country has gone thorugh.
> 
> Stalin just happened to be Georgian as well as his Secret Police Chief and few other Politbureau members. He could have been a Jew, Russian or anyone else it's not relevant to the Georgians as a nation.



true, but is good to remember he was georgian because theres an idea that everything bad in eastern europe came from russia. but the worst guy in fact was georgian, like hitler was austrian not german.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 16, 2008)

Hunterbunter said:


> The bear better beware, they have enough trouble on the home front. Last thing Russia needs is more hardened enemies on the doorstep. Lets see where these little nations are in comparison to the Russian ethnic core in two score years from now.
> 
> Current UN projections have the Russian population dropping to 100 million or less in that near future. Keep playing hardball the same old way with traditional Russian brute force, can you say stand aside and hand your UN security council seat to India in the not so distant future? Nukes or not, a bully who beats the wimps within his own inner circle will never have respect, but always have enemies in ample supply. Just a matter of time for the balance to tilt.



I wouldnt be that pessimistic about Russia's population grows - it's above average among other europian nations and the Net migration index is actually positive in Russia that means more people come to the country then leave it.

For example in Georgia and some Baltic states Net migration rate is way below zero that means people of those "democratic, prosperous" countries are fleeing abroad with a supersonic speed and by the time Russia's population drops to 100mln it is possible that such countries like Latvia and Estonia will dissapear at all due to an extremely low birth rate and a negative migration index.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 16, 2008)

JugBR said:


> true, but is good to remember he was georgian because theres an idea that everything bad in eastern europe came from russia. but the worst guy in fact was georgian, like hitler was austrian not german.



Well, most of Lenin's Politbureau members and other October Revolution masterminds were Jewish, so, now what? To blame them for all communist's attrocities? Probably not. In fact, communists didnt have nationalities, they simply divided people by classes and acted by the book written by Lenin and Marx.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 16, 2008)

stasoid said:


> Well, most of Lenin's Politbureau members and other October Revolution masterminds were Jewish, so, now what? To blame them for all communist's attrocities? Probably not. In fact, communists didnt have nationalities, they simply divided people by classes and acted by the book written by Lenin and Marx.



karl marx was jewish, by the way. also hitler had the aidea of international jewish conspiracy over comunism.

you can call me ignorant, but i dont think lenin was a evil like stalin was. the october revolution as i readed was in some points cruel, but the situation before that was even worst and i dont know if the western powers supports the white army also make the process more bloody.

but i think lenin in overal wasnt a evil guy, you could think he wasnt a hero, but he was much better than czar.

i know its just silly input to some kind of people a kind of behavior. its not because stalin was georgian that all georgians will be little stalins, for gods shakes the world would be in danger then.

i just use stalin example to show that soviet union was a project of many people from many countries, not just russians, and the bad things like torture, like repression, etc... also was not made just by russians in soviet union.

because i think some people could have the idea: aw, the georgia, ukraine, etc... became independent so automatically they are uncharged of any responsability about the bad things of soviet union, now they are democratic nations and all the bad things we blame on russia...

like... georgians, ukranians, polaks, eastern germans, etc... didnt tortured, didnt repressed, didnt make anithing bad. just russians did. instead to everybody tries to assume their responsabilities, they just blame all on russia. wich is not fair.


----------



## bigZ (Aug 16, 2008)

If Lenin had lived longer his atrocities could have been worse than Stalin.

At least Stalin gave women and children mock trials before executing them.


----------



## Mitya (Aug 16, 2008)

some more:

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtdVS8646GI_ freedom of speech 

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqSIXIwGLhI_ NO COMMENTS


----------



## JugBR (Aug 16, 2008)

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqSIXIwGLhI_

   

"Saakashvili - a sick man!"

agree !


----------



## JugBR (Aug 16, 2008)

bigZ said:


> If Lenin had lived longer his atrocities could have been worse than Stalin.
> 
> At least Stalin gave women and children mock trials before executing them.



same thing happened in french revolution, its allways happends when theres a internal struggle in a country. 

i just think lenin was better than czar, because in czar times the repression was even greater and the poor people usually havent any hope of social improvement. im not talking lenin was the best leader in the world, but he wouldnt win the struggle if the russians was happy with the czar.


----------



## Pisis (Aug 16, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> firing with MLRS at the city districts is a proper way to keep order?
> 
> Interesting that the Czech president Klaus unlike his East European colleagues has recently heavely critisized Georgian goverment and the European approach at the conflict as whole.


I didn't say it's the propper way to keep order, I have just stated that they _were trying to keep it._

As for Klaus, I can see some points in his opinions, but most of it is self-centric statements anyway. If you look at his speech, you can count ten times more word "I" and "me" than the words Gerogia and Russia altogether. 

I'm just implying that this is another stage of balancing the influence of Russia against "the rest" on the Asian-European border.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 16, 2008)

Gorbachev, says Russia had no choice.

The last soviet leader, Mikhail Gorbachev says georgian president is a lier and russia had o choice but respnds the georgian attacks over ossetia:


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nSd_FNhZEZs_

man he is very old since last time i saw him, early 90´s, but still very conscient and very inteligent person. Most part of low profile comunists still hating him because he implodes USSR, but the time shows he was right, and another good example, how wrong are the western powers policies, gorbachev had no support of ANY western country to his attempt of democratization and moderate change ussr to a free and capitalist society.

there was a coup supported by western powers and yeltsin baceme the new president of russia. he sinks the country, and the nato sings victory - oh we won the cold war !!! russia is defeated !!! - nuclear proliferation, the grow of russian mafia, political issues over former ussr republics... the prize of NATO´s superb and arrogance over gorbachev´s plan for a carefull political change.

also that same superb blinds the western leaders for the fact that you cant deal with the former ussr republics without deal with russia. because russia is the most stable country in the region and the strongest power. 

could that conflict had been usefull to show that ?


----------



## Juha (Aug 16, 2008)

JugBR

Quote: "gorbachev had no support of ANY western country to his attempt of democratization and moderate change ussr to a free and capitalist society."

Now that is a very interesting interpretion on history when one remember the support gave to Gorba and the fact that according to one of Gorba's statements free elections were BS and according to other he insisted that he was still a communist.

Quote:"there was a coup supported by western powers.."

Now can you name the Western Powers that supported that failed coup by Communist Party hard liners????

Juha


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 16, 2008)

Mitya said:


> some more:
> 
> _View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtdVS8646GI_ freedom of speech
> 
> _View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqSIXIwGLhI_ NO COMMENTS


Censored? I see nothing that was censored - the reporter questioning Rice was rambling and there could be a dozen reasons why the signal was lost.

BTW the clip of the girl commending Russia and its troops have been shown all over my local news stations this morning.


----------



## delcyros (Aug 16, 2008)

The caucasus is and has always been a melting pot of cultures.

I am certain that nobody here can give a stisfying explenation but I am looking forward to read doctoral thesises in c. 30 years to this topic. 
Seriously, not everything is known, understood and accessable today and I have kept my doubting habit to everything crying around without a proper distance in time and a better understanding of the sources.


----------



## v2 (Aug 16, 2008)

More than 330 pictures about the conflict:

Caucasus Belli : Guerre Georgie / Ossétie du Sud - Russie - a set on Flickr


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 16, 2008)

Thanks V2!!!


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 16, 2008)

thanks a lot V2 , good pictures indeed!


----------



## Kruska (Aug 16, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> How did the US and NATO meddle along Russia's borders. If Russias former satelites wish to cozy up to the west that is there god given right. They are a soverign nation and Russia has not right to interfere in that either.



Hello D.A.I.G.

The main reason for the eastern countries (Former Block countries) to embrace NATO is the greed and hope for $$$ and not fear of Russia. NATO is fully aware of this and takes the advantage of giving them the outlook and partial support by upgrading their Armed Forces, or even an EU membership (Many, many $$$). 

Both NATO and the former Russian republics are fully aware of this and use the same “motivation” which ends in NATO’s favor, and resulting in a direct military buildup at Russia’s borders. Russia simply doesn’t have the $$ to buy or attract friends and as such gets more and more pissed off.

Everybody involved knows that Russia doesn’t have the slightest military conventional capability to attack anyone successfully besides midgets like Georgia – meaning total occupation of a country such as the Ukraine – or a totally utopist scenario such as an attack on Poland or any other former Block country. At the end this “Georgia scenario” is exactly what happens and once Putin points at his nukes NATO and the US weasel into their holes and resort to the usual diplomatic blah blah – economic sanctions, embargo and probably telling Putin that he will not receive a birthday telegram.

Now how much frustration does NATO need to impose on Russia in order for the military high command or the Russian government to press the button (only alternative besides resignation), especially after a Russian orgy and Vodka intoxicated bears in uniforms?

Anti - missile shield against – Iran? and rouge states or rather Russia? I am sure the Russians know the answer and keep regarding it as a further provocation.

You would be reacting blind to politics in this world by saying, that Russia has no right to interfere in other countries, or you would be forwarding double standards in regards to the US (constantly interfering in other countries since a hundred years) and Russia’s or any other countries doings in the past centuries. 

Regards
Kruska


----------



## JugBR (Aug 16, 2008)

Juha said:


> JugBR
> 
> Quote: "gorbachev had no support of ANY western country to his attempt of democratization and moderate change ussr to a free and capitalist society."
> 
> ...



gorbachev was the most responsible for the democratization of russia, former ussr republics and the eastern iro curtain countries:

1985 gorbachev announces the two programs of his government: the glasnost(transparency) and the perestroika(rebuilding):

he bring the red troops in afghanistan back to ussr.
negotiate with usa a decrease of nuclear spendings.
do not interfere on eastern countries.

1988 gorbachev announces ussr will quit the bejnev douctrin, then all the western countries could have democratic governments if they wanted. its was called sinatra douctrin.

this led the peacefull revolutions of eastern countries. the only exception was romenia.

about the coup d´etat you right, its my interpretation of history. but the fact that the coup´d etet was good for yeltisn, who was supported by usa, you cant doubt.


----------



## Soundbreaker Welch? (Aug 16, 2008)

Yeltsin dancing........

I think we miss that kind of Russia.


----------



## The Basket (Aug 16, 2008)

I find the idea of threatening Russia laughable.

Only a full scale war will make Putin take notice.

Unless NATO is willing to march down Red Square then it is all bluster.

Western Europes gas comes from Russia and we are proper screwed if they turn off the taps. As said before, you don't need MiGs when you got a hand on the plugs.

Underestimating Russian will has proven a folly. They still have a nuclear, chemical and biological threat to make the eyes water. A technical supeiority is meaningless against such a foe.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 17, 2008)

JugBR said:


> gorbachev was the most responsible for the democratization of russia, former ussr republics and the eastern iro curtain countries:
> 
> 1988 gorbachev announces ussr will quit the bejnev douctrin, then all the western countries could have democratic governments if they wanted. its was called sinatra douctrin.



Gorbachev was weak in global politics, too naive, I would say. He was outplayed by more experienced and pragmatic western leaders. He took the blame on starting the Cold War (what an idiot) and because of that he didnt ask enything in exchange of the soviet troops withdrawal from Eastern Europe. He should have demanded those countries to stay neutral for another 50 or something years, instead he screwed things up completely jepardizing his country's security.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 17, 2008)

Soundbreaker Welch? said:


> Yeltsin dancing........
> 
> I think we miss that kind of Russia.



and we definitely don't.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 17, 2008)

stasoid said:


> Gorbachev was weak in global politics, too naive, I would say. He was outplayed by more experienced and pragmatic western leaders. He took the blame on starting the Cold War (what an idiot) and because of that he didnt ask enything in exchange of the soviet troops withdrawal from Eastern Europe. He should have demanded those countries to stay neutral for another 50 or something years, instead he screwed things up completely jepardizing his country's security.



i think mikha had good will, the others dont. he wants so save the east europe from a crisis, the nato just want to won a cold war.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 17, 2008)

another controversial news:

HRW says the genocide of ossetians is a hoax. the georgian army just killed around 50 ossetians and the main reason of conflict starts was the ossetian gerrilla supported by moscow.

does HRW is working in s. ossetia ? how do they know how many ossetians died ? should HRW taking the numbers gave by georgia or do they have very good and independent sources to say that ?


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 17, 2008)

JugBR said:


> another controversial news:
> 
> HRW says the genocide of ossetians is a hoax. the georgian army just killed around 50 ossetians and the main reason of conflict starts was the ossetian gerrilla supported by moscow.


well the HRW is well known due to their heavy critique against Moscow. 
particulary here they base their claim on the fact that only 50 people was registred as dead in the Tcentral Hospital of Tshinvali. But they seem to forgot that in fact this hospital was almost completely destroyed in the last day and effective counting was virtually impossible. Beside that not all of wounded or dead were been brought to this hospital.
I do believe though the number of 2000 is exaggerated. There're some hundreds of deads anyway.


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 17, 2008)

Kruska, You never cease to amaze me. Thumbs up to You my friend.

Agree with you on this.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 17, 2008)

Kruska said:


> Hello D.A.I.G.
> 
> The main reason for the eastern countries (Former Block countries) to embrace NATO is the greed and hope for $$$ and not fear of Russia. NATO is fully aware of this and takes the advantage of giving them the outlook and partial support by upgrading their Armed Forces, or even an EU membership (Many, many $$$).
> 
> Both NATO and the former Russian republics are fully aware of this and use the same “motivation” which ends in NATO’s favor, and resulting in a direct military buildup at Russia’s borders. Russia simply doesn’t have the $$ to buy or attract friends and as such gets more and more pissed off.



some issues:

is that true that the eastern countries that would agree to install that defence system would receive $$$ for that ?

does the countries of east are reacting by the own policy inposed by west about russia ? so, stay far from russia means stay close of EU not just by the euros, but also to can export more and bring investments and economic upgrades for their nations ?

then if the EU had a more close policy over russia, the intention of membership by eastern countries wouldnt make diference for russians, because they also will be close partners of europe. is that right ?

i just think its so sad that policy and economics are so far each other, because reading the economic newspapers is clear that is important stay close of russia, because for the next 10, 15 years russia will have a great industrial jump and the countries that will have close economic ties with moscow and the enterprises that invest in russia will have a lot of profits.



Kruska said:


> Everybody involved knows that Russia doesn’t have the slightest military conventional capability to attack anyone successfully besides midgets like Georgia – meaning total occupation of a country such as the Ukraine – or a totally utopist scenario such as an attack on Poland or any other former Block country. At the end this “Georgia scenario” is exactly what happens and once Putin points at his nukes NATO and the US weasel into their holes and resort to the usual diplomatic blah blah – economic sanctions, embargo and probably telling Putin that he will not receive a birthday telegram.



agree with you, but also i think yes, russia have the capability to occupy not one but 2 or 3 of these countries at same time. wich doesnt means that they wanna do that. i dont think so.



Kruska said:


> Now how much frustration does NATO need to impose on Russia in order for the military high command or the Russian government to press the button (only alternative besides resignation), especially after a Russian orgy and Vodka intoxicated bears in uniforms?



 have you watched "dr. strangelove" ? its almost quite like that scenario 

but i think for russians its quite like a chess match. chess is a national sport in russia. i dont think they felt frustrated by nato policies, they are worried, because they dont trust too much in nato. 



Kruska said:


> Anti - missile shield against – Iran? and rouge states or rather Russia? I am sure the Russians know the answer and keep regarding it as a further provocation.



yes, thats the most ridiculous of everything !!! IRAN DONT HAVE THE TECHNOLOGY TO SEND A NUKE TO EUROPE !!!

  

they havent missiles to hits europe and also they dont have nuclear devices. all about iran´s nuclear program is pure speculation. 

kruska, a good reading for you : "legacy of ashes - tim weiner", i think you gonna like this book.

regards !


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 17, 2008)

stasoid said:


> Who they, Alder? In my post I mentioned one particurlar individual who is responsible for everything that his country has gone thorugh.
> 
> Stalin just happened to be Georgian as well as his Secret Police Chief and few other Politbureau members. He could have been a Jew, Russian or anyone else it's not relevant to the Georgians as a nation.



That is not what I am talking about. I was not even talking about Stalin in particular. I was talking about Mikheil Saakashvili and how he treated his people, in response to you saying he was a brutal man to his own people.

Therefore I said maybe he learned from his big brother and by that I mean:

Lenin
Stalin
Khrushchev
Brezhnev

And frankly just about every other ruler of the Soviet Union...

Oh well don't worry about it.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 17, 2008)

Mitya said:


> some more:
> 
> _View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtdVS8646GI_ freedom of speech




First of all your video does not prove that anything was censored. Where does it prove that it was censored?

In the end the reporter was a dumb **** anyhow. Anyone who trys to compare 9-11 to what is going on in Georgia deserves to be shot.

Also why are you a member of this forum? Your agenda is very clear. You never post about WW2 aircraft which by the way is the purpose of this forum. Again, I ask you why are you here?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 17, 2008)

Kruska said:


> Hello D.A.I.G.
> 
> The main reason for the eastern countries (Former Block countries) to embrace NATO is the greed and hope for $$$ and not fear of Russia. NATO is fully aware of this and takes the advantage of giving them the outlook and partial support by upgrading their Armed Forces, or even an EU membership (Many, many $$$).
> 
> ...



1. I never said the US does not interfere with other nations, nor did I say it was right. You keep changing the subject. This is about Russia not the US.

2. Again explain to me what right Russia has to stop nations from getting cozy with the west. I do not give a **** what the motivation behind it is.

3. Stop changing the subject. If you wish to discuss how much you do not like the United States, do so in a thread dedicated to it.

Now having said that answer my question that I asked you above!


----------



## JugBR (Aug 17, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> That is not what I am talking about. I was not even talking about Stalin in particular. I was talking about Mikheil Saakashvili and how treated his people, in response to someone saying he was a brutal man to his own people.
> 
> Therefore I said maybe he learned from his big brother and by that I mean:
> 
> ...



in fact i started with that stalin stuff... because he was georgian... but i think now was an unhappy idea mine.


----------



## Kruska (Aug 17, 2008)

*DerAdlerIstGelandet;

1. I never said the US does not interfere with other nations, nor did I say it was right. You keep changing the subject. This is about Russia not the US.*

Now you said it, before you only put in on Russia, and yes it is about Russia that why I reacted on your one sided statement. 

*2. Again explain to me what right Russia has to stop nations from getting cozy with the west. I do not give a **** what the motivation behind it is*.

The same right that the US took and takes into acount to stop any country from getting cosy with the communists or Russia or any country that the US dislikes. 

*3. Stop changing the subject. If you wish to discuss how much you do not like the United States, do so in a thread dedicated to it.*

I am not changing the subject at all, it is and my forwardings have been about Russia - Georgia and NATO. Because I do not believe in NATO, I do not like the US? Because I do not like Baseball I am against the US? Because I do not like Bush, I am against the US? Because I dispise Hitler I am against Germany? Because I do not like Whisky I am against alcohol?

After all this Forum is not called "Dedicated to Whisky" or is it?

So what is your problem mate?

*Now having said that answer my question that I asked you above!*

I did answer them and I just answered them again, maybe you want to answer mine?

1. Now how much frustration does NATO need to impose on Russia in order for the military high command or the Russian government to press the button (only alternative besides resignation), especially after a Russian orgy and Vodka intoxicated bears in uniforms?

Regards
Kruska


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 17, 2008)

Kruska said:


> *
> 1. Now how much frustration does NATO need to impose on Russia in order for the military high command or the Russian government to press the button (only alternative besides resignation), especially after a Russian orgy and Vodka intoxicated bears in uniforms?
> 
> Regards
> Kruska*


*

I just want all forum members to be crysal clear on exactly what Kruska is asking.*


----------



## Kruska (Aug 17, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> I just want all forum members to be crysal clear on exactly what Kruska is asking.



You forgot the most important question:

After all this Forum is not called "Dedicated to Whisky" or is it?

I think it is very important to answer that in clear words by some people here.

Regards
Kruska


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 17, 2008)

Kruska said:


> *DerAdlerIstGelandet;
> 
> 1. I never said the US does not interfere with other nations, nor did I say it was right. You keep changing the subject. This is about Russia not the US.*
> 
> ...



No you did not answer my question. You answered it with questions and you skirt around the answer. Again this discussion is not about the US, it is about Russia. 

Are you going to answer it? If not there is no further need for this discussion or this thread.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 17, 2008)

Kruska said:


> You forgot the most important question:
> 
> After all this Forum is not called "Dedicated to Whisky" or is it?
> 
> ...



I think some people would be better off posting in:

www.stasi.net


----------



## Kruska (Aug 17, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> No you did not answer my question. You answered it with questions and you skirt around the answer. Again this discussion is not about the US, it is about Russia.
> 
> Are you going to answer it? If not there is no further need for this discussion or this thread.



Truly i do not know which question I did not answer. but its a fact that you didn't answer mine again.

Regards
Kruska


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 17, 2008)

Kruska said:


> Truly i do not know which question I did not answer. but its a fact that you didn't answer mine again.
> 
> Regards
> Kruska



Nor will I until I feel you have made an effort to answer mine.


----------



## Kruska (Aug 17, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I think some people would be better off posting in:
> 
> www.stasi.net



Thanks for the very clear answer. 

Regards
Kruska


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 17, 2008)

Hey Kruska. Why don't you take a break from the forums for a while. See ya in a week.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 17, 2008)

Kruska said:


> Thanks for the very clear answer.
> 
> Regards
> Kruska



You are welcome!


----------



## JugBR (Aug 17, 2008)

acording with french president nicolas sarkozy, the russian forces will leave georgia after 12:00 am.

but, the russian president said to the french that russia will keep a peacekeeper force to ensure the end of conflicts in ossetia.

so, its quite like to say: we gonna leave, but georgian will not enter here.

another headache for nato leaders...


----------



## JugBR (Aug 18, 2008)

a interesting text i found in internet. i wont copy paste here cause its too long but it worth to be readen by pro-russians, anti-russians and indiferents of this topic:

In the Media

a very good american site about world politics.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 18, 2008)

JugBR said:


> a interesting text i found in internet. i wont copy paste here cause its too long but it worth to be readen by pro-russians, anti-russians and indiferents of this topic:
> 
> 
> a very good american site about world politics.



finally some decent analysis. Altough not much digging in the roots of the conflict, some good conclusions are made by autor. I wish the American dimplomacy would react as suggested in this text. But I have some bad feelings that the hawks in the establishment will take the upper hand. Looks like the hardline politics is much more trendy in the face of upcoming elections.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 18, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> finally some decent analysis. Altough not much digging in the roots of the conflict, some good conclusions are made by autor. I wish the American dimplomacy would react as suggested in this text. But I have some bad feelings that the hawks in the establishment will take the upper hand. Looks like the hardline politics is much more trendy in the face of upcoming elections.



ramirezzz i liked that site because it shows what the big guys in washington thinks and not what they want people thinks, that stories about "free society, free world, free democracy, free i dont know what..." no cliches, just their very american political vision about what had been done and what they think should be made.

ny times colunists also are little boring because allways defends the same points of view, or almost the same. the same theories wrote with diferent words. thats what impressed me on this site. a very rich and complex vision without cliches or slogans...

well, august, 18 !

now, lets see what happends, if the ceasefire will be done and whats the georgians and russians moves. i hope the worst part was gone. now lets leave the politicians killing themselves a little bit too ! the average people from both sides are tired to die !


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 18, 2008)

JugBR said:


> ramirezzz i liked that site because it shows what the big guys in washington thinks and not what they want people thinks, that stories about "free society, free world, free democracy, free i dont know what..." no cliches, just their very american political vision about what had been done and what they think should be made.


I see it, thanks for the link mate! I'm going to dig a little bit deeper into this site, looks very interesting..

that're the sites I used to read when it comes to some sober analysis from the West:

Foreign Affairs - Home

and check this one, the Blake Hounshell's blog:
Blake Hounshell's blog | FP Passport

Usually a good stuff there, even when his view of the Ossetian conflict is very much different from that of mine.


> now, lets see what happends, if the ceasefire will be done and whats the georgians and russians moves. i hope the worst part was gone. now lets leave the politicians killing themselves a little bit too ! the average people is tired to die !



let's put it otherwise: one conflict has ended, another has just begun.


----------



## Pisis (Aug 18, 2008)

A Czech senator, Jaromír Štětina, has travelled to the vicinity recently and had collected numerous sources of information that are independent on each other. There is a whole website about it but only in Czech so I'd have to translate it, but I currently don't have any time for that. Maybe later...
JihoosetinskÃ© mÄ›sto Cchinvali zniÄila ruskÃ¡ 58. armÃ¡da | srpen 2008 | Aktuality | JaromÃ­r Å tÄ›tina
*
Echoes of August 1968

"It is not Chechnya that I get reminded here of, but the year 1968. The same spirit, protests against the occupiers, the same lies and arrogance from the Russian side. The actions taken by Kremlin are the same as they were 40 years ago, they have the same imperialist features. Only Kremlin is more dangerous than it was back then," says Štětina-journalist.

"Because today's Russia is directly ruled by KGB. During the times of Soviet Union the secret service had politbyro to respond to, today it is no longer true. Which is why it is necessary for the world to deal with Russia without gloves and confront it with truth, not just with veiled warnings," Štětina-politician recommends to his colleagues.* 

Just check this out. The turth climbs slowly up the horizon...
Czech senator returns to war reporting in Georgia - Czechnews - Aktuln.cz


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 18, 2008)

Pisis said:


> Just check this out. The turth climbs slowly up the horizon...
> Czech senator returns to war reporting in Georgia - Czechnews - Aktuln.cz




which truth exactly?


----------



## Pisis (Aug 18, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> which truth exactly?


For example the truth that the 58th Army had entered the territory of Georgia almost fourteen hours before Georgian army had enetered Cchinvali - this means on August 7th.

The truth that Chinvali was not destroyed by Georgians, what was called a "genocide on Ossetian people and hence a legitimate reason for an intervention" by the Russian authorities, but the Russian army just later, when they tried to push out the Georgian army (what they have later achieved).

And so on...


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 18, 2008)

Pisis said:


> For example the truth that the 58th Army had entered the territory of Georgia almost fourteen hours before Georgian army had enetered Cchinvali - this means on August 7th.


oh really? any facts to prove this "statement"?



> The truth that Chinvali was not destroyed by Georgians, what was called a "genocide on Ossetian people and hence a legitimate reason for an intervention" by the Russian authorities, but the Russian army just later, when they tried to push out the Georgian army (what they have later achieved).


whoa that looks like a real conspiracy ! Once again - any facts to back it?


> And so on...


please share your knowledge with us, we are all curious...


----------



## Pisis (Aug 18, 2008)

Here you go. 
_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsSAz_Zhe38_


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 18, 2008)

Where did you find that crazy bastard, Pisis?


----------



## Pisis (Aug 18, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> oh really? any facts to prove this "statement"?
> 
> 
> whoa that looks like a real conspiracy ! Once again - any facts to back it?
> ...


Nah, really now...

Here is a robo-translated website of the Czech senator Stetina, whom I mentioned earlier. I don't have any reason why I shouldn't believe him, because he is one of the most reliable Czech politicians. He went there and saw it first hand...

Translated version of http://www.jaromirstetina.cz/aktuality/srpen-2008/jihoosetinske-mesto-cchinvali-znicila-ruska-58-armada-2.html

EDIT: I see that the fricken translator doesn't work that much, so I'll have to rework it. Gimme some time, OK?


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 18, 2008)

The Czech guy isn't wearing a Corona beer hat too, is he?


----------



## Pisis (Aug 18, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> The Czech guy isn't wearing a Corona beer hat too, is he?


The American guy isn't a Senator, is he?


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 18, 2008)

Pisis said:


> Czech senator Stetina,


sorry Pisis that explains it all. _Czech_ senator? _Stetina_? That Stetina who wrote nonsense about post Soviet Union for years? 



> EDIT: I see that the fricken translator doesn't work that much, so I'll have to rework it. Gimme some time, OK?



no prob


----------



## Pisis (Aug 18, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> sorry Pisis that explains it all. _Czech_ senator? _Stetina_? That Stetina who wrote nonsense about post Soviet Union for years?


What nonsenses exactly? Examples, please.

JaromÃ­r Å tÄ›tina - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 18, 2008)

Pisis said:


> The American guy isn't a Senator, is he?



Probably. I think his name is Jim McDermott.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 18, 2008)

Sorry that was probably lost on most everybody. Jim McDermott is a wackjob out of Seattle who serves in US Congress. He is frequently called "Baghdad Jim". Nevermind. I'm derailing the discussion.

Carry on...


----------



## JugBR (Aug 18, 2008)

Pisis said:


> Here you go.
> _View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsSAz_Zhe38_




"south austacia"


----------



## Mitya (Aug 21, 2008)

I that shall not write. Something to explain it is useless. If something shows CNN and BBC is the fact. All others tell lies!  

Therefore simply we look.


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1qsq9Xk1XN8_

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=61aU3uRarUM_

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUdz36VSVCQ_

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ru3rL34aQb0_


----------



## Amsel (Aug 21, 2008)

> The arrogant folly of the architects of U.S. post-Cold War policy is today on display. By bringing three ex-Soviet republics into NATO, we have moved the U.S. red line for war from the Elbe almost to within artillery range of the old Leningrad.
> 
> Should America admit Ukraine into NATO, Yalta, vacation resort of the czars, will be a NATO port and Sevastopol, traditional home of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, will become a naval base for the U.S. Sixth Fleet. This is altogether a bridge too far.
> 
> ...



PJB: Who Started Cold War II? ::: Patrick J. Buchanan - Official Website


----------



## JugBR (Aug 21, 2008)

cold war II ?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 21, 2008)

Mitya said:


> I that shall not write. Something to explain it is useless. If something shows CNN and BBC is the fact. All others tell lies!
> 
> Therefore simply we look.



You do know that the Daily Show is a comedy and not meant to be taken seriously right?


----------



## timshatz (Aug 21, 2008)

He's posting from the Daily Show? This is a joke, right?


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 21, 2008)




----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 21, 2008)

I do not know if he is serious or not? I pray to god he is not, because if he is then he just through out what little credibility he had.


----------



## Freebird (Aug 21, 2008)

timshatz said:


> He's posting from the Daily Show? This is a joke, right?



I get all of my news from the daily show....


----------



## evangilder (Aug 21, 2008)

You know, sometimes satire is lost in translation...


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 21, 2008)

.


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 22, 2008)

Anyone else notice that Mitya hasnt reurned since his superior knowledge of American news reporting has surfaced???


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 22, 2008)

eh I guess Mitya's post is somehow spoiled by the automatic translator , I believe he meant it ironically as well.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 22, 2008)

Rice and Poles drink to shield with Georgian wine | Politics | Reuters


----------



## mkloby (Aug 22, 2008)

freebird said:


> I get all of my news from the daily show....



Jon Stewart is a real class act. The last time I saw any of his show was a couple years ago when he was joking about DoD recruiting efforts being stepped up since they were losing so many troops in Iraq...

There are few TV personalities I loathe more than that man.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 22, 2008)

He's a donkey. And he's supported by those who are left of center.


----------



## Freebird (Aug 23, 2008)

mkloby said:


> Jon Stewart is a real class act. The last time I saw any of his show was a couple years ago when he was joking about DoD recruiting efforts being stepped up since they were losing so many troops in Iraq...
> 
> There are few TV personalities I loathe more than that man.



Let me guess - Kieth Obermann? His vitriolic rants against Bush and America have made himself into the biggest joke on MSNBC....


BTW, I hope you got the sarcasm in my last post about Stewart's show....


----------



## lesofprimus (Aug 23, 2008)

I did...... I dont watch the daily show with Stewart.... I'd rather have my eyebrows plucked and then have alchohol rubbed on the blank spots...


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 23, 2008)




----------



## pbfoot (Aug 23, 2008)

Now Jon Stewart"s opposite number IMHO on the right is O'Reilly but Stewart knows he's satire and the o'Reilly hasn't figured that out yet


----------



## mkloby (Aug 23, 2008)

pbfoot said:


> Now Jon Stewart"s opposite number IMHO on the right is O'Reilly but Stewart knows he's satire and the o'Reilly hasn't figured that out yet



You make comments like that... Bill O'Reilly is not a comedic news spoof or whatever you'd want to categorize Stewart's partisan vomit show. Sure Bill O'Reilly leans to the right, but he doesn't take the republican party agenda hook, line, and sinker. Also, he'll be just as quick to criticize the GOP as the democratic party for policies he disagrees with. To compare the two is not even close to reality even if you can't stand O'Reilly.

The reason the left hates him so much is largely because he is so successful and his ratings destroy all of their competition.


----------



## fly boy (Aug 23, 2008)

comiso90 said:


> They are coming to get you fly boy!!!
> Better hide your comic books!
> 
> .



i saw the news right after i posted that and i forgot to reply


----------



## fly boy (Aug 23, 2008)

and from what i know this has been the bigest russian millitary attack in a few years


----------



## stasoid (Aug 23, 2008)

I've been watching CBC News for many years and never seen anything like that. Is this a hidden form of censorship? 


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtdVS8646GI_

And few days earlier a Fox News host trying to interrupt an interview of a 12-year old ossetian girl and her aunt when their story got slightly out of his guidelines:


_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8XI2Chc6uQ_

Then, I'm watching Glenn Beck's show on August 19th (I like this guy, his sense of humor and sarcasm) and Glenn calls russian invasion of Georgia operation "Clean Field" translated as "scorched land" saying that Russia's goal in this conflict was extermination of all Georgians    etc... when everyone knows that "Clean Field" was in fact georgian code name for their attack on South Ossetia on August 8th in an attempt to drive Ossetians out of their homeland to the north which in other words would be called "ethnic cleansing"
Why does he need to twist facts so badly? Does he believe his viewers are so dumb stupid?
Why western mainstream media is so scared of the truth?


----------



## pbfoot (Aug 23, 2008)

y


mkloby said:


> You make comments like that... Bill O'Reilly is not a comedic news spoof or whatever you'd want to categorize Stewart's partisan vomit show. Sure Bill O'Reilly leans to the right, but he doesn't take the republican party agenda hook, line, and sinker. Also, he'll be just as quick to criticize the GOP as the democratic party for policies he disagrees with. To compare the two is not even close to reality even if you can't stand O'Reilly.
> 
> The reason the left hates him so much is largely because he is so successful and his ratings destroy all of their competition.


Sorry to disagree I dislike him like you dislike Stewart for reasons very similar except Fox viewers believed his crap and to this day 7 years later the crap he spewed is still believed by some 

_View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RbX-2X7_h-M_


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 23, 2008)

Pb, O'Reilly was not talking about nation trade. He was referring to tourism. Which had hit France in the shorts a few years ago.

As much as you dislike O'Reilly (and I join you, just not in the degree), he is not Jon Stewart of Comedy Central. And to make the comparison is silly you must admit. The one thing that I do admire about O'Reilly is he gives it to both sides. He is a conservative, but he is not a Republican Party talking horse. That he can never be accused of.


----------



## pbfoot (Aug 23, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Pb, O'Reilly was not talking about nation trade. He was referring to tourism. Which had hit France in the shorts a few years ago.
> 
> As much as you dislike O'Reilly (and I join you, just not in the degree), he is not Jon Stewart of Comedy Central. And to make the comparison is silly you must admit. The one thing that I do admire about O'Reilly is he gives it to both sides. He is a conservative, but he is not a Republican Party talking horse. That he can never be accused of.


He seems to jump at innuendo rather then vetting his sources


----------



## fly boy (Aug 23, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> With Georgia almost having been admitted into NATO and the agreements to provide defense for NATO protectorates, what is the European reaction about Georgia. NATO would be in the thick of it right now if the decision were differently. Russia vs NATO? Oh man what a mess that would be.



i think it might end up UN and NATO vs russia and it would still be a mess


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 23, 2008)

stasoid said:


> I've been watching CBC News for many years and never seen anything like that. Is this a hidden form of censorship?
> 
> 
> _View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WtdVS8646GI_
> ...




While I agree that Russia was more than likely correct in what they did, and in that I support Russia, my question to you is this:

You claim that the US news sources are biased and crap and twist the facts. Do you think that the Russian news sources do the same when it comes to reporting news on the US or West? Do you think that that Russian news sources are biased as well, or do you really think they are perfect and tell nothing but the truth?

Please be honest with us here...

I am really looking foward to your response. Please tell us what you think.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 23, 2008)

The question is not about russian news sources. 
There is no freedom of speech in Russia by default, you know. Russian media are corrupt, goverment controlled, anti-west biased, distributing solely Putin's propaganda etc
The question is why free and independent western press is now manipulating public opinion in such primitive ways. Is that what russian journalists need to learn from you?


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 23, 2008)

stasoid said:


> Then, I'm watching Glenn Beck's



that pretty explains it. AFAIK Mr. Beck is one of the most conservative hosts on American TV. I watched some of his shows on CNN and my opinion of him is rather negative as far he covers the international affairs.
of some of his masterpieces, check this out:

Commentary: Russian bombs' message is 'this is for America' - CNN.com


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 23, 2008)

glenn beck is a step above Micheal Savage. Ignore him.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 24, 2008)

coincidence or not ?

the first week that obama losses to mccain in pools is the week of conflict in ossetia.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 24, 2008)

JugBR said:


> coincidence or not ?
> 
> the first week that obama losses to mccain in pools is the week of conflict in ossetia.



It's *"polls"* and that's incorrect - 3 weeks have gone by before McCain pulled ahead in the polls.

2008 South Ossetia war - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Zogby International

Research the dates...........


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 24, 2008)

stasoid said:


> The question is not about russian news sources.
> There is no freedom of speech in Russia by default, you know. Russian media are corrupt, goverment controlled, anti-west biased, distributing solely Putin's propaganda etc
> The question is why free and independent western press is now manipulating public opinion in such primitive ways. Is that what russian journalists need to learn from you?



1. You just answered that question yourself. It is called Freedom of Speech. Maybe one day you will actually get to see what it is like.

2. Stop kidding yourself into thinking that all media in the west is like that. It is really getting very very very old...


----------



## JugBR (Aug 25, 2008)

FLYBOYJ said:


> It's *"polls"* and that's incorrect - 3 weeks have gone by before McCain pulled ahead in the polls.
> 
> 2008 South Ossetia war - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
> 
> ...



its poollss !!!


----------



## JugBR (Aug 25, 2008)

from bbc.co.uk :

*Russian MPs back Georgia's rebels *

_Both houses of Russia's parliament have urged the president to recognise the independence of Georgia's breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. _

BBC NEWS | Europe | Russian MPs back Georgia's rebels

question : if is the will of majority of those people in their regions be independent of georgia, what could be the nato´s position over that and would u.n. recognize their independence ?


----------



## JugBR (Aug 29, 2008)

Mr Putin believes US citizens were in the area of conflict
The US has dismissed as "patently false" accusations by Russia that it helped provoke the conflict in Georgia for domestic political reasons. 

Russian forces subsequently launched a counter-attack and the conflict ended with the ejection of Georgian troops from both South Ossetia and another rebel region, Abkhazia, and an EU-brokered ceasefire. 

Diplomatic wrangling 

Mr Putin said in the US television network interview: "The fact is that US citizens were indeed in the area in conflict during the hostilities. 

"It should be admitted that they would do so only following direct orders from their leaders." 

Mr Putin added: "The American side in effect armed and trained the Georgian army. 

"Why... seek a difficult compromise solution in the peacekeeping process? It is easier to arm one of the sides and provoke it into killing another side. And the job is done. 

*"The suspicion arises that someone in the United States especially created this conflict with the aim of making the situation more tense and creating a competitive advantage for one of the candidates fighting for the post of US president,"* he said. 

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino rejected the allegation. 

"To suggest that the United States orchestrated this on behalf of a political candidate - it sounds not rational," she said. 

*"Those claims first and foremost are patently false, but it also sounds like his defence officials who said they believed this to be true are giving him really bad advice." *

Diplomatic wrangling over Russia's actions in Georgia continued on Thursday with the Georgian parliament urging its government to cut diplomatic ties with Moscow. 

*Earlier, French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner suggested some EU countries were considering sanctions against Russia. *

Mr Kouchner insisted France had made no proposals for sanctions itself but, as current president of the EU, would aim to get consensus among all 27 countries of the bloc if sanctions were envisaged. 

France has called an emergency EU summit on Monday to reassess relations with Russia. 

*Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov described talk of sanctions as the working of "a sick imagination". 

Such talk was an emotional response that demonstrated Western confusion over the situation, he said. *

The US has said it is now considering scrapping a US-Russia civilian nuclear co-operation pact in response to the conflict. 

The White House has also announced that up to $5.75m (£3.1m) will be freed to help Georgia meet "unexpected and urgent refugee and migration needs". 

'Specious' 

Late on Thursday, the UN held an open meeting to discuss the situation in Georgia but it descended into an angry exchange. 

*Russian ambassador to the UN, Vitaly Churkin, launched a scathing attack on some council members. 

He questioned their criticism of the use of force, asking the US representative: "Did you find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq?" 

He compared council members' defence of the territorial integrity of states with what he said was a failure to do so for Serbia over Kosovo. *

_*US deputy ambassador Alejandro Wolff said such "specious comparisons cannot detract from the facts before us". *_

He said Russia had invaded Georgia and was "dismembering" Georgia. 

Irakli Alasania, Georgia's ambassador to the UN, said Russia's actions were "all pre-planned". 

He called for swift humanitarian aid and a UN presence in upper Abkhazia. 

Requests for representatives of South Ossetia and Abkhazia to participate in the formal council meeting were rejected.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 29, 2008)

JugBR said:


> Mr Putin believes US citizens were in the area of conflict
> 
> 
> Mr Putin said in the US television network interview: "The fact is that US citizens were indeed in the area in conflict during the hostilities.
> ...




The world knows there were US citizens in Georgia. Hell, some of them sided with Ossetia for Godsake!!!

Georgia has been seeking NATO entrance. There are qualifications for entrance into NATO.

Whomever found these gems is Master of the Bleedin' Obvious.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 29, 2008)

What a stupid accusation by Putin. Eveyrone knows there were US citizen in Georgia. 

There were about 1000 US soldiers in Georgia at the time. 2 were at the airport that was bombed (thank god they were not hurt, I would hate to see what would have happend then.).

Putin is just ruffeling his feathers and in my opinion ruining his credibility even more. Every day the KGB Communist in him comes out more and more. He is just showing his true color. RED


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 29, 2008)

He's a scary lookin' dude. Like child killer scary lookin'.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 29, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


>



some people should be glad to loose their hair...


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 30, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> What a stupid accusation by Putin. Eveyrone knows there were US citizen in Georgia.


I believe he just wants to prevent the McCains victory by any means possible. That would have some catastrophic effects to the Russ-American relations.


> Putin is just ruffeling his feathers and in my opinion ruining his credibility even more. Every day the KGB Communist in him comes out more and more. He is just showing his true color. RED
> [/IMG]



it's not about his personal mentality ,which is rather cold blooded rational than nationalst or communist irrational, it's about Russia which clearly turns its back to the West since the West has made its choice as well. So no wonder such statements are made by him. If McCain gets elected, we'll hear much more of that in the future, from the both sides.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 30, 2008)

i think the great differential here is the europe. as a brazilian and south american, i know my country and my continent have a lot of issues and weakness, but i just cant believe how the european leaders could be so subordinated to usa.

i dont know if kruska, v2, seesul and other would agree or strongly disagree, but i think if e.u. could have a more independent position over this issue, maybe the situation wouldnt go too far as we see.

ramirezzz, i was convicted that mccain would win, but after i read the speech of obama i think the democrats will win that one easy. he said that he wants incentivate with tax reduction only the american enterprises that creates new jobs inside country. they dont care about foreign policy, they want know about economy.

i think thats enough to win the ellections, even if republicans puts cicciolina or madonna as vice, mccain couldnt beat that.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 30, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> I believe he just wants to prevent the McCains victory by any means possible. That would have some catastrophic effects to the Russ-American relations.



American-Russian relations are going to fall anyhow. Not because of America but because of Putin. He wants to see them fail, he wants to see Russia's return to a super power. He is willing to do so at all costs, even if it means starting a new cold war.

Just as you do not like Bush, I can not stand Putin. To me he is nothing more than a Commie. Me and my wife (she is German by the way, so you can not say that only Americans feel this way) had a discussion about this just this morning, and she can not stand him either. She thinks he is the most dangerous man in the world right now.




Ramirezzz said:


> t's not about his personal mentality ,which is rather cold blooded rational than nationalst or communist irrational, it's about Russia which clearly turns its back to the West since the West has made its choice as well. So no wonder such statements are made by him. If McCain gets elected, we'll hear much more of that in the future, from the both sides.



I have news for you. Obama getting elected will not change a thing. Why? Putin...

You all love Obama, but it will not change a thing. I promise you that. Why, because the American public will not allow the United States to bow down to a Commie (yes that is how I view him).


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Aug 30, 2008)

JugBR said:


> ramirezzz, i was convicted that mccain would win, but after i read the speech of obama i think the democrats will win that one easy. he said that he wants incentivate with tax reduction only the american enterprises that creates new jobs inside country. they dont care about foreign policy, they want know about economy.
> 
> i think thats enough to win the ellections, even if republicans puts cicciolina or madonna as vice, mccain couldnt beat that.



Are you sure about that. I do not think you know Americans as well as you think you do. Keep studying....


----------



## JugBR (Aug 30, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Are you sure about that. I do not think you know Americans as well as you think you do. Keep studying....



its all about economy !


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 30, 2008)

...and taxes. Obama is advocating huge new expenditures all on the shoulders of new taxes.


----------



## stasoid (Aug 30, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> I have news for you. Obama getting elected will not change a thing. Why? Putin...



Ofcourse it wont change things right away. There are so many war profiteers in US. They wont evaporate over night after elections. McCain is their hope for Cold War Two, but Obama can prevent this once elected.

Putin shouldn've made those allegations before he got strong evidence. But what is obviouse now is that the US armed the mad dog and failed keeping him on leash (deliberately or not short before the elections), and that McCain gained a lot of votes because of the conflict and Obama lost. 
Good timing guys. Well done.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 30, 2008)

?


----------



## mkloby (Aug 30, 2008)

JugBR said:


> its all about economy !



Why would you even think you know what US politics is all about? Can you say pompous???


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 30, 2008)

Ooorah!


----------



## Haztoys (Aug 30, 2008)

mkloby said:


> Why would you even think you know what US politics is all about? Can you say pompous???



A lot of none Americans on this forum think they are so sure they know about my country...   

Its like the hate Bush thing ...And not knowing the Dem's have control of Congrees ..And thats what counts in the US...We till some of the guys here over and over and over how "MY" country works and they keep saying the same thing...Gets old ...


----------



## mkloby (Aug 30, 2008)

stasoid said:


> Ofcourse it wont change things right away. There are so many war profiteers in US. They wont evaporate over night after elections. McCain is their hope for Cold War Two, but Obama can prevent this once elected.
> 
> Putin shouldn've made those allegations before he got strong evidence. But what is obviouse now is that the US armed the mad dog and failed keeping him on leash (deliberately or not short before the elections), and that McCain gained a lot of votes because of the conflict and Obama lost.
> Good timing guys. Well done.





Oh the old MIC!!!


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 30, 2008)

This thread has become more and more amusing as time has gone on. Poor russia, victims of the big bad US Republican Political machine. Save us Obama. Save us.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 30, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> ...and taxes. Obama is advocating huge new expenditures all on the shoulders of new taxes.



but if the richs pay more and the poors pay less the situation will be more balanced isnt ? for a country with 300 milion citzens, everything needs huge expendures anyway.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 30, 2008)

mkloby said:


> Why would you even think you know what US politics is all about? Can you say pompous???



pompous


----------



## JugBR (Aug 30, 2008)

Haztoys said:


> A lot of none Americans on this forum think they are so sure they know about my country...
> 
> Its like the hate Bush thing ...And not knowing the Dem's have control of Congrees ..And thats what counts in the US...We till some of the guys here over and over and over how "MY" country works and they keep saying the same thing...Gets old ...



but is simple, its just read the newspapers, and read what the american analists write about the issues. in the end, what we say is nothing less that what the own americans says.

theres the none americans that support bush theres others who think bush is a bad leadership for the west. but the american bush supporters just get annoyed with the guys who dont like bush. the other are smart and understand the situation isnt ?

the americans talk about bush haters, but isnt that true bush is a world hater too ? how could the world loves bush if bush hates the world ?


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 30, 2008)

JugBR said:


> but if the richs pay more and the poors pay less the situation will be more balanced isnt ? for a country with 300 milion citzens, everything needs huge expendures anyway.




Jug 54% of Americans pay no federal taxes. Should 95%? [That's a rhetorical question, I don't want you to answer it. I really don't care what your answer is.]

Obama is proposing to increase taxes to US corporations. [Now here is the question that is not rhetorical]. Where do you think those costs will ultimately come from? The rich? The super-rich? The easily hateable mega-rich? Wrong my liberal friend. They ultimately get eaten by the same dumbass people who vote for the democratic liberal agenda.

Ignorance is an ugly trait. But it is curable. Usually it just takes Americans most of their lifetime to realize that the US gov't taxes the hell out of everyone and only in the average US citizen's final throes of life do they realize that they can't keep all of their hard earned life energy ($).

So where were we in the Georgia vs Russia war...

Georgia has removed all diplomatic relations with Russia. Russia is threatening all its little neighbors with death and violence if they speak out or assist anyone who is against its will and meanwhile blaims the US for all its ills.

Who's next to comment?


----------



## JugBR (Aug 30, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Jug 54% of Americans pay no federal taxes. Should 95%? [That's a rhetorical question, I don't want you to answer it. I really don't care what your answer is.]
> 
> Obama is proposing to increase taxes to US corporations. [Now here is the question that is not rhetorical]. Where do you think those costs will ultimately come from? The rich? The super-rich? The easily hateable mega-rich? Wrong my liberal friend. They ultimately get eaten by the same dumbass people who vote for the democratic liberal agenda.



but the enterprises will have taxes reductions if they creates jobs for the american dumbasses instead other dumbasses from other countries. if the mega-richs wants to pay less taxes they will think about the american dumbasses first. then the dumbasses will have more work, more money, the unemployment will decreasse and all dumbasses will be happy.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 30, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> So where were we in the Georgia vs Russia war...
> 
> Georgia has removed all diplomatic relations with Russia. Russia is threatening all its little neighbors with death and violence if they speak out or assist anyone who is against its will and meanwhile blaims the US for all its ills.
> 
> Who's next to comment?



putzzzz, this georgian president is a genius, serious ! they attacked the ossetians and the russian peacekeeper misson, russian army invaded south ossetia, abkhazia(abhkasia, abkhassia... bah !) and gori. but now, he felt is better remove all diplomatic relations with russia !


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 30, 2008)

Russian peacekeepers. What UN charter was that? I forgot.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 30, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Russian peacekeepers. What UN charter was that? I forgot.



i also forgot man, sorry cant help you.

the deal is that russia recognized the independence of this 2 regions, its a matter of time, the u.n. members also recognize their independence. too much noise for nothing. let the ossetians be free.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 30, 2008)

JugBR said:


> but the enterprises will have taxes reductions if they creates jobs for the american dumbasses instead other dumbasses from other countries. if the mega-richs wants to pay less taxes they will think about the american dumbasses first. then the dumbasses will have more work, more money, the unemployment will decreasse and all dumbasses will be happy.


The whole point here my friend is enterprises WILL NOT have taxes reduced if they create jobs - PERIOD! Ever hear of a place in the US called Michigan? It's where Ford and GM is located and was the automobile producing capital of the world. Michigan is dying because not only Ford and GM are doing poorly as companies, but they and a host of other Michigan companies are being taxed to death DESPITE HOW MANY PEOPLE THEY EMPLOY!!!!

The jobs are moved to other states where the taxes are reasonable or even worse, they are moved overseas!!!

Michigan is one example - Southern California had a huge aerospace base in the 1980s - now it's just a shadow of what it used to be.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 30, 2008)

JugBR said:


> i also forgot man, sorry cant help you.
> 
> .



THAT'S BECAUSE THERE WASN'T ONE!!!

Tell me Jug, what would the average Brazilian think if russia supplied arms and training to the indigenous people of the Amazon in support of a separatist state? Amazonia. Heck, what if they decided on a whim to send "peacekeeping troops" into Brazil to make that happen?

[not sure I want your answer given your siggy]


----------



## JugBR (Aug 30, 2008)

FLYBOYJ said:


> The whole point here my friend is enterprises WILL NOT have taxes reduced if they create jobs - PERIOD! Ever hear of a place in the US called Michigan? *It's where Ford and GM is located and was the automobile producing capital of the world*. *Michigan is dying because not only Ford and GM are doing poorly as companies*, but they and a host of other Michigan companies are being taxed to death DESPITE HOW MANY PEOPLE THEY EMPLOY!!!!
> 
> The jobs are moved to other states where the taxes are reasonable or even worse, they are moved overseas!!!
> 
> Michigan is one example - Southern California had a huge aerospace base in the 1980s - now it's just a shadow of what it used to be.



gm could die in hell, but ford is awesome.

gm is bricklayer´s autos, they also have a brick-shape to remember that !

ford rules, best lines best design

you can go everywhere wheres ford and gm sell autos in the world. the gm autos will be always brick-shaped and the ford ones a state of art.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 30, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> THAT'S BECAUSE THERE WASN'T ONE!!!
> 
> Tell me Jug, what would the average Brazilian think if russia supplied arms and training to the indigenous people of the Amazon in support of a separatist state? Amazonia. Heck, what if they decided on a whim to send "peacekeeping troops" into Brazil to make that happen?
> 
> [not sure I want your answer given your siggy]



training indigenous people in amazon ? whe gonna think is a quite weird idea ! theres nothing there, just bush, monkeys and parrots, we try to burn that by decades but the godamm bushes still growing !!!



just kidding. the indians are brazilian citzens, the ossetians arent georgian citzens. btw, acording ramirezzz they never was georgian citzens because since georgia became independent the ossetians wants to be also independent of georgia. also they are a diferent ethiny of georgians.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 30, 2008)

JugBR said:


> gm could die in hell, but ford is awesome.
> 
> gm is bricklayer´s autos, they also have a brick-shape to remember that !
> 
> ...


Well take heed in my post because the way things are going neither one will be around much longer.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 30, 2008)

JugBR said:


> training indigenous people in amazon ? whe gonna think is a quite weird idea ! theres nothing there, just bush, monkeys and parrots, we try to burn that by decades but the godamm bushes still growing !!!.




Well since they are just monkeys, then I guess your right. Who cares.



JugBR said:


> the ossetians arent georgian citzens. btw, acording ramirezzz they never was georgian citzens because since georgia became independent the ossetians wants to be also independent of georgia. also they are a diferent ethiny of georgians.



Well if ramirezzz says its true it must be. They are part of Georgia! They are seperatists, but are part of Georgia. Just like your "monkeys" who want Amazonia. And guess what. Those "monkeys" are of a different ethnic group too.

So Jug is this a racist divide you profess?


----------



## JugBR (Aug 30, 2008)

FLYBOYJ said:


> Well take heed in my post because the way things are going neither one will be around much longer.



if the situation in michigan is too bad as you said, i agree with you 100%

i just think the government must ensure their people have jobs and their industry grows. if the obama´s view is not right, i think neithers bush is, because as you said the situation is bad in michigan.

but look, obama could be ellected and the situation change for better. why to be so radical, everything the guys says is stupid, isnt right. i think the main idea of keep jobs and money inside usa for the americans is good.

but you forget, obama also waants to tax the imports to protect american industry so if you buy a german bmw or a japanese toyota, you gonna pay much more than buy a brick shaped malibu or a beautifull mustang. of couse its just a example over your previous example, but the idea is make americans buy more american stuff, american multinationals hire more american workers and the money keeps inside usa. isnt that good for you ?


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 30, 2008)

JugBR said:


> i just think the government must ensure their people have jobs and their industry grows.



That is exactly the difference between a liberal and a conservative. A conservative is not expecting the gov't to "ensure" people have jobs and industry grows. Fundamental differences that are lost on most people.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 30, 2008)

Uh... russia vs little Georgia? Where were we? If this thread continues to be sidetracked I'm gonna close it.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 30, 2008)

JugBR said:


> if the situation in michigan is too bad as you said, i agree with you 100%
> 
> i just think the government must ensure their people have jobs and their industry grows. if the obama´s view is not right, i think neithers bush is, because as you said the situation is bad in michigan.


The only way to do that is to ensure business has a good development and growth base and there are tax incentives to induce investment. Democrats have always been short sided on this and Obama, who has only worked as a social worker doesn't have the grasp on how business and government should work IMO. I hope he surrounds himself with those who do.


JugBR said:


> but look, obama could be ellected and the situation change for better. why to be so radical, everything the guys says is stupid, isnt right. i think the main idea of keep jobs and money inside usa for the americans is good.


See above - he needs a base to create those jobs and if he doesn't make the American business market friendly, those jobs aren't going to happen. Additionally the government can only create so many jobs before it too it burdened as a total welfare state.


JugBR said:


> but you forget, obama also waants to tax the imports to protect american industry so if you buy a german bmw or a japanese toyota, you gonna pay much more than buy a brick shaped malibu or a beautifull mustang. of couse its just a example over your previous example, but the idea is make americans buy more american stuff, american multinationals hire more american workers and the money keeps inside usa. isnt that good for you ?


It also keeps American products off foreign markets unless the US dollar is weak. There needs to be a balance and many democrats like Obama are social workers and activists, they don't know how to run businesses.

Something else you probably don't hear about in your part of the world - many of our local governments are running out of money because of the reasons I just described. In my local community the school board had a bond voted on in 2004 to fix the local schools (a bond is like a tax here). 4 years later the schools never got fixed and now they want another bond.

There are many "activists and social workers" who decide to get into local politics. Many of them can't balance their check book and even have gone bankrupt, but they want to run for public office and handle the public's money!


----------



## JugBR (Aug 30, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Well since they are just monkeys, then I guess your right. Who cares.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



indians are monkeys matt like you and me, charles darwin and the rest of mankind. but when i said monkeys, i was talking about monkeys really, not indians. you know that. thanx god in my family we have blacks and whites so... what can i say ?

i was just ironical because outside borders people says brazilians dont care about the amazon forrest , etc... wich is BS, but i wont spend time here explaining why. i dont need. the forrest is ours, we can burn that, we can preserve that, of course preserve is more wise than burn. but what country preserved their forrests ?

about ramirezzz. dimitri is russian, we are not, he knows better the history of their country and their local issues than you and me. i think his opinion is important since in bbc and cnn we just see the georgian side of story.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 30, 2008)

JugBR said:


> i dont need. the forrest is ours, we can burn that, we can preserve that, of course preserve is more wise than burn. but what country preserved thair forrests ?
> QUOTE]
> 
> Germany... Black Forest. And by learning from them, the US. This German conservation has served as the basis for virtually all US efforts of forest management.
> ...


----------



## JugBR (Aug 30, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> JugBR said:
> 
> 
> > i dont need. the forrest is ours, we can burn that, we can preserve that, of course preserve is more wise than burn. but what country preserved thair forrests ?
> ...


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 30, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Uh... russia vs little Georgia? Where were we? If this thread continues to be sidetracked I'm gonna close it.


Agree - let's move it back....


----------



## JugBR (Aug 31, 2008)

i think is better to close that too


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 31, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> American-Russian relations are going to fall anyhow. Not because of America but because of Putin.


They began to fall actually long time ago. And that was clearly not a process initialised by Putin - the roots of the ongoing conflict are back to late 90ies, when the NATO expansion took place. You see it as a quite acceptable process, we see it (and yes, I see it so as well) as a act which is clearly hostile towards Russia. In fact what both USA and Western Europe had to do afer fall of the Berlin Wall is to disband NATO. That would prevent much of todays problems.


> He wants to see them fail, he wants to see Russia's return to a super power. He is willing to do so at all costs, even if it means starting a new cold war.


hey don't demonise him, nobody wants a second Cold War exept of some hawks both in US and Russian establishment. The message he tries to spread is rather "like it or not, we'll pursue our goals regardless your critic and politics just as you're (America) doing so in your sphere of interest. We wont give up our positions to you just like it was during the chaotic Yelzin times. Even at the cost of a new Cold War if the West wants it so. We are ready for going that far."
So you see ,what happens now is actually the both sides accuse each other of starting the new cold war, but nobody really wants it.



> Just as you do not like Bush, I can not stand Putin. To me he is nothing more than a Commie. Me and my wife (she is German by the way, so you can not say that only Americans feel this way) had a discussion about this just this morning, and she can not stand him either.


I always wonder why so many in the West think of Putin as of being Commie. In fact nobody in Russia, and I mean really nobody, even some diehard opposition members considers him as being a communist .He was always highly critical to the communist regime in the Soviet Union and the current Russian Communist Party is very critical towards him, just like the democratic opposition is. 
Or maybe anyone who opposes the West in some sensitive issues risks of being called a Commie? Please enlighten me Adler, I don't get the point!  



> I have news for you. Obama getting elected will not change a thing. Why? Putin...
> 
> You all love Obama, but it will not change a thing. I promise you that. Why, because the American public will not allow the United States to bow down to a Commie (yes that is how I view him).



THAT would change a lot. You know , as an American concetrated on domestic issues I would vote for McCain too. But as been said, for the russ-amer relations his election would be disastrous. 
Why?
Because this guy is one of those neoconservative hawks acting in best traditions of the Theo Roosevelt gunboat diplomacy. This guy isn't able to make compromisses, in fact he doesn't want to make any. He is a hawk, a warrior , not a diplomat. His views on Russia were up-to-date in the 1960ies or 1970ies, but not in the late 2000ies. He is just not flexible enough.
We have some of his sort as well - and believe me ,Putin is by far not one of them . I do hope these guys wont take the upper hand in Russia very soon. That would be a dead end.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 31, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> THAT'S BECAUSE THERE WASN'T ONE!!!


oh really?

Both Russian and Georgian (yes you know there were also some Georgian blue helmets as well) are UN acknowledged peacekeeping force.
UNOMIG's Mandate

the 1992 agreements of Dagomys( in Russian):
Äàãîìûññêèå ñîãëàøåíèÿ

the 1994 agreement of Moscow(in Russian as well):

ÎÁ ÎÑÍÎÂÍÛÕ ÏÐÈÍÖÈÏÀÕ ÄÅßÒÅËÜÍÎÑÒÈ ÂÎÅÍÍÛÕ ÊÎÍÒÈÍÃÅÍÒÎÂ È ÃÐÓÏÏ ÂÎÅÍÍÛÕ ÍÀÁËÞÄÀÒÅËÅÉ, ÏÐÅÄÍÀÇÍÀ×ÅÍÍÛÕ ÄËß ÍÎÐÌÀËÈÇÀÖÈÈ ÑÈÒÓÀÖÈÈ Â ÇÎÍÅ



> Heck, what if they decided on a whim to send "peacekeeping troops" into Brazil to make that happen?


Are you actually aware of the 1992 war? what happened there? Why are the peacekeeping troops there?


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 31, 2008)

Haztoys said:


> A lot of none Americans on this forum think they are so sure they know about my country...
> 
> Its like the hate Bush thing ...And not knowing the Dem's have control of Congrees ..And thats what counts in the US...We till some of the guys here over and over and over how "MY" country works and they keep saying the same thing...Gets old ...



You know it goes the other way round as well. There are also a lot of Americans who think they are so sure they know about the other countries . This particular thread here is just another confirmation of that.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 31, 2008)

the most funny is that "you all love obama" 

i dont love obama, i love my family, i love my country, as you love you family and loves your country herr adler. but we allways should have opinion about the issues and mine is obama is not an awesome guy, but he is much better than bush, by his ideas. 

but if obama would make a speech here in campinas, i wouldnt go listen him, first because he is not from here, second because theres much more things interesting to do.

dont you guys think ossetia and abkhazia are too small excuses to start, or wants to start a second cold war ? is better that both regions becomes independent as fast as possible to end this issue before people starts digging out corpses from 40 years ago.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 31, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> oh really?
> 
> Both Russian and Georgian (yes you know there were also some Georgian blue helmets as well) are UN acknowledged peacekeeping force.
> UNOMIG's Mandate



UNOMIG was originally established on 24 August 1993 by Security Council resolution 858 (1993) to verify compliance with the 27 July 1993 ceasefire agreement between the Government of Georgia and the Abkhaz authorities in Georgia with special attention to the situation in the city of Sukhumi; to investigate reports of ceasefire violations and to attempt to resolve such incidents with the parties involved; and to report to the Secretary-General on the implementation of its mandate, including, in particular, violations of the ceasefire agreement. *The authorized strength of the Mission was 88 military observers. *

*After UNOMIG's original mandate had been invalidated* by the resumed fighting in Abkhazia in September 1993, the *Mission was given an interim mandate*, by Security Council resolution 881 (1993) of 4 November 1993, to maintain contacts with both sides to the conflict and with Russian military contingent, and to monitor and report on the situation, with particular reference to developments relevant to United Nations efforts to promote a comprehensive political settlement. Following the signing, in May 1994, by the Georgian and Abkhaz sides of the Agreement on a Ceasefire and Separation of Forces, the Security Council, by its resolution 937 (1994) of 21 *July 1994, authorized the increase in UNOMIG's strength to up to 136 military observers* and decided that the mandate of an expanded Mission shall be as follows: 

To monitor and verify the implementation by the parties of the Agreement on a Ceasefire and Separation of Forces signed in Moscow on 14 May 1994; 
To observe the operation of the peacekeeping force of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) within the framework of the implementation of the Agreement; 
*To verify, through observation and patrolling, that troops of the parties do not remain in or re-enter the security zone and that heavy military equipment does not remain or is not reintroduced in the security zone or the restricted weapons zone; *
To monitor the storage areas for heavy military equipment withdrawn from the security zone and the restricted weapons zone in cooperation with the CIS peacekeeping force as appropriate; 
To monitor the withdrawal of troops of the Republic of Georgia from the Kodori Valley to places beyond the boundaries of Abkhazia, Republic of Georgia; 
To patrol regularly the Kodori Valley; 
To investigate, at the request of either party or the CIS peacekeeping force or on its own initiative, reported or alleged violations of the Agreement and to attempt to resolve or contribute to the resolution of such incidents; 
*To report regularly to the Secretary-General within its mandate, in particular on the implementation of the Agreement, any violations and their investigation by UNOMIG, as well as other relevant developments;* 
To maintain close contacts with both parties to the conflict and to cooperate with the CIS peacekeeping force and, by its presence in the area, to contribute to conditions conducive to the safe and orderly return of refugees and displaced persons. 
The United Nations office for the protection and promotion of human rights in Abkhazia, Georgia (HROAG) , was established on 10 December 1996 in accordance with Security Council resolution 1077 (1996) of 22 October 1996. It is jointly staffed by the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). The Human Rights Office forms part of UNOMIG and reports to the High Commissioner for Human Rights through the Head of Mission of UNOMIG. 

Most recently the mandate of UNOMIG was extended until 15 October 2008 by Security Council resolution 1808 (15 April 2008).


Where in there does it state that these 136 "observers" can mushroom into hundreds of APCs/tanks/strike/bomber aircraft can take action without further UN resolution? Exactly where Ramirezzz?


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 31, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> Are you actually aware of the 1992 war? what happened there? Why are the peacekeeping troops there?


I am - I think you seen me mention this in earlier posts and probably why I agree with a lot of what you are saying.


----------



## GrauGeist (Aug 31, 2008)

From what I've seen over the years, UN peace-keepers rarely operate with heavy armor and offensive tactics.

And just to make things interesting, I wonder what would happen if China decided to "recognize" Chechnya, and send in "peace-keepers"...


----------



## JugBR (Aug 31, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Where in there does it state that these 136 "observers" can mushroom into hundreds of APCs/tanks/strike/bomber aircraft can take action without further UN resolution? Exactly where Ramirezzz?



but matt remember the "APCs/tanks/strike/bomber aircraft" came after georgia attack the ossetians and the russian peacekeepers missionaires. i agree with you that it should be discussed first in UN instead of just go and strike georgia. but since bush did the same on iraq and you guys call UN as corrupt and lazy... you know... in this case putin just followed bush´s example...


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 31, 2008)

Oh here we go again... Bush got the security council approval Jug. Focus like a laser beam. This is the Russia vs Georgia thread. Not Bush vs the world.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 31, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Oh here we go again... Bush got the security council approval Jug. Focus like a laser beam. This is the Russia vs Georgia thread. Not Bush vs the world.



no is not bush against the world either russia against the west its just a sunday´s talk...


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 31, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Where in there does it state that these 136 "observers" can mushroom into hundreds of APCs/tanks/strike/bomber aircraft can take action without further UN resolution? Exactly where Ramirezzz?



well which peacekeepers are you talking about then? Those who were initially there or about the troops which entered the SO after Georgian assault?


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 31, 2008)

GrauGeist said:


> From what I've seen over the years, UN peace-keepers rarely operate with heavy armor and offensive tactics.
> 
> And just to make things interesting, I wonder what would happen if China decided to "recognize" Chechnya, and send in "peace-keepers"...



Are the Chechen people to 90 percent the Chinese citizens? Does the Chechen economy depend to the same 90 percent on Russian financial injections? 
in fact what you've described here is exactly what the NATO did with/to Kosovo.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 31, 2008)

JugBR said:


> i agree with you that it should be discussed first in UN instead of just go and strike georgia.



actually it was been discussed right after the Georgan intervention.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 31, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Bush got the security council approval Jug.



That's the news to me.. Where and when?


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 31, 2008)

FLYBOYJ said:


> I am - I think you seen me mention this in earlier posts and probably why I agree with a lot of what you are saying.



I see that FlyboyJ and I'm very thankful for that. I'm trying to be objective as well and abstracting from positions of both sides. I see a lot of mistakes made by Russian goverment during this war and some controversial themes in the past and really don't church them up on every issue. At least I'm trying not to do so.


----------



## GrauGeist (Aug 31, 2008)

The object of that scenario, placing China into a "peace-keeper" role, is to illustrate a point.

Kosovo, which wasn't the same scenario, was to intervene in ethnic cleansing.

Chechnya has wanted to break away from Russia, Russia has responded in kind with military action. Enter a large nation with a modern arsenal to "back up" seperatist actions, and you have a situation much like Russia and the S. Ossetia.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 31, 2008)

> Kosovo, which wasn't the same scenario, was to intervene in ethnic cleansing.


what makes you think there weren't any atrocities commited in the SO war? both of the 1992 and 2008? For example, it's little known in the West that the siege of Tshinhvali in 1992 was very similar to the one of Sarajevo 'till 95? Burning villages and houses on both sides etc? That's why the Russian peacekeepers where there all the time since 92.
I do believe the same would happen in the same scale this year as well if Russia wouldn't intervene. 
Saakashvili tried to invade the SO in 2004 as well, which is little known in the West as well.
So much about the humanitarian aspect.


> Chechnya has wanted to break away from Russia, Russia has responded in kind with military action. Enter a large nation with a modern arsenal to "back up" seperatist actions, and you have a situation much like Russia and the S. Ossetia.



see above.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 31, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> actually it was been discussed right after the Georgan intervention.



interesting stuff was acording to the bbc brazil, the ambassador os usa in moscow said that russia was right to defends their citzens in south ossetia.


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 31, 2008)

BS


----------



## JugBR (Aug 31, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> BS



BS huh ?

US Ambassador in Moscow: Russia's response to Georgia's actions in South Ossetia was reasonable


----------



## Milos Sijacki (Aug 31, 2008)

Ramirezz, that war in 1992. Was the shelling of Tshkinvali really similiar to that of Sarajevo?

What do You think about this independent Abkhazia and South Ossetia thing?


----------



## Matt308 (Aug 31, 2008)

JugBR said:


> BS huh ?
> 
> US Ambassador in Moscow: Russia's response to Georgia's actions in South Ossetia was reasonable



Yep.

Rice gives Russia cold shoulder over Georgia | Markets | Reuters


----------



## Ramirezzz (Aug 31, 2008)

Milos Sijacki said:


> Ramirezz, that war in 1992. Was the shelling of Tshkinvali really similiar to that of Sarajevo?


there were many similarities indeed. Georgians surrounded Tshinval and cut away the supply lines. They seized the hills around the city and shelled it with a heavy gunfire.



> What do You think about this independent Abkhazia and South Ossetia thing?


You mean the recent recognising of their independence by Russia?
I see at as a mistake at this particular moment. Or maybe not as mistake, but as a premature move in any case. They could hang up the whole issue for a while and chaffer their independence in the peace talks, not in that one - sided way like they've done it. But this is a complex political question , you know. 
From the local Caucasian point of view the recognition is certainly considered as a quite logical step in Russia's efforts to maintain their presence there. Any other decision would not have been understood by the locals, plain and simple. On the other side , there're still some separatist tensions inside Russian Caucasus republics, such as Ingushetia. Not as near as strong as in the past decade, but anyway present to a certain degree. They would react to this decision in a very predictable way.
Saakashvili has gained much points here as well. If he, say, would agree to recognise these republics in public in peace talks, he would turn into a political dead meat. No support of the opposition, everyone would turn away from him in this case. But now he can present it as a European problem and shuffle off the responsibilty off his shoulders. His message is something like " Europe should deal with that, Georgia was powerless from the very beginning". 
So from the global view that was clearly a premature move. And nobody remembers now who actually started this mess.
So it was actually a very tough decision to meet by Medvedev. But maybe there wasn't much choice either. Tough situation indeed.


----------



## JugBR (Aug 31, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Yep.
> 
> Rice gives Russia cold shoulder over Georgia | Markets | Reuters



btw, rice is "soviet expert", and i heard that her russian is described as less than basic... i think it shows a picture of situation.

her russian is worst than my english 

skavurska !


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Aug 31, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> I see that FlyboyJ and I'm very thankful for that. I'm trying to be objective as well and abstracting from positions of both sides. I see a lot of mistakes made by Russian goverment during this war and some controversial themes in the past and really don't church them up on every issue. At least I'm trying not to do so.


I think you've been "reasonably objective."


----------



## Ramirezzz (Sep 1, 2008)

JugBR said:


> btw, rice is "soviet expert", and i heard that her russian is described as less than basic... i think it shows a picture of situation.


lol it's funny that both of the current sovietologists-in-charge, Rice and Gates actually are the ones who contributed to the fall of Russian - American relations on the American side at most. The more you learn Russia , the less you understand it.  As the famous Russian poet of the 19th century named Tjutchev once said : "Russia is understood not by the mind,. Nor by a common rule. She has a special stature of her own:. In Russia one can only believe".  




> her russian is worst than my english
> 
> skavurska !



far worser man! In fact your English is not much worser than the one of Bush (ok, ok , don't ban me, it's just a joke  )


----------



## JugBR (Sep 1, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> lol it's funny that both of the current sovietologists-in-charge, Rice and Gates actually are the ones who contributed to the fall of Russian - American relations on the American side at most. The more you learn Russia , the less you understand it.  As the famous Russian poet of the 19th century named Tjutchev once said : "Russia is understood not by the mind,. Nor by a common rule. She has a special stature of her own:. In Russia one can only believe".
> 
> 
> 
> ...



no man stay cool im not administrator ! and i didnt feel offended.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Sep 1, 2008)

JugBR said:


> no man stay cool im not administrator ! and i didnt feel offended.



lol no it was just in case someone of our moderators takes it too serious


----------



## JugBR (Sep 1, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> lol no it was just in case someone of our moderators takes it too serious



i didnt took that serious, why should they take ?


----------



## Ramirezzz (Sep 1, 2008)

JugBR said:


> i didnt took that serious, why should they take ?



well maybe somebody could have been insulted by my low estimate of the Bush language abilities


----------



## JugBR (Sep 1, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> well maybe somebody could have been insulted by my low estimate of the Bush language abilities



you even needs to insult bush ramirezzz, just watch the david letterman´s top ten bush´s bloopers. its all there !


----------



## mkloby (Sep 1, 2008)

JugBR said:


> you even needs to insult bush ramirezzz, just watch the david letterman´s top ten bush´s bloopers. its all there !



If almost everything you said was recorded I'm sure there would be many instances in which you came across much less formidable than you intended.


----------



## JugBR (Sep 1, 2008)

mkloby said:


> If almost everything you said was recorded I'm sure there would be many instances in which you came across much less formidable than you intended.



thats material enough to make a top 1000


----------



## JugBR (Sep 3, 2008)

so, anybody saw any picture of baku-tiblisi pipelines destroyed or with some evidence os russian bombings ?

*ISNT THAT STRANGE ?*


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 3, 2008)

AvWeek reported no pipelines were bombed. What they did report is the origination of the claim came from some errant bombs from a Tu-22M that missed a different target and landed nearby buried pipelines. AvWeek debunked the pipeline attack, claiming if the russians wanted to bomb the pipeline they would have focused upon the larger pumphouses and not the pipeline proper.

A really good analysis in AvWeek on the order of battle.


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 4, 2008)

No shame 

It appears the international space station members are formally protesting the russian cosmonauts using the station as a reconnaisance platform.  The russians have responded that they were only monitoring compliance to ceasefire lines.

I love it.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Sep 8, 2008)

some first reliable information on casualties in South Ossetia
the list of 311 South Ossetians known to be killed as of 4 September
(in Russian only)
it's still incomplete and will be expanded later.
The name and birthdate are mentioned ,as well as cause and place of death.
Ñïèñîê ïîãèáøèõ æèòåëåé Þæíîé Îñåòèè ïî äàííûì íà 4 ñåíòÿáðÿ: ÔÈÎ, ïðè÷èíà ãèáåëè, ìåñòî çàõîðîíåíèÿ - Íîâîñòè Ðîññèè - ÈÀ REGNUM


----------



## Ramirezzz (Sep 13, 2008)

some pics of the Su-25s after combat missions , Ossetia 2008
u_96: ÐŸÐ—Ð Ðš ÑÑ€Ð°Ð±Ð¾Ñ‚Ð°Ð» ÑˆÑ‚Ð°Ñ‚Ð½Ð¾, Ð½Ð¾ "Ð“Ñ€Ð°Ñ‡" Ð²ÐµÑ€Ð½ÑƒÐ»ÑÑ Ð´Ð¾Ð¼Ð¾Ð¹. Ð–Ð¸Ð²Ð¾Ð¹...


----------



## B-17engineer (Sep 13, 2008)

Wow...those are pretty damaged


----------



## JugBR (Sep 13, 2008)

pretty damaged ? i think its totally damaged !


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 13, 2008)

Heat seeking missile damage by the looks of it. MANPADS probably.


----------



## JugBR (Sep 13, 2008)

what happened with the pilots of these planes ramirez ?


----------



## Gnomey (Sep 13, 2008)

That's quite some damage. By the looks of things Jug they are back at a base in Russia and so the pilot would of just been shaken?


----------



## JugBR (Sep 13, 2008)

Gnomey said:


> That's quite some damage. By the looks of things Jug they are back at a base in Russia and so the pilot would of just been shaken?



amazing they could flight in that kind of situation. migs and sukhois are more reliable the hollywood movies made us to believe so !

in my ignorance i allways thought this kind of planes was one shot, one explosion.

amazing !


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 15, 2008)

IT is amazing. Even though these are two engine aircraft, the engines are physically in close proximity to each other. That's some serious damage to a rotating turbine and I would have thought it would take both engines out.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 15, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> Or maybe anyone who opposes the West in some sensitive issues risks of being called a Commie? Please enlighten me Adler, I don't get the point!



No I have no problem with people being critical of the west. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. If I were against peopel being critical of the west, you would have been banned already? I would not ban you, because you are only stating your opinion, which is great. That is the point of these forums to discuss stuff.

Now having said that, just as you are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to mine? I am entitled to mine, correct?

I try to call it like I see it. 

My opinions of Putin:

He is a communist, through and through, whether he likes it or not. Sure he might have been critical of the Soviet regime, but that does not change anything. A Republican can be critical of the Republican party, does that make him any less of a Republican?

He can not be trusted.

He is looking West...

Is all of this fact? Probably not, but it is how I view the man, because I do not trust him.

Again just as you do not like Bush. I can not stand Putin. If you do not like that, well you will have to deal with it. Atleast I do not like Bush either and can admit that my own leader is not the greatest thing since sliced bread and butter and makes mistakes.

As for your expansion of NATO theory, I do not agree with it either. If NATO had been abolished, it would have been only a matter of time until Russia flexed her muscles again. Would it have been okay for Russia to do so with a weakened West? Get my point.



Ramirezzz said:


> Because this guy is one of those neoconservative hawks acting in best traditions of the Theo Roosevelt gunboat diplomacy. This guy isn't able to make compromisses, in fact he doesn't want to make any. He is a hawk, a warrior , not a diplomat. His views on Russia were up-to-date in the 1960ies or 1970ies, but not in the late 2000ies. He is just not flexible enough.



Please site hard fact examples to back these comments up. Quotes and facts please...

By the way, I am not actually expecting you to post fact or quotes. I am just making a point, that just as you have your opinion of McCain (which I absolutely do not agree with it), I have my opinion of Putin.

Am I am wrong about Putin? Maybe (I do not think so though).

Are you wrong about McCain? Maybe...


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 15, 2008)

JugBR said:


> the most funny is that "you all love obama"



If the comment was not directed to you, or you did not fit the description, then you should have ignored it and moved on, instead of looking like a prick.


----------



## JugBR (Sep 15, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> If the comment was not directed to you, or you did not fit the description, then you should have ignored it and moved on, instead of looking like a prick.



how do i know huh ? you say "you all love obama"...

all gore, all pacino ?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 15, 2008)

JugBR said:


> how do i know huh ? you say "you all love obama"...



Don't take everything so seriously then...


----------



## Venganza (Sep 15, 2008)

Wow, just got a look at the damaged Frogfoots! That really is one tough plane. I'm with Matt308; it's hard to understand how a running turbine could have been that shredded without not just taking the other engine out, but the entire plane. There should have been pieces of blades spraying everywhere, like shrapnel. What are the blades made out of? Titanium? Those pictures kind of remind me of damaged B-17 photos from WWII - you wonder how the planes made it back.

Venganza


----------



## Ramirezzz (Sep 15, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Heat seeking missile damage by the looks of it. MANPADS probably.



absolutely right Matt, it was a Georgian Igla MANPAD.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Sep 15, 2008)

BTW guys have you noticed a beer bottle in the exaust section in the first pic? THAT is what probably kept the airframe alive!


----------



## stasoid (Sep 15, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> My opinions of Putin:
> 
> He is a communist, through and through, whether he likes it or not. Sure he might have been critical of the Soviet regime, but that does not change anything



In my opinion, he is no more communist then, Augusto Pinochet or South Korean dictator Chun Doo-Hwan.

In fact, it's maybe more capitalism in Russia these days then in Canada. Income tax in Russia is 13% and it's not progressive. Thousands of expats from the West and millions from ex-soviet states are coming to Russia every year with only one reason - to make money. If Putin was a bloody communist that wouldn be possible.


As for NATO - Ukraine, Poland, Czech Republic, Georgia - this problem didnt exist 10 years ago and it wasnt Russia who created tension with these countries.


----------



## Venganza (Sep 16, 2008)

I don't think Putin is pro-communist or pro-capitalist. I think he's pro-Putin - in other words a rank opportunist, and a darn good one at that, unfortunately for us (or anybody else who gets in his way).

Venganza


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 16, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> BTW guys have you noticed a beer bottle in the exaust section in the first pic? THAT is what probably kept the airframe alive!



Well I'll be damned.  Probably the same maintenance guy that said he'll "fix it first thing tomorrow morning". Not exactly western maintenance standards.  Ask FlyboyJ what the AF would do if they found the maintenance crew drinking on the job.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Sep 17, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Well I'll be damned.  Probably the same maintenance guy that said he'll "fix it first thing tomorrow morning". Not exactly western maintenance standards.  Ask FlyboyJ what the AF would do if they found the maintenance crew drinking on the job.



well Matt, that's the way it sometimes goes there .


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Sep 17, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Ask FlyboyJ what the AF would do if they found the maintenance crew drinking on the job.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Sep 17, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Now having said that, just as you are entitled to your opinion. I am entitled to mine? I am entitled to mine, correct?


certainly you are! This is an internet forum and finally you are a moderator here.  



> He is a communist, through and through, whether he likes it or not. Sure he might have been critical of the Soviet regime, but that does not change anything. A Republican can be critical of the Republican party, does that make
> Again just as you do not like Bush. I can not stand Putin. If you do not like that, well you will have to deal with it. Atleast I do not like Bush either and can admit that my own leader is not the greatest thing since sliced bread and butter and makes mistakes.



I still can't get your point Adler or I can't express myself clear enough anymore. Probably my poor English is to blame.  
Once again - *what *does make him a commie according to your opinion Adler? Which foreign or domestic issues exactly?


> As for your expansion of NATO theory, I do not agree with it either. If NATO had been abolished, it would have been only a matter of time until Russia flexed her muscles again. Would it have been okay for Russia to do so with a weakened West? Get my point.


 you see , we're just interpreting the same facts from the different positions. You see it as a reaction to an inevitable agressive behavior of Russia in the future, we see at as an agressive act towards Russia itself. There's no way we can convince each other of the contrary, so let's leave it. 



> Please site hard fact examples to back these comments up. Quotes and facts please...



Oh please that would take helluva time since every single statement of Mr. McCain on Russia reminds me of the good ol' times of the Cold War.  Shall I post them all?


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 17, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Ask FlyboyJ what the AF would do if they found the maintenance crew drinking on the job.



Believe it or not, we were actually forbidden from flying in Russian aircraft in Kosovo because of shotty Maintenance and Russian flight crews drinking while on duty.

We would do exchange programs and fly with other countries in their aircraft. We flew in Germany CH-53s and UH-1Ds, Swiss Super Pumas, Italian MD 500s and British Gazelles. We wanted to do an exchange with the Russians in there Hinds and Hips. The Russians were all for it but we did not recieve permission from our own command for those reasons stated above.

Kind of a shame, I think it would have been neat, but better safe than sorry.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 17, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> There's no way we can convince each other of the contrary, so let's leave it.



Agreed 



Ramierezzz said:


> Oh please that would take helluva time since every single statement of Mr. McCain on Russia reminds me of the good ol' times of the Cold War.  Shall I post them all?



Of course not, I already said that I did not actually expect you to do so. For the same reasons you talk of McCain, is why I do not like Putin. He is no different in my opinion, just on the other side.


----------



## Ramirezzz (Sep 17, 2008)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> Believe it or not, we were actually forbidden from flying in Russian aircraft in Kosovo because of shotty Maintenance and Russian flight crews drinking while on duty.



as far as for flight crews I can't remember any accident in the VVS both Soviet and Russian in its postwar history which happend because of a drunk flight crew. Certainly now and then even among the pilots there have been some cases of drinking while on duty , but it's not THAT dramatically as your command in Kosovo tried to present.. 
Kind of a shame indeed.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 17, 2008)

Ramirezzz said:


> as far as for flight crews I can't remember any accident in the VVS both Soviet and Russian in its postwar history which happend because of a drunk flight crew. Certainly now and then even among the pilots there have been some cases of drinking while on duty , but it's not THAT dramatically as your command in Kosovo tried to present..
> Kind of a shame indeed.



I never said they lost an aircraft in Kosovo due to drinking on duty. I said they were drinking while on duty. 

We were even offered beer by Russian mechanics working on a Hind in Pristina. Do you know what the real shame was? They were drinking American Budweiser that they got in the American MWR in Pristina!  That is a real shame!

I think the main issue as it was explained to me, was because of the maintenance that was being done and the lack of parts available.


----------



## mkloby (Sep 17, 2008)

I tend to think that Mr Putin is not communist. Traditionally, communists believed that it was not possible to acheive socialism by working within the socio-economic confines already firmly in place under capitalism, and sought to overthrow them - force was a top method. This, he is not. I believe he leans more toward the free market (maybe not as much as I'd like to see), but is also fearful of giving too much freedom to the market. An example of this, as I see it, is how the oil/gas industry was nationalized to a large extent. As I have seen written, he's taking a Russian and not a Western approach to moving toward market based economy.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 17, 2008)

mkloby said:


> I tend to think that Mr Putin is not communist. Traditionally, communists believed that it was not possible to acheive socialism by working within the socio-economic confines already firmly in place under capitalism, and sought to overthrow them - force was a top method. This, he is not. I believe he leans more toward the free market (maybe not as much as I'd like to see), but is also fearful of giving too much freedom to the market. An example of this, as I see it, is how the oil/gas industry was nationalized to a large extent. As I have seen written, he's taking a Russian and not a Western approach to moving toward market based economy.



I can actually agree with that. I just do not trust the guy and I guess I see him as a commie in a figurative sense.


----------



## Matt308 (Sep 17, 2008)

Putin is a closet authoritarian.

An authoritarian government accepts no limitation on the amount or kind of coercion it may use to achieve its ends. It can execute exile or place people in the labor of prison camps without any restraint. Therefore authoritarian power is unlimited in scope. It is all embracing. The authoritarian government asserts the right to control and regiment every phase of life.

Think of authoritarians as "super-communists".


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Sep 18, 2008)

Matt308 said:


> Putin is a closet authoritarian.
> 
> An authoritarian government accepts no limitation on the amount or kind of coercion it may use to achieve its ends. It can execute exile or place people in the labor of prison camps without any restraint. Therefore authoritarian power is unlimited in scope. It is all embracing. The authoritarian government asserts the right to control and regiment every phase of life.
> 
> Think of authoritarians as "super-communists".



Agreed!


----------

