NationStates Jolt Archive

Wow you sunk a PT boat. Impressive.

It's the job of those peacekeepers to stop the Ossetians doing stuff to Georgia. Obviously they didn't. Great job :hail:

Now let us talk about the flagship of the BSF, the missile cruiser Moskva:



From Globalsecurity.org.

Wow, impressive. It might actually be more dangerous to the people using it :eek:


Actually the Russians have a pretty good navy, despite a few design flaws.

They were killing inncoent people since the begging. If you support people who were at fault for the Beslan school hostage crisis, than theres no way I can even talk to you about this anymore.

We only targeted separatist forces. Now did some people die who shouldnt of? Yes it was a war and that happens in wars unforantly. However the separatist targeted no military targets as their targets thourghout the wars.

You only targetted separatist forces during the complete devastation of Grozny? Estimates for civilian deaths during the First Chechen War reach 100,000 dead, 200,000 wounded.

From Human Rights Watch:

http://www.hrw.org/reports/1996/WR96/Helsinki-16.htm

Stop with this absurd charade that Russia can do no wrong.

Its not like Russia invaded another country with the excuse of helping some citizens, and its not like they are continueing to bomb Georgia even after Georgia pulled out, like Russia asked them too, and after georgia having declared a ceasefire.

Also, the Georgian ship was sunk by your planes, not by your ships. While you navy may do well enough for now, if it ever came up against the UK or the USA, you wouldn't stand a chance.

You fail to understand it was Georgia that started this war and were and are killing our people. Also you fail to understand that they did not pull out but are still fighting and regrouping.

By mistake. It is more Russian and the people want to be part of us and have the right to rejoin us. Ever since they were put in Georgia, they have been trying to get back with us.

And please explain to me why they couldn't have done this in a democratic way.

They were killing inncoent people since the begging. If you support people who were at fault for the Beslan school hostage crisis, than theres no way I can even talk to you about this anymore.

We only targeted separatist forces. Now did some people die who shouldnt of? Yes it was a war and that happens in wars unforantly. However the separatist targeted no military targets as their targets thourghout the wars.

I'm asking to to provide proof that the Chechyns were commiting terrorist acts from day one of their demand to be a seperate state. The fact you can't provide this shows you a a hypocrite and the fact you can't explain the Russian government threatening to execute civilians shows you support a regime just as depraved as the Chechyns you hate.

Actually the Russians have a pretty good navy, despite a few design flaws.

A few?

:tongue:

Just this Spring, a Russian CVBG had to turn around for base when the Admiral Kuznetsov set on fire. Most of the ships that actually matter are underfunded and dangerous to their crew.

They should stick to buying planes with long range missiles. They do them much better. MUCH, MUCH better.

You fail to understand it was Georgia that started this war and were and are killing our people. Also you fail to understand that they did not pull out but are still fighting and regrouping.

Actually, I think you will find that Russia invaded Georgia. Georgia was technically dealing with a totally internal matter, and you had to go and make things 100 times worse by throwing you weight about to try and prove you aren't as dead and useless as you actually are.

Also, unless I am very much mistaken, you are not on the ground in Georgia, so you have no idea what is happening and are probably reading only very biased sources. From independant sources, I can tell you that Russia are still bombing locations inside Georgia, and that Georgia have definately declared a ceasefire. Even Russia actually agrees that Georgian forces are no longer in the Ossetian captial.

I'm asking to to provide proof that the Chechyns were commiting terrorist acts from day one of their demand to be a seperate state. The fact you can't provide this shows you a a hypocrite and the fact you can't explain the Russian government threatening to execute civilians shows you support a regime just as depraved as the Chechyns you hate.

How about you do me a favor frist than I will be happy to reply back. I want you to take a few mins and study this topic a little bit more before you post about it. We didnt execute any civilians, did civilians die? Yes, it was a war. Do you think we wanted deaths to occur no of course not. Chechyns forces were terroists and used the civilans as humaan sheilds.

Actually, I think you will find that Russia invaded Georgia. Georgia was technically dealing with a totally internal matter, and you had to go and make things 100 times worse by throwing you weight about to try and prove you aren't as dead and useless as you actually are.

Also, unless I am very much mistaken, you are not on the ground in Georgia, so you have no idea what is happening and are probably reading only very biased sources. From independant sources, I can tell you that Russia are still bombing locations inside Georgia, and that Georgia have definately declared a ceasefire. Even Russia actually agrees that Georgian forces are no longer in the Ossetian captial.

Would you like us to let Georgia get away with the deaths of our people including the first peace keepers? Aslo we are NOT invading Georgia. We are protecting our people. Yes we are bombing military targets in Georgia, this happens when a country delcares war on you. They are no longer in the captail because of us. We are going to force Georgia to go in a Cease fire. They have broken it in the first place.

How about you do me a favor frist than I will be happy to reply back. I want you to take a few mins and study this topic a little bit more before you post about it. We didnt execute any civilians, did civilians die? Yes, it was a war. Do you think we wanted deaths to occur no of course not. Chechyns forces were terroists and used the civilans as humaan sheilds.

Yes, how dare Chechyn live in Grozny. I'm talking about a threat made by Russian commanders.

The Russian government has repeatedly shown it doesn't care about the lives of Russian civilians in hostage situations, see the theatre siege in Moscow, why does it suddenly care about the S. Ossetians?

Also, why didn't the Russian governmet concede to Chechyn demand for independence before invading in 1994?

Would you like us to let Georgia get away with the deaths of our people including the first peace keepers? Aslo we are NOT invading Georgia. We are protecting our people. Yes we are bombing military targets in Georgia, this happens when a country delcares war on you. They are no longer in the captail because of us. We are going to force Georgia to go in a Cease fire. They have broken it in the first place.

You have your troops on sovereign Georgian soil. That is an invasion. Perhaps a justified invasion, but an invasion nonetheless. Georgia has declared a unilateral cease fire. Russia continues the fighting.

From a moral absolutist standpoint? No. You cannot morally say "this group of people who seek self-determination should have it because of x, y, and z, but this group of people who seek self-determination do not deserve it because of a, b, and c." From a realist view, there are political reasons why it's not always feasible.

What? Of course you can. Maybe you can't, but that does not make it logically invalid.

If A does a, b, or c Then A is no longer deserving.
If A does x, y, or z Then A is still deserving.
A does a, b, or c.
A is no longer deserving.
B does x, y, or z.
B is still deserving.

I am confused where this dilemma you choose to assert is justified.

Would you like us to let Georgia get away with the deaths of our people including the first peace keepers? Aslo we are NOT invading Georgia. We are protecting our people. Yes we are bombing military targets in Georgia, this happens when a country delcares war on you. They are no longer in the captail because of us. We are going to force Georgia to go in a Cease fire. They have broken it in the first place.

Oh i'm sorry, I thought you said previously that innocent people die in wars? The Russians were innocent bystanders who happened to die when Georgia was fighting the rebels. You are invading Georgia. Your troops are in Georgia, and Georgia is not Russia - thus you are invading them.

And it's funny, you guys were bombing Georgia before they declared war on you, are your leaders physic or something?

Also, Georgia gave a ceasfire. The Rebels carried on. So Georgia moved in to stop them, they gave out another ceasefire this morning after you Russians forced them from the Ossetian capital, which you proceeded to ignore, its no wonder by now that they would have started attacking you again, no-one is stupid enough to let themselves get pummeled without doing something about it.

Yes, how dare Chechyn live in Grozny. I'm talking about a threat made by Russian commanders.

The Russian government has repeatedly shown it doesn't care about the lives of Russian civilians in hostage situations, see the theatre siege in Moscow, why does it suddenly care about the S. Ossetians?

Also, why didn't the Russian governmet concede to Chechyn demand for independence before invading in 1994?

Wow. We dont care about our own people. Wow can you even say that. We did everything in ALL the hostage situations to ge tthe most people out alive. The reason why we are helping South Ossetia IS because we do care for our own people. The soilders on the ground are fighting because they care and our goverment is offering aid to thew people there, many of each are our people.

Chechyn demanded for independnce in the worng way and showed they DIDNT care for THEIR own.

Wow. We dont care about our own people. Wow can you even say that. We did everything in ALL the hostage situations to ge tthe most people out alive. The reason why we are helping South Ossetia IS because we do care for our own people. The soilders on the ground are fighting because they care and our goverment is offering aid to thew people there, many of each are our people.

Chechyn demanded for independnce in the worng way and showed they DIDNT care for THEIR own.

There was no violence against Russian civilians by Chechnya before the Russian invasion in 1994. You started the violence. If you can show me proof otherwise I will conceed, failing that you lose this arguement. I have asked enough.

Moscow theatre siege, your government gassed the people inside resulting in 128 dead, Budyonnovsk hospital, most of the hostages killed were killed by Russian grenades. That is why I say your government doesn't care about it's own people.

There was no violence against Russian civilians by Chechnya before the Russian invasion in 1994. You started the violence. If you can show me proof otherwise I will conceed, failing that you lose this arguement. I have asked enough.

Moscow theatre siege, your government gassed the people inside resulting in 128 dead, Budyonnovsk hospital, most of the hostages killed were killed by Russian grenades. That is why I say your government doesn't care about it's own people.

Right at the start.

They killed Vitaly Kutsenko in 1991 when they demended independence.

Right at the start.

They killed Vitaly Kutsenko in 1991 when they demended independence.

Was he pushed or did he jump trying to escape? Anyway, that was try to get independence from the USSR and not Russia.

You don't support the Soviet Union do you?

Right at the start.

They killed Vitaly Kutsenko in 1991 when they demended independence.

Kutsenko fell from a window.

Was he pushed or did he jump trying to escape? Anyway, that was try to get independence from the USSR and not Russia.

You don't support the Soviet Union do you?

There are some things I wouldnt agree with some things the Soviet Union goverment did. It depends on what issue we are talking about during that time.

There are some things I wouldnt agree with some things the Soviet Union goverment did. It depends on what issue we are talking about during that time.

Trying to keep satellite states under it's sphere of influence through military means?

Kutsenko fell from a window.

Yeah I'm sure he just fell.

By mistake. It is more Russian and the people want to be part of us and have the right to rejoin us. Ever since they were put in Georgia, they have been trying to get back with us.

Parts of countries don't just wind up in other countries "by mistake".

Yeah I'm sure he just fell.

There's no evidence either way. It's plausible that he fell, jumped, or was defenestrated.

Trying to keep satellite states under it's sphere of influence through military means?

No I would not support that

No I would not support that

You are, though.

You are, though.

How do you come up with that?

How do you come up with that?

Chechnya wanted indepencence, Russia invaded to keep it within it's sphere of influence. You are supporting that.

How do you come up with that?

Supporting Putin's going after the former satellite state of Georgia, mayhaps? Not much difference, really.

Chechnya wanted indepencence, Russia invaded to keep it within it's sphere of influence. You are supporting that.

Oh, but, clearly, Russia decided those Chechens didn't deserve to be independent!

Chechnya wanted indepencence, Russia invaded to keep it within it's sphere of influence. You are supporting that.

That is Russia land. Also to support their indepenence would be supporting their acts of terrsiom while trying to gain it.

Supporting Putin's going after the former satellite state of Georgia, mayhaps? Not much difference, really.

No. You dont seem to understand why we are in this conflict. We are not taking over Georgia. We are helping our people in South Ossetia and Abkhazian.

Oh, but, clearly, Russia decided those Chechens didn't deserve to be independent!

I am sick of people bringing this up and comparing it to South Ossetia when it was VERY different. You need to read about the two wars to understand why it is different.

That is Russia land. Also to support their indepenence would be supporting their acts of terrsiom while trying to gain it.

S. Ossetia is Georgian land. The whole world says so, including the Alma-Ata Protocol, signed by Russia.

So why have Russian tanks advanced outside of South Ossetia?

S. Ossetia is Georgian land. The whole world says so, including the Belavezha Accords, signed by Russia.

No it isnt. It is for Russian than it is Georgia in many ways. Ossetians are a people of its own and most are our people and want to belong to us or in the least be free.

So why have Russian tanks advanced outside of South Ossetia?

To protect the people of South Ossetia many of which are ours. Also Georgia was th eone who started the war. We warned them NOT to use military action and they did. Killing Russians and that is why we are there.

No it isnt. It is for Russian than it is Georgia in many ways. Ossetians are a people of its own and most are our people and want to belong to us or in the least be free.

So why did Russia write and sign the Alma-Ata Protocol?

To protect the people of South Ossetia many of which are ours. Also Georgia was th eone who started the war. We warned them NOT to use military action and they did. Killing Russians and that is why we are there.

So you admit Russia is now invading Georgia?

So why did Russia write and sign the Alma-Ata Protocol?

To tell you the turth, I dont know why.

Russia should be more worried about Ukraine. Ukraine's armed forces are far more formidable than Georgia's. If they fight them over the Ukraine naval blockade, they'll get a rather bloody nose. If not a broken one.

So you admit Russia is now invading Georgia?

No. We are not invading the nation we are protecting our people. Yes there are military strikes in Geogria but we are not invading and will not take it under our rule. This is purly to protect our people, South Ossetia and Abkhazian.

Russia should be more worried about Ukraine. Ukraine's armed forces are far more formidable than Georgia's. If they fight them over the Ukraine naval blockade, they'll get a rather bloody nose. If not a broken one.

All out War with them is most unlikly. However, if it is all out war our forces can and would Defeat them. Mor formidable? Yes, but not strong enough to stand up to our armies.

No. We are not invading the nation we are protecting our people. Yes there are military strikes in Geogria but we are not invading and will not take it under our rule. This is purly to protect our people, South Ossetia and Abkhazian.

Russian tanks are on Georgian soil, outside of the S. Ossetian region, you admitted it yourself, it is an agressive posture. How would Russia react to another nations troops on it's soil?

All out War with them is most unlikly. However, if it is all out war our forces can and would Defeat them. Mor formidable? Yes, but not strong enough to stand up to our armies.

True, but how long could you stand war on multiple frontiers?

No. We are not invading the nation we are protecting our people. Yes there are military strikes in Geogria but we are not invading and will not take it under our rule. This is purly to protect our people, South Ossetia and Abkhazian.

Even Russia legally recognizes South Ossetia and Abkhazia as belonging to Georgia, and no Georgian military moves were made in Abkhazia to provoke the entry of the Russian Army into invading there, either. From the west, this looks like Russia's just trying to carve up a rebellious former satellite.

Russian tanks are on Georgian soil, outside of the S. Ossetian region, you admitted it yourself. How would Russia react to another nations troops on it's soil?

South Ossetia has the right to be free and we are making sure their right for freedom is given. Also our people were killed there by Georrgia's forces and we warned them it would end in a military conflict.

True, but how long could you stand war on multiple frontiers?

If they couldn't defeat the Afghans who were helped by the US & UK with things like missile launchers, I can't imagine they can defeat someone with modern combat aircraft similar to what Russia has and such and a modern navy.

Russia would also find it hard to deploy it's full army. Trying to marshall, feed and equip a million men in the modern age is rather difficult.

South Ossetia has the right to be free and we are making sure their right for freedom is given. Also our people were killed there by Georrgia's forces and we warned them it would end in a military conflict.

So now it isn't defence but an attack on Georgia?

South Ossetia has the right to be free and we are making sure their right for freedom is given. Also our people were killed there by Georrgia's forces and we warned them it would end in a military conflict.

I thought it was a defensive war.

So why have Russian tanks advanced outside of South Ossetia?
To give the Georgian president a slap in the face.

True, but how long could you stand war on multiple frontiers?

Not very long, especially given that if Ukraine were to come under attack from Russia, then NATO intervention would radically increase in likelihood.

Seriously, the Ukraine could really challenge Russia. The Ukrainian airforce alone could keep Russia tied down and change the situation. The Black Sea fleet could really be shook up by the Ukraine, too. However, I just don't see their entry.

No. We are not invading the nation we are protecting our people. Yes there are military strikes in Geogria but we are not invading and will not take it under our rule. This is purly to protect our people, South Ossetia and Abkhazian.

A war of defence to try and protect your citizens in South Ossetia, and yet you are aggresively hitting targets inside Georgia? If North Ossetia wished to join Georgia, and when you tried to stop them, Georgia began to bomb Russian towns and cities, killing many civilians and soldiers alike, wouldn't you state they are being agressive towards you and declare war and invade and destroy Georgia?

Seriously, the Ukraine could really challenge Russia. The Ukrainian airforce alone could keep Russia tied down and change the situation. The Black Sea fleet could really be shook up by the Ukraine, too. However, I just don't see their entry.

Yeah but if they get involved, NATO involvment becomes so much more likely.

Yeah but if they get involved, NATO involvment becomes so much more likely.

NATO won't enter this war.

NATO won't enter this war.

If Russia goes after Ukraine, it becomes far more likely. Still not probable, but it would be an indication of such a change in the Russian strategic position and attitude that it would put a whole hell of a lot of pressure to put massive defensive formations in Poland.

If Russia goes after Ukraine, it becomes far more likely. Still not probable, but it would be an indication of such a change in the Russian strategic position and attitude that it would put a whole hell of a lot of pressure to put massive defensive formations in Poland.

Awful big if there. Russia has no reason to even make threats to the Ukraine.

If Russia goes after Ukraine, it becomes far more likely. Still not probable, but it would be an indication of such a change in the Russian strategic position and attitude that it would put a whole hell of a lot of pressure to put massive defensive formations in Poland.

The nuclear nations in NATO will not go into direct conflict with Russia, the risk is too great.

Maybe the non-nuclear nations would start posturing.

Awful big if there. Russia has no reason to even make threats to the Ukraine.

Russia doesn't have too; the Ukranians are doing a bang up job of making threats themselves.
Putting their ships between the home port of the Russian fleet and the fleet itself is a pretty good indicator of not-so-friendly intent.

Seriously, the Ukraine could really challenge Russia.
Not really.
The Ukrainian airforce alone could keep Russia tied down and change the situation.
It's small and crap, I don't see how this is even remotely true.
The Black Sea fleet could really be shook up by the Ukraine, too.
Aye for all of 20 minutes until they get the Sunburns out.
However, I just don't see their entry.
Agreed.

Awful big if there. Russia has no reason to even make threats to the Ukraine.

That the Ukrainians are cutting of Sevastopol is a fairly big deal to the Russians, and a strategic threat.

It's small and crap, I don't see how this is even remotely true.




800 or so planes is small?

It also uses quite a few planes the Russians do. Su-27, Mig-29, SU-24 and such.

It might be smaller than the Russian one but it isn't crap by any means.

I'd also note that respected defence anaylsts have stated the BSF is in a poor state. I wonder if they still paint the elevating screws shut so as to not show how poor they are?

That the Ukrainians are cutting of Sevastopol is a fairly big deal to the Russians, and a strategic threat.

As far as I know, the Ukrainians are just restricting the Russian fleet from docking.

The bases the Black Sea fleet use are mainly Ukrainian ones anyway. It's not like they are blockading Russian ports.

S. Ossetia is Georgian land.
Parts of countries don't just wind up in other countries "by mistake".
You should understand that the whole of Georgia has been Russian land since 1802. Full property of the crown, not just a satellite state or a SSR with at least formal sovereignty - just an area within the Russian Empire.

A lot of borders have changed since that, including the Empire expanding and internal population moving around.
Thus, when they cut up USSR into regions, they did pretty much like they did with states in US: geographically forming countries with smooth edges.

But these weren't historical edges. In particular, Ossetia was in such a position that it ended up cut in two by the national border: one part went to Russia, another to Georgia.
This North-South Ossetia division has never existed ethnically or historically, the Ossetians simply were ignored in favour of a cleaner looking map of administrative divisions.

It didn't matter the slightest until the split of USSR, when Georgia got a cut of a nation that never had anything to do with them.

You should understand that the whole of Georgia has been Russian land since 1802. Full property of the crown, not just a satellite state or a SSR with at least formal sovereignty - just an area within the Russian Empire.

A lot of borders have changed since that, including the Empire expanding and internal population moving around.
Thus, when they cut up USSR into regions, they did pretty much like they did with states in US: geographically forming countries with smooth edges.

But these weren't historical edges. In particular, Ossetia was in such a position that it ended up cut in two by the national border: one part went to Russia, another to Georgia.
This North-South Ossetia division has never existed ethnically or historically, the Ossetians simply were ignored in favour of a cleaner looking map of administrative divisions.

It didn't matter the slightest until the split of USSR, when Georgia got a cut of a nation that never had anything to do with them.

How about 1918 to 1920?

South Ossetia has been de facto independent for a decade as it is, if anything it's Georgian "imperialism" to fault in this crisis. I fail to see how Russia is at fault in this situation. I understand the bombing of Gori was terrible, but Georgia was the one who broke a major ceasefire a few days ago and launched a fairly surprise attack on South Ossetia. Doesn't that make them the aggressor? God forbid Russia be at fault for protecting its own citizens and defending those who look to them for aid.

I heard a rumour that the separatist leaders in Abkhazia have declared an intent to mobilize forces. Is there any truth to this?

How about 1918 to 1920?
Yeah, 2 years of same government ruling over a chunk of a country that ceased to exist - that's totally the time it takes for two ethnicities to assimilate and the temporary borders to become the natural ones.

That period is little more than a footnote in history, until VKP(m) was displaced by VKP(b) along with the territories.

Effectively, there has never been South or North Ossetia until 1990s, and the Ossetia, either piece of it, has never been ruled by Georgia in the last more than 200 years more than for very short periods. Until 1991, it was ruled by Russia, after that, independently.


I heard a rumour that the separatist leaders in Abkhazia have declared an intent to mobilize forces. Is there any truth to this?
More than that, according to some information, they've already been engaging Georgian forces for a couple days.

South Ossetia has been de facto independent for a decade as it is, if anything it's Georgian "imperialism" to fault in this crisis. I fail to see how Russia is at fault in this situation. I understand the bombing of Gori was terrible, but Georgia was the one who broke a major ceasefire a few days ago and launched a fairly surprise attack on South Ossetia. Doesn't that make them the aggressor? God forbid Russia be at fault for protecting its own citizens and defending those who look to them for aid.

I heard a rumour that the separatist leaders in Abkhazia have declared an intent to mobilize forces. Is there any truth to this?

Wrong. Ossetia seperatists broke the ceasefire by killing Georgian civilians with Russian support. Ossetian seperatists and Russia are the aggressors in this war and Georgia is defending, quite marvelously if I may add considering the odds are stacked against them. They shot down a TU-22 Backfire yesterday.

Did the Georgians not send a force to seize Tskhinvali on Sunday the 7th, hours after they agreed to a cease-fire and international talks? That sounds like an aggressive act to me, considering the separatists agreed to sit down and have talks, albeit sponsored by Russia.

Hm, I wonder how many TU-22Ms Georgia will shoot down. If they get many, I suspsect Russia will increase their air strikes. Something doubts that they've shot down "almost twenty planes" as the Georgian president said on CNN today.

Wrong. Ossetia seperatists broke the ceasefire by killing Georgian civilians with Russian support.

Really, do you have some sort of proof to this claim? If so you may want to send it off to CNN and Fox. As of now, no one really knows who started it.

Wrong. Ossetia seperatists broke the ceasefire by killing Georgian civilians with Russian support.

Source? Because all reports indicate the brief truce between the separatists and Georgia was broken when Georgia initiated a speedy attack on the Ossetia 'capital'.

At least when the US went to topple the Iraqi government, we were open about it. The Russians are trying to do this entirely in secret, utilizing South Ossetia as a cloak. I'd daresay, there is more here than merely South Ossetia, this is Russia trying to bring Georgia back into the fold, because they think Saakashvili is too close to the West.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/08/10/un.georgia/index.html

Really, do you have some sort of proof to this claim? If so you may want to send it off to CNN and Fox. As of now, no one really knows who started it.
My source is CNN, although I'm not proud of it, am I supposed to trust Russia's media.

Really, do you have some sort of proof to this claim? If so you may want to send it off to CNN and Fox. As of now, no one really knows who started it.

http://www.france24.com/en/20080807-new-fighting-erupts-between-georgia-rebels-south-ossetia&navi=MONDE

Georgians claimed that the South Ossetians didn't stop shelling, South Ossetians claim they did. None of the news sources indicate either way.

My source is CNN, although I'm not proud of it, am I supposed to trust Russia's media.

What a silly thing to say. Of course not, but that doesn't mean you should trust the Western media either. All they have to go off is what they're told and both sides are lying their asses off.

http://www.france24.com/en/20080807-new-fighting-erupts-between-georgia-rebels-south-ossetia&navi=MONDE

Georgians claimed that the South Ossetians didn't stop shelling, South Ossetians claim they did. None of the news sources indicate either way.

Funny, I was just reading exactly that page, except in French :tongue:

Anyway, my point is that we don't know. Everyone's first instinct seems to be to blame the Russians (ooh, big, bad, evil, baby-eating Russia!) while forgetting that the Georgians (especially Saakashvili) are just as shady as the Russians.

800 or so planes is small?
800 planes my arse. 300, tops, the rest is all helicopters.
It also uses quite a few planes the Russians do. Su-27, Mig-29, SU-24 and such.
No, it uses quite a few planes that the Russians downgraded and sold to their 'socialist brothers'. Not actually the same thing.
It might be smaller than the Russian one but it isn't crap by any means.
How many times have the Ukranians actually used their jets? Not many. The Russians have been using their kit and building up experienced crews due to their actions in Chechnya and Abkhazia, as well as actions in South Ossetia.
I'd also note that respected defence anaylsts have stated the BSF is in a poor state. I wonder if they still paint the elevating screws shut so as to not show how poor they are?
I'd love to know what they think of the mighty Ukranian Navy ;)

Well it wouldn't be Stalin's homeland if he wasn't shady.

Maybe that's part of it........Russian's don't remember Stalin fondly. Possible connection?

Well it wouldn't be Stalin's homeland if he wasn't shady.
He was a total pleb, how does that affect anything?
Maybe that's part of it........
I doubt it.
Russian's don't remember Stalin fondly.
Some of them see him fondly for his modernisation of Russia and his victory over Nazi Germany. Others don't remember him at all fondly. Tarring everything with the same brush is just ridiculous.
Possible connection?
Doubt it.

800 planes my arse. 300, tops, the rest is all helicopters.


Wiki says 625 combat aircraft. A good chunk of them MiG-29s and Su-27s.

Wiki says 625 combat aircraft. A good chunk of them MiG-29s and Su-27s.
Uhu... an even greater chunk of them are transport helicopters and Hinds.

Uhu... an even greater chunk of them are transport helicopters and Hinds.

So like the RAF, but with Russian stuff.

Uhu... an even greater chunk of them are transport helicopters and Hinds.

No, I said Combat Aircraft. The rest are Su-24s and -25s.

Funny, I was just reading exactly that page, except in French :tongue:

I parlez vouz not much Fracois. :D

Anyway, my point is that we don't know. Everyone's first instinct seems to be to blame the Russians (ooh, big, bad, evil, baby-eating Russia!) while forgetting that the Georgians (especially Saakashvili) are just as shady as the Russians.

Of course Saakashvili is as shady as a back-alley hocker selling fake Rolexes, but, Russia is the country with 20,000 tanks, and that automatically makes 'em really creepy. Hell, NATO barely has half of that.

Admittedly, Challenger 2's, LeClerc's, Abrams and Leopard 2's could eat their T-72's alive.

Uhu... an even greater chunk of them are transport helicopters and Hinds.

Hinds are combat aircraft.

Currently Ukraine has (approx):

Ground attack & bomber role
71 SU-24's
63 SU-25's

Fighter role
217 MiG-29's
60 SU-27's

Reconnaissance role
29 SU-24's
20 SU-17's

CBT TRG role
4 SU 24's
1 MiG 23
2 Mig 29's

476 fixed wing aircraft that can be used in an attack role (I'm sure you can fit the recon ones and technical group ones with weapons).

They have 304 Helicopters. 281 of these (Mi-2 & Mi-8) can also be used in an offensive capacity. And the Hinds do pack quite a punch.

If the Ukrainian airforce wanted to mess up the Russian Black Sea fleet, they could. They could also knock down a ton of Russian planes. Their navy has aircraft, too.

We're getting ahead of ourselves. Ukraine and Russia are not going to war unless someone is an idiot.

Putin is a madman and Victor "Yutaka Yoshie" Yuschenko is a little silly IIRC. All bets are off.

Calm down people. There won't be any foreign military action.

1). The Ukraine has a large ethnic Russian population.
2). It depends on Russia for oil.
3). Pro-Russian party is massive, and a strong force in opposition
4). Ukraine can't handle the potential damage of war
5). Eastern Ukraine heavily Russian, and would not support war.


NY Times is now reporting Russian troops are shelling and moving on Gori, although like almost everything else in the conflict, it can't be confirmed.

We're getting ahead of ourselves. Ukraine and Russia are not going to war unless someone is an idiot.
Everyone is being idiots in this.

Everyone is being idiots in this.

Idiots as in insane idiots. Stupid idiots are much less damaging.

NY Times is now reporting Russian troops are shelling and moving on Gori, although like almost everything else in the conflict, it can't be confirmed.

I wonder how they're going to justify this.

Something about this backward province of the Austrian Empire and a womanizing Duke or Archduke or something. Germany would never back the Austrians over that, sheesh.



That's why this stuff scares me.

Maybe Russia wants to go back to the Cold War. Maybe after losing round 1 they think they can win round 2.

NY Times is now reporting Russian troops are shelling and moving on Gori, although like almost everything else in the conflict, it can't be confirmed.

Last I heard, a Russian tank group heading for Gori was forced back by Georgian forces. Unless that is old news...

The only possible way the Ukraine will get involved militarily is if Russia actually attacks them, however that won't stop them from giving the Georgians arms and money. They are already showing support for the Georgian side by blocking the Black Sea Fleet from returning to port. As far as the ethnic Russian population goes they might support a war, Ukraine is very pro-western and if Russia attacked them directly I'm sure they would support a response. They've been trying to join NATO for a couple years now, against Russian wishes, and hold exercises with NATO forces. Furthermore, I'm not sure how their doing it yet but the USA is redeploying Georgian troops from Irag to Georgia and the USA is providing the transportation. Which means one of the following:

1. They are flying them directly into Georgia. (This is unlikely because the USA probably doesn't want to fly aircraft into that airspace right now and the Russians have bombed every airport in the country.)

2. They are flying them to Turkey, a NATO country, and running them across the border. (A potentially dangerous option because it could be interpeted as NATO directly supporting the Georgians).

3. They are flying them to the Ukraine, a non-NATO country with good US relations, and getting them across the border. (Also dangerous but not as much because NATO couldn't be implicated as easily.)

Either way I think this is only going to escalate more before it gets any better. Depending on how stupid politicians are this could either end as a small skirmish or the beginning of WW III. I personally think it will end as a skirmish.

I'm reading on wikipedia that the Vice Chairman of Russian parliament Vladimir Zhirinovsky has suggested overthrowing Saakashvili's "fascist regime".


The UN isn't looking too good either.
http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL937294920080810

UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - The United States suggested on Sunday that Russia was interested in "regime change" in Georgia after Moscow rejected Tbilisi's offer of a cease-fire in the separatist enclave of South Ossetia.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov told U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice that the president of Georgia Mikheil Saakashvili "must go," the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Zalmay Khalilzad, told the Security Council.

Khalilzad then looked straight at Russian Ambassador Vitaly Churkin and asked if Moscow was looking for "regime change."

"Is the goal of the Russian Federation to change the leadership of Georgia?" he said.
You can tell that the way "Regime Change" is implied is, "So are you going to pull the same thing we did?"

I'll post the rest.
In Moscow, Lavrov said the departure of Saakashvili, who was re-elected by popular vote early this year, was not a must to solve the crisis but that Russia no longer saw him as a partner.

Khalilzad told reporters the telephone call between Rice and Lavrov was "disturbing," adding that the days of overthrowing European governments by force were over.

Churkin insisted Russia was not out to take over South Ossetia. "Let's state clearly that we are ready to put an end to the war, that we will withdraw from South Ossetia, that we will sign an agreement on non-use of force," he said.

The U.S. envoy said he would introduce a U.N. resolution condemning Moscow, even though Russia is a permanent council member with the power to veto it. He was meeting later with British, French diplomats and other allies on the council.

The council has been unable to take any action in four emergency meetings on the crisis in as many days due, though the heated exchanges have been reminiscent of the Cold War.

'CAMPAIGN OF TERROR'

Georgian envoy Irakli Alasania told the Security Council that Churkin's comments were all "Soviet propaganda" and said Russia intended to repeat what it did in Chechnya.

Moscow plans to "erase Georgian statehood and exterminate the Georgian people," he said. Churkin in turn accused the Georgians of "genocide" and "ethnic cleansing".

Khalilzad said Russia was waging "terror" in Georgia.

"We must condemn Russia's military assault on the sovereign state of Georgia ... including the targeting of civilians and the campaign of terror against the Georgian population," he said. More or less Khalilzad just called Russia a terrorist state.


Khalilzad also accused Russia of preventing the withdrawal of Georgian forces from South Ossetia to prolong the conflict and prevent Georgia from laying down its arms.

"Since Russia is impeding Georgian forces from withdrawing, rejecting a cease-fire and continuing to carry out military attacks against civilian centers, its claims of a humanitarian purpose clearly are not credible," Khalilzad said.

Churkin was furious that Khalilzad used the word "terror".

"This statement, ambassador, is completely unacceptable, particularly from the lips of the permanent representative of a country whose actions we are aware of, including with regard to the civilian populations in Iraq and Afghanistan and Serbia," Churkin told the council. And Churkin replied "Pot to the kettle".

This is NOT good at all.

I parlez vouz not much Fracois. :D


Admittedly, Challenger 2's, LeClerc's, Abrams and Leopard 2's could eat their T-72's alive.



Not really, they'd be even matched. The military's T-72's are far superior to the shitty ones the Americans fought in Iraq, and have Kontakt-5 or Relikt ERA along with good crews and modern ammunition.

I'm reading on wikipedia that the Vice Chairman of Russian parliament Vladimir Zhirinovsky has suggested overthrowing Saakashvili's "fascist regime".


The UN isn't looking too good either.
http://www.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idUSL937294920080810


You can tell that the way "Regime Change" is implied is, "So are you going to pull the same thing we did?"

I'll post the rest.
More or less Khalilzad just called Russia a terrorist state.

And Churkin replied "Pot to the kettle".

This is NOT good at all.

That looks very grim and all, but, seriously, it is very entertaining politics. The world may end because of it, but Eastern European political shenanigans still keep one entertained like a good political thriller.

The Russian government has repeatedly shown it doesn't care about the lives of Russian civilians in hostage situations, see the theatre siege in Moscow, why does it suddenly care about the S. Ossetians?


Technically untrue. The theater siege of Moscow showed that the Russian government does care, otherwise they'd have just told the hostage takers to stuff themselves, pump in a couple thousand gallons of fuel and thrown in a match, or using nerve gas if they wanted the building intact.

What it did show however, was that Russia was committed to the idea of non-negotiation with hostage takers, and was willing to sacrifice some, not all, civilians, as part of the package.

WWIII probably won't break out.

But even if it does, I doubt even Putin is stupid enough to start a global Nuclear Holocaust. Or Bush for that matter.

Not really, they'd be even matched. The military's T-72's are far superior to the shitty ones the Americans fought in Iraq, and have Kontakt-5 or Relikt ERA along with good crews and modern ammunition.

Even though the actual Russian T-72's are decidedly superior, and their training is better than that of the Iraqis, the T-72 is massively outclassed by the NATO tanks, which are far more modern, and whose crews have far more and better training.

Beyond that, the Russian army has a lot of what they B- and C-type formations that are equipped with T-62's and T-55's.

WWIII probably won't break out.

But even if it does, I doubt even Putin is stupid enough to start a global Nuclear Holocaust. Or Bush for that matter.

You give both of them far too much credit.

Putin wants power. He won't have much on a radioactive cinder in space.

Putin wants power. He won't have much on a radioactive cinder in space.

Agreed. Look, Putin is a crafty sunuvabitch, he isn't insane. He wants power and a Russia that can expand that for him. He not only knows how to get that power, he is very, very good at it. I have enough faith in his political talent and intelligence to believe that he won't fuck himself over.

This bears some similarity to Tom Clancy's Red Storm Rising. I doubt WWIII will break out, Bush isn't that stupid and niether is Putin. I just saw Bush speak tonight on the news and he didn't express any desire to lead the USA into a war in Eastern Europe.

After reading this one report, it seems like the Georgians think the West is their personal army >.>

Well they feel abandoned. Can't blame them for being angry.

Hopefully the Russian advance runs out of steam. They had to rush units in. They'll tire out. I'll be more annoyed if Russia annexes part of Georgia.

I still can't understand why Russia is attacking Gori if their intention is to defend South Ossetia.

They want to redefine the borders like they did in Finland. Sadly, Georgia hasn't done as good a job as the Fins in fighting them off.

I still can't understand why Russia is attacking Gori if their intention is to defend South Ossetia.

Gori has a lot of Georgian military facilities. If you take out those, not only does it lower moral, it weakens their military[obviously]

Probably to get concessions out of Georgia. I suspect they want a bit more than just a ceasefire.

Probably to get concessions out of Georgia. I suspect they want a bit more than just a ceasefire.

Marshmallows are serious business :rolleyes:

Just what is wrong with the Georgian government trying to defeat the rebels and reclaim their land?

Gori has a lot of Georgian military facilities. If you take out those, not only does it lower moral, it weakens their military[obviously]

Why would Russia want to weaken the Georgian Military? Georgia is out of South Osseita. Is Russia's mission not accomplished?

Yeah. I can see it against a foe who has a lot more military strength, but Georgia? All they have to do is sit on the borders of South Ossetia and they'd pretty much have it made.

Why would Russia want to weaken the Georgian Military? Georgia is out of South Osseita. Is Russia's mission not accomplished?

They could be tired of Georgia picking on Ossetia, Abkhazia and the others. This is not the first time.

Kind of reminds me of 1991. More importantly, do you folks remember a quote from a James Bond movie? Its not verbatim but..

"Are we seeing this live or are we seeing it the American way?"

1) I think neither the Russians nor the Georgians are being 100% truthful in their representation of what is happening over there.

2) I think that the Russians are exploiting the situation knowing that the US is a major ally, and knowing that the US won't militarily interfere. This serves the purpose of showing the other "smaller" nations of the world that the US can't help them when the chips are down, but that Russia is willing to flex it's military muscle to help smaller "nations". It's a move to weaken the US influence in the world, and strengthen the Russian influence all in one relatively small move.

3) I think both sides have done wrong in this situation. The Georgians should have let South Ossetia go a long time ago. The Russians are wrong for directly interfering with another nations internal matters.

Why would Russia want to weaken the Georgian Military? Georgia is out of South Osseita. Is Russia's mission not accomplished?

Is there still a solid line between Russia and Georgia on the map?

Marshmallows are serious business :rolleyes:

Assuming that Georgia does fully pull back, then continued strikes on Georgian territory only means that Russia intends a continued number of punitive actions against it, or an outright invasion. What would their motivation for the strikes be if they don't want Georgia? The only thing that makes sense is to drive home a few points while demonstrating their position of strength over Georgia, something you usually do when you want concessions.

Assuming that Georgia does fully pull back, then continued strikes on Georgian territory only means that Russia intends a continued number of punitive actions against it, or an outright invasion. What would their motivation for the strikes be if they don't want Georgia? The only thing that makes sense is to drive home a few points while demonstrating their position of strength over Georgia, something you usually do when you want concessions.

And then suddenly, Mexico becomes uber friendly with Russia. Begins allowing Russian troops to station there. Begins building an oil pipeline that allows easy transportation to Russia (lolwut). Mexico then invades Puerto Rico. What does the US do in that situation?

And then suddenly, Mexico becomes uber friendly with Russia. Begins allowing Russian troops to station there. Begins building an oil pipeline that allows easy transportation to Russia (lolwut). Mexico then invades Puerto Rico. What does the US do in that situation?

It means America won't suddenly invade Cancun and bomb Mexico City.

You're screwed if Czechoslovakia comes up in the news soon...

more like WRECKoslovakia, amirite? :tongue:

And then suddenly, Mexico becomes uber friendly with Russia. Begins allowing Russian troops to station there. Begins building an oil pipeline that allows easy transportation to Russia (lolwut). Mexico then invades Puerto Rico. What does the US do in that situation?

I bolded the answer to the question in your post.

I bolded the answer to the question in your post.

I basically just reversed the Georgia-Russia-America situation to switch Georgia for Mexico and US for Russia.

I basically just reversed the Georgia-Russia-America situation to switch Georgia for Mexico and US for Russia.

I know what you did. I gave you the answer for what the US would do. The situation is not even remotely similar, so the events are extremely far removed from current reality.

I know what you did. I gave you the answer for what the US would do. The situation is not even remotely similar, so the events are extremely far removed from current reality.

Cuba?

I can see the response now. "But.. but.. thats different! We didn't attack them!"

Cuba?

I can see the response now. "But.. but.. thats different! We didn't attack them!"

What's Cuba got to do with your example of Mexico and Russia now?

Im saying that Both Russia and America have a policy of wanting to control what goes on in its own backyard, through economics, politics, and military interventionism. NATO has continually applied pressure to Russia through Lithuania, Ukraine, Turkey, and Georgia. When you corner a bear, what do you expect to happen?

They could be tired of Georgia picking on Ossetia, Abkhazia and the others. This is not the first time.

Kind of reminds me of 1991. More importantly, do you folks remember a quote from a James Bond movie? Its not verbatim but..

"Are we seeing this live or are we seeing it the American way?"
I'm going to convert the Georgio-Russian war to an RPG.

Georgia: Lol, fuck you South Ossetia, ima kill you this time and make you us again

South Ossetia: OMG NOES, someone halp us!!!1111!!1

*Georgia Bombs South Ossetia for 11.7 damage*

Georgia:k tks bai

*Georgia attacks South Ossetia with 4 armies*

Russia: Don't worry we'll halp you lol

*Russia attacks Georgia in South Ossetia with 7 armies*

Georgia: Dammit russia, stay out of this!

Russia: stfu n00b

*Russia defeats Georgia in South Ossetia*

Georgia: dam u russia!

Russia: lol

Georgia: KK, we give up. lets talk about this. truce?

Russia: lol no

*Russia bombs Georgia for 1.3 Damage*

Georgia: OMG why u bomb me?

Russia: i donno. it was fun

*Russia moves 3 armies into Abkhazia*

Abkhazia: KOOL thanks russia

Russia: np np

*Abkhazia mobilizes*

Georgia: omg I wasn't attacking them! we were at peace!

Russia: lol no

Georgia: i want a ceasefire. i already withdrew. cant we talk about this?

*Russia bombs Tbilisi for 3.2 Damage*

*Russia attacks Georgia in Gori*

Georgia: OMG thats not even disputed!!11!1!

Russia: lol, does it look liek i care?

Fin

I'm going to convert the Georgio-Russian war to an RPG.

-snip-



your forgot this part!


Georgia: America, halp pl0x?

USA: brb, Olypimcs

Georgia: Plz? T_T

USA: bah.

*USA uses stern words. It's not very effective..*


Russia: lol no

USA: lawlz

Georgia: T_T

I'm going to convert the Georgio-Russian war to an RPG.

Georgia: Lol, fuck you South Ossetia, ima kill you this time and make you us again

South Ossetia: OMG NOES, someone halp us!!!1111!!1

*Georgia Bombs South Ossetia for 11.7 damage*

Georgia:k tks bai

*Georgia attacks South Ossetia with 4 armies*

Russia: Don't worry we'll halp you lol

*Russia attacks Georgia in South Ossetia with 7 armies*

Georgia: Dammit russia, stay out of this!

Russia: stfu n00b

*Russia defeats Georgia in South Ossetia*

Georgia: dam u russia!

Russia: lol

Georgia: KK, we give up. lets talk about this. truce?

Russia: lol no

*Russia bombs Georgia for 1.3 Damage*

Georgia: OMG why u bomb me?

Russia: i donno. it was fun

*Russia moves 3 armies into Abkhazia*

Abkhazia: KOOL thanks russia

Russia: np np

*Abkhazia mobilizes*

Georgia: omg I wasn't attacking them! we were at peace!

Russia: lol no

Georgia: i want a ceasefire. i already withdrew. cant we talk about this?

*Russia bombs Tbilisi for 3.2 Damage*

*Russia attacks Georgia in Gori*

Georgia: OMG thats not even disputed!!11!1!

Russia: lol, does it look liek i care?

Fin

lol.. oh NSG.

You know if they're not already, the UN should really be getting in on the action in this thread :)

Assuming that Georgia does fully pull back, then continued strikes on Georgian territory only means that Russia intends a continued number of punitive actions against it, or an outright invasion. What would their motivation for the strikes be if they don't want Georgia? The only thing that makes sense is to drive home a few points while demonstrating their position of strength over Georgia, something you usually do when you want concessions.

I think Russian action against Georgia is a lot more about punishing Georgia for straying over towards the Americans. All the additional bombing is about getting an agreement from Gerogia to stay in the Russian spehere of influence.

I think Russian action against Georgia is a lot more about punishing Georgia for straying over towards the Americans. All the additional bombing is about getting an agreement from Gerogia to stay in the Russian spehere of influence.

I'm sure bombing Tbilisi is a great way to ensure that Georgia says friendly to Russia.

Thinking about it, even if the Georgians had moved on South Ossetia first, Russia is in the wrong. South Ossetia would not have been able to maintain its "independence" without Russian intervention, and this support for South Ossetia seems to be nothing more than an effort to create just such a situation, so that they can enforce their will on their tiny neighbor militarily. Russia had no right to do so with South Ossetia, and they have no right to be attacking Georgia now.

I'm sure bombing Tbilisi is a great way to ensure that Georgia says friendly to Russia.

I'd imagine it's a pretty effective way of scaring the sh*t out of Georgia so say they're friendly to Russia.

Thinking about it, even if the Georgians had moved on South Ossetia first, Russia is in the wrong. South Ossetia would not have been able to maintain its "independence" without Russian intervention, and this support for South Ossetia seems to be nothing more than an effort to create just such a situation, so that they can enforce their will on their tiny neighbor militarily. Russia had no right to do so with South Ossetia, and they have no right to be attacking Georgia now.

On the parameters you've mentioned only, Kuwait, 1991. Some small differences, but quite a few similarities.

That being said, why doesn't Russia have the right? Assuming Georgia shot first and Russia had already made those promises before the whole mess started.

On the parameters you've mentioned only, Kuwait, 1991. Some small differences, but quite a few similarities.
One big difference, Kuwait had been a legal nation for quite a long time.
It is a legal nation.


That being said, why doesn't Russia have the right? Assuming Georgia shot first and Russia had already made those promises before the whole mess started. Firstly, we still don't know who shot first. And on another thing. Russia's promise was to violate the sovergenity of another nation because they had "Citizens" there.
That is a violation of international law.

On the parameters you've mentioned only, Kuwait, 1991. Some small differences, but quite a few similarities.

Actually, I'd daresay the differences are quite stark. Legally, Kuwait was not recognized as part of Iraq by the international community, it was and is an independent country by law. Iraq invaded a sovereign state.

South Ossetia has de facto independence within Georgia because Russia has funneled resources and military assistance to them, no other reason. Beyond that, South Ossetia has absolutely no international recognition of being independent of Georgia.

My point is that Russia has been meddling in Georgian affairs for a long time, and this is the culmination and goal of what Russia has been doing in South Ossetia. They have no right to fool around in Georgia's internal affairs in such an unwarranted, self-interested fashion.

Further, this fight is not about South Ossetia, which is inconsequential, this fight is about the increasing Western orientation of Georgia. Russia, whose empire had oppressed the Georgian people for hundreds of years, wants Georgia back under their sway, and is willing to do anything to do it.

I'm sure bombing Tbilisi is a great way to ensure that Georgia says friendly to Russia.

now now, i never actually said "friendly" did i? I think Russian behaviour is about ensuring that Georgia knows its place in the Russian world order, principally as a russian-leaning buffer state against Euro-American intersts (represented for example as the EU, NATO and Turkey) and the Middle East.

Firstly, we still don't know who shot first. And on another thing. Russia's promise was to violate the sovergenity of another nation because they had "Citizens" there.
That is a violation of international law.

Quite.

It would be one thing if the Russian military were to sweep in, pull out the Russian citizens, and withdraw, as the US had recently done in Lebanon. It is an entirely different thing to invade and occupy in the name of "protecting" your citizens, especially when Russian troops are now penetrating outside of South Ossetia into zones that had nothing to do with our specific conflict in South Ossetia. Russia clearly does not want to fight a limited war, they want all of Georgia, they want it out from under the western sway, and they want it now.

Quite.

It would be one thing if the Russian military were to sweep in, pull out the Russian citizens, and withdraw, as the US had recently done in Lebanon. It is an entirely different thing to invade and occupy in the name of "protecting" your citizens, especially when Russian troops are now penetrating outside of South Ossetia into zones that had nothing to do with our specific conflict in South Ossetia. Russia clearly does not want to fight a limited war, they want all of Georgia, they want it out from under the western sway, and they want it now.

Georgia can not get away with their crimes. We are in South Ossetia to protect our people and to keep peace. Also we NEVER declared war against Georgia, they were the ones who declared war one us. Our targets are only military targets unlike Georgia who dose not care who gets in their way.

South Ossetia would not have been able to maintain its "independence" without Russian intervention, and this support for South Ossetia seems to be nothing more than an effort to create just such a situation, so that they can enforce their will on their tiny neighbor militarily. Russia had no right to do so with South Ossetia, and they have no right to be attacking Georgia now. There's an error in logics here.

If might doesn't make right, then it doesn't matter whether South Ossetia is able to defend its independence or not.

If might does make right, then the right to be attacking is proven by doing so successfully.

Georgia can not get away with their crimes. We are in South Ossetia to protect our people and to keep peace. Also we NEVER declared war against Georgia, they were the ones who declared war one us. Our targets are only military targets unlike Georgia who dose not care who gets in their way.

It would seem that the Russian invasion of Georgia has done far more harm to the general peace than the Georgians have.

To begin with, Russia should not have extended citizenship to the people of South Ossetia, even though they lived in what Russia, and the rest of the world, recognized as Georgia.

Finally, the Russian invasion of Georgia, especially given comments made to the US Secretary of State and the startling silence of Churkin when Kalilzad confronted him at the United Nations bespeaks volumes about Russia's intent in invading Georgia. I suspect, despite their denials, that Russia's goal in all of this has been to force Georgia back into line with Moscow, and it has had nothing, nothing at all, to do with South Ossetia.

I hope we can get Ukraine into NATO before your government tries this sort of BS on them, too.

Maybe, maybe not. Russia is proving that it is willing to fight for territories friendly to it, and NATO's big players are a lot further away than a friendly/hostile Russia is.
And let's not forget. NATO is unlikely to become involved in direct open war with Russia. They have enough nuclear missiles to end the civilized world after all, even if they'll go down doing so.
Yes. And it's not just about nukes.
Pretty much the only *real* big player in NATO is US - the EU nations had enough internal problems with the Iraq War, plus EU doesn't have enough military power to talk from the position of force, and an even match would get too messy to be sane.
So it's all gets down to US, Europe might even dodge the alliance duties as not to get involved. They still remember 1945 when half the Europe was liberated by USSR, becoming very Soviet and Socialist, and the other half was on its way, if not for US and UK doing it first.

But even the possibility of US involvement, even small-scale, is very questionable. As far as war is out of the question and it's safe, most people readily do the bashing. But should such a situation arise that your own son might be sent there, people quickly start to look into the matter deeper and develop different points of view.

Finally, there's the sheer logistical problem of delivering forces to the conflict zone. It's a pretty far way, and for US done over the sea, using limited military transport capacity. It would probably all end up in not delivering enough forces even with US involvement to match.
And an attack at any other spot, into the Russian territory proper, far from the conflict zone, is too insane to even think of - it's a strategic attack, authorizing the use of strategic forces. If NATO sent troops to Georgia, it doesn't carry a risk of provoking a strategic response, but it can go safely only this far. And due to logistical difficulties, "this far" won't win it, just turn Georgia into a useless piece of land like Afghanistan.
At most, it can escalate to NATO smuggling in weapons and instructors, but even that is improbable - the war won't be won this way, and escalating it just for the sake of it helps no one.


NATO and Russia both know that. NATO approval for new memberships will be tempered by how badly they want the territories to be aligned with them and how badly Russia wants to keep them unaligned.
Agreed. Though that's not the only point. I think the main point here is that Russian reputation as a reliable ally has been tainted by Kosovo, where they couldn't help the Serbs. Letting Ossetia take defeat from Georgia would ruin it entirely; on the other hand, successfully helping Ossetia will save it somewhat. Everyone wants to ally with winners, not with losers.

It would seem that the Russian invasion of Georgia has done far more harm to the general peace than the Georgians have.

To begin with, Russia should not have extended citizenship to the people of South Ossetia, even though they lived in what Russia, and the rest of the world, recognized as Georgia.

Finally, the Russian invasion of Georgia, especially given comments made to the US Secretary of State and the startling silence of Churkin when Kalilzad confronted him at the United Nations bespeaks volumes about Russia's intent in invading Georgia. I suspect, despite their denials, that Russia's goal in all of this has been to force Georgia back into line with Moscow, and it has had nothing, nothing at all, to do with South Ossetia.

I hope we can get Ukraine into NATO before your government tries this sort of BS on them, too.

These are our people they have the right to citizenship to our country.

More lies by the west. All we want to do is make sure the govemrnet of Georgia frees the people of South Ossetia and Abkhazian. Again all our military targets are military targets. The leadership of Georgia should be removed and I can only hope it is, so conflict dose not happen again.

Ukraine has many Russsians in their country and will not support the move to NATO. You seem to forget that Georgia started this conflict.

These are our people they have the right to citizenship to our country.

The people of South Ossetia live outside of Russia, in Georgian territory. Citizenship was extended to them well after the collapse of the Soviet Union, well after this dispute between Russia and Georgia set in. It is quite clear that Russia did this as a paper thin veil for what the true goals of Russia are: To force Georgia back into being a colonial possession of Moscow.

More lies by the west. All we want to do is make sure the govemrnet of Georgia frees the people of South Ossetia and Abkhazian. Again all our military targets are military targets. The leadership of Georgia should be removed and I can only hope it is, so conflict dose not happen again.

Abkhazia had nothing to do with this conflict until Russia made it so. As far as South Ossetia, it would be one thing if they had any international recognition, even from Russia, but they do not. They are clearly a legal part of Georgia, and Russia has no right to be there, nor to create this sort of situation.

Ukraine has many Russsians in their country and will not support the move to NATO. You seem to forget that Georgia started this conflict.

Ukraine has even more Ukrainians, who know well the press of the Russian boot.

Furthermore, it remains to be seen who started this conflict, both sides claim that the other was responsible, and there is no clear evidence either way.

These are our people they have the right to citizenship to our country.

More lies by the west. All we want to do is make sure the govemrnet of Georgia frees the people of South Ossetia and Abkhazian. Again all our military targets are military targets. The leadership of Georgia should be removed and I can only hope it is, so conflict dose not happen again.

Ukraine has many Russsians in their country and will not support the move to NATO. You seem to forget that Georgia started this conflict.

The Russians in Georgia have a right to Russian citizenship, the Ossetians in Georgia do not have a right to Russian citizenship, they are Georgians, not Russians.

Has it ever occured to you that it might be lies from Russia? Maybe, just this once, the west is telling the truth, and Russia is just invading Georgia on the pre-text of helping the Ossetians.

On the subject of the Leaders, they were voted into power, so its not up to you to decide who leads and who doesn't. It's the citizens of Georgia who should decide.

Ukraine has about 17% russians, no where near enough to stop them joining NATO is most of the rest of Ukraine wanted too.

The people of South Ossetia live outside of Russia, in Georgian territory. Citizenship was extended to them well after the collapse of the Soviet Union, well after this dispute between Russia and Georgia set in. It is quite clear that Russia did this as a paper thin veil for what the true goals of Russia are: To force Georgia back into being a colonial possession of Moscow.



Abkhazia had nothing to do with this conflict until Russia made it so. As far as South Ossetia, it would be one thing if they had any international recognition, even from Russia, but they do not. They are clearly a legal part of Georgia, and Russia has no right to be there, nor to create this sort of situation.



Ukraine has even more Ukrainians, who know well the press of the Russian boot.

South Ossetia has always been historically Russian and it was by mistake that Georgia got a hold of it.

We are supporting our people in Abkhazia and have the right to be free.

The west lets kosvo free and not South Ossetia or Abkhazia, which are Russian? This is prove the west cares nouthing about the people of these areas but only wants to better their own needs.

Has it ever occured to you that it might be lies from Russia? Maybe, just this once, the west is telling the truth, and Russia is just invading Georgia on the pre-text of helping the Ossetians.

Until the Russians actually occupy Georgia (unless this has happened in the last hour or so) that's just a presupposition about Russian intentions at this stage.

The Russians in Georgia have a right to Russian citizenship, the Ossetians in Georgia do not have a right to Russian citizenship, they are Georgians, not Russians.

Has it ever occured to you that it might be lies from Russia? Maybe, just this once, the west is telling the truth, and Russia is just invading Georgia on the pre-text of helping the Ossetians.

On the subject of the Leaders, they were voted into power, so its not up to you to decide who leads and who doesn't. It's the citizens of Georgia who should decide.

Ukraine has about 17% russians, no where near enough to stop them joining NATO is most of the rest of Ukraine wanted too.

Heres what I say to that.

Has it ever occured to you that it might be lies from West? Maybe, just this once, the Russia is telling the truth, and Russia is helping its people. Georgia started this war.

Until the Russians actually occupy Georgia (unless this has happened in the last hour or so) that's just a presupposition about Russian intentions at this stage.

The Russian military has moved deep inside indisputably Georgian territory, and is driving on the city of Gori. I'd daresay that's a move with an intent to occupy.

The Russian military has moved deep inside indisputably Georgian territory, and is driving on the city of Gori. I'd daresay that's a move with an intent to occupy.

Why would we even want to occupy Georgia, we have no need of it.

Georgia may have started this conflict, but South Ossetia is part of Georgia. If Georgia wishes to rein in a rebel province, it is within Georgia's right to do so without interference. By moving troops into South Ossetia, already Russia violated Georgia's sovereignty. By bombing targets outside the South Ossetian province, Russia has gone beyond the pale.


The leadership of Georgia should be removed
Incidentally, this would be yet another incidence of violating Georgia's sovereignty. Georgian leaders will only be removed from office if the Georgian voters wish it so at the next election.

Russia cannot be allowed to bully other nations using its sheer weight. I hope that when this all ends, Russia gets a kick in the behind for trying to dominate its neighboring nations.

EDIT: Oh, and to boot, Georgia has also historically been part of Russia. Perhaps this little history will show what "being part of Russia" means.

In 1795, Russian forces betrayed Georgia in face of a Persian invasion. Georgia was defeated and later annexed by Russia.
In 1921 Bolshevik Russia invaded independent Georgia and established Soviet rule there, during which hundreds thousands of Georgians were murdered.
Despite that, 700,000 Georgians bravely fought in the Red Army against Nazi Germany.
On April 9, 1989, Russian troops used force to disperse a peaceful demonstration in Tbilisi, killing dozens of peaceful civilians.
In 1991 and 1993, separatists and murderers backed by Russian Federal Forces in Abkhazia and South Ossetia expelled 400,000 Georgians from their homes and murdered thousands. Georgians were expelled from lands historically theirs and still cannot return to their homes.

South Ossetia has always been historically Russian and it was by mistake that Georgia got a hold of it.

The Ossetians, while allied with Russia during the Imperial wars against the Caucasus countries, are not historically Russian. They are ethnically and culturally distinct, and that this land is part of Georgia is something that, not all that long ago, Russia itself agreed to.

We are supporting our people in Abkhazia and have the right to be free.

Hahaha. Russia? Free? More like making it easier for Russia to annex and dismember a former subject who won't toe the Moscow line any more.

The west lets kosvo free and not South Ossetia or Abkhazia, which are Russian? This is prove the west cares nouthing about the people of these areas but only wants to better their own needs.

What the West did in Kosovo was in response to a prolonged Serbian campaign of repression and ethnic cleansing, after the dissolution of the rest of Yugoslavia for these very same reasons. There was no strategic benefit derived by the West from supporting Kosovo, and no significant amount of prestige was gained.

Georgia may have started this conflict, but South Ossetia is part of Georgia. If Georgia wishes to rein in a rebel province, it is within Georgia's right to do so without interference. By moving troops into South Ossetia, already Russia violated Georgia's sovereignty. By bombing targets outside the South Ossetian province, Russia has gone beyond the pale.


Incidentally, this would be yet another incidence of violating Georgia's sovereignty. Georgian leaders will only be removed from office if the Georgian voters wish it so at the next election.

Russia cannot be allowed to bully other nations using its sheer weight. I hope that when this all ends, Russia gets a kick in the behind for trying to dominate its neighboring nations.

You need a history lesson it would seem. South Ossetia is Russian land and 95% people voted to be free form Georgia as they should.

You too seem to think we started this war?

The Ossetians, while allied with Russia during the Imperial wars against the Caucasus countries, are not historically Russian. They are ethnically and culturally distinct, and that this land is part of Georgia is something that, not all that long ago, Russia itself agreed to.



Hahaha. Russia? Free? More like making it easier for Russia to annex and dismember a former subject who won't toe the Moscow line any more.



What the West did in Kosovo was in response to a prolonged Serbian campaign of repression and ethnic cleansing, after the dissolution of the rest of Yugoslavia for these very same reasons. There was no strategic benefit derived by the West from supporting Kosovo, and no significant amount of prestige was gained.

Georgia as tried to do ethnic cleansing there. However, do to the efforts of our military forces he have stoped it.

Why would we even want to occupy Georgia, we have no need of it.

Because Russia is a prideful country, and a scared one. While Georgia provides no strategic benefit to be in-line with Moscow, it does provide a perceived strategic threat if it remains out of line with their masters-to-be in Moscow, if it is permitted to remain oriented towards the bright future the West can provide it.

Russia has not forgotten Napoleon, let alone the Kaiser, the Allies, Hitler and the crushing defeat of the Cold War. Russia sees the West as a threat (an absurd proposition in the nuclear age) and wants to keep it "at bay".

Georgia as tried to do ethnic cleansing there. However, do to the efforts of our military forces he have stoped it.

Let's see the body of evidence that NATO had amassed in regards to Kosovo. Let's see some mass graves, let's see eye witness testimonials, let's see some of that. Why don't you bring it out, and utilize something besides the clearly interested claims of your government? Your government, one that has no qualms about murdering its own people because they oppose it publicly, and obliterating Chechen civilians.

Because Russia is a prideful country, and a scared one. While Georgia provides no strategic benefit to be in-line with Moscow, it does provide a perceived strategic threat if it remains out of line with their masters-to-be in Moscow, if it is permitted to remain oriented towards the bright future the West can provide it.

Russia has not forgotten Napoleon, let alone the Kaiser, the Allies, Hitler and the crushing defeat of the Cold War. Russia sees the West as a threat (an absurd proposition in the nuclear age) and wants to keep it "at bay".

No, having Georgia is more trouble than its worth and we are not here to take it but to help our people.

You need a history lesson it would seem. South Ossetia is Russian land and 95% people voted to be free form Georgia as they should.

You too seem to think we started this war?

Given that over thirty percent of South Ossetia is ethnically Georgian, I'd daresay that the 95% number is highly inflated, and extremely questionable.

No, having Georgia is more trouble than its worth and we are not here to take it but to help our people.

Then why is your Army driving on Gori?

Let's see the body of evidence that NATO had amassed in regards to Kosovo. Let's see some mass graves, let's see eye witness testimonials, let's see some of that. Why don't you bring it out, and utilize something besides the clearly interested claims of your government? Your government, one that has no qualms about murdering its own people because they oppose it publicly, and obliterating Chechen civilians.

God you people need to study more about the Chechen wars. BOTH of them.

Chechen forces were terroists. Yes, the first war was done worng but when Putin took over it was done right. Since the begging the Chechen forces did acts of terrosim.

Given that over thirty percent of South Ossetia is ethnically Georgian, I'd daresay that the 95% number is highly inflated, and extremely questionable.

Worng it is more ethnically Russian. There are few ethic Georgians there.

Then why is your Army driving on Gori?

To take out of the Militart targets there.

Worng it is more ethnically Russian. There are few ethic Georgians there.

You are being lied to.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Ossetia#Demographics

To take out of the Militart targets there.

How convenient. :rolleyes: Gori is well outside of South Ossetia, well outside of the combat zone Russia is claiming it is trying to defend. It is, though, on the way to Tbilisi.

You are being lied to.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Ossetia#Demographics


70% of the South Ossetia citizens had Russian citizenship.

They are Russian people.

How about the west reports how Georgia's forces bomed Tskhinvali's main hospital . Dose that sound like a military target?

70% of the South Ossetia citizens had Russian citizenship.

They are Russian people.

How about the west reports how Georgia's forces bomed Tskhinvali's main hospital . Dose that sound like a military target?

Russia extended the offer of citizenship to South Ossetians well after South Ossetia was part of Georgia. Rather, it is merely using this "citizenship" issue as cover for the primary goals, namely, carving Georgia up and turning it back into a demure little puppet of Moscow.

Russia extended the offer of citizenship to South Ossetians well after South Ossetia was part of Georgia. Rather, it is merely using this "citizenship" issue as cover for the primary goals, namely, carving Georgia up and turning it back into a demure little puppet of Moscow.

South Ossetia has been Russian long before this.

70% of the South Ossetia citizens had Russian citizenship.

They are Russian people.

How about the west reports how Georgia's forces bomed Tskhinvali's main hospital . Dose that sound like a military target?

Correction, 70% of the Ossetians now have Russian citizenship. Very few of them were born with Russian citizenship, it was bestowed on them in an attempt to try and help them fighting their war against Georgia.

About the bombing off a hospital, I think you'll find that Georgia haven't flown any planes for a while, so it will have been artilery, and Tskhinvali happened to have been the main combat zone at the time. Of course targets are going to get hit, it is just as likely it was the Russians who hit it as it was the Georgians.

South Ossetia had been Russian long before this.

Corrected it for you. There is a big difference between had and has, present and past tense you know. Ossetia isn't Russian, you are invading it.

Correction, 70% of the Ossetians now have Russian citizenship. Very few of them were born with Russian citizenship, it was bestowed on them in an attempt to try and help them fighting their war against Georgia.

About the bombing off a hospital, I think you'll find that Georgia haven't flown any planes for a while, so it will have been artilery, and Tskhinvali happened to have been the main combat zone at the time. Of course targets are going to get hit, it is just as likely it was the Russians who hit it as it was the Georgians.

Really? This is proof you have already made up your mind that it was Russia is at fault for everything even things they did not do. It is fact that it was Georgia who hit it.

Corrected it for you. There is a big difference between had and has, present and past tense you know. Ossetia isn't Russian, you are invading it.

Let me correct you.

South Ossetia had been part of Russia even before the USSR and should before this.

One big difference, Kuwait had been a legal nation for quite a long time.
It is a legal nation.


One real difference, but that's about it.


Firstly, we still don't know who shot first. And on another thing. Russia's promise was to violate the sovergenity of another nation because they had "Citizens" there.
That is a violation of international law.

Hardly any different than the other violations that have peppered history is it? In the end, international law is just a feel good measure that has no teeth except when major powers find it convenient to enforce.

Actually, I'd daresay the differences are quite stark. Legally, Kuwait was not recognized as part of Iraq by the international community, it was and is an independent country by law. Iraq invaded a sovereign state.

Maybe so, but it's not like NATO was under any obligation to visit non-NATO countries when under the threat of invasion now is it? It is after all, a collective defense treaty.


My point is that Russia has been meddling in Georgian affairs for a long time, and this is the culmination and goal of what Russia has been doing in South Ossetia. They have no right to fool around in Georgia's internal affairs in such an unwarranted, self-interested fashion.

Pfft. Rights are whatever people with the power to enforce them want them to be. It's not like the Western world hasn't done its fair share of meddling in other country's internal affairs, including invasions, entirely for their benefit.

Let me correct you.

South Ossetia was been part of Russia even before the USSR.

Once again corrected. South Ossetia =/= Russia. Not anymore, maybe it did at some point in the past, it doesn't really matter. Its not Russian, its Georgian.

South Ossetia has been Russian long before this.

As part of an oppressive Empire, imposed from abroad, yes. So, just like Poland, Ukraine, the Baltics, Georgia, Kazakhstan, etc., South Ossetia had been part of the Russian Empire. What is the common theme amongst all those countries?

Post-collapse, though, South Ossetia has been part of Georgia, and even Russia has recognized that.

As part of an oppressive Empire, imposed from abroad, yes. So, just like Poland, Ukraine, the Baltics, Georgia, Kazakhstan, etc., South Ossetia had been part of the Russian Empire. What is the common theme amongst all those countries?

Post-collapse, though, South Ossetia has been part of Georgia, and even Russia has recognized that.

It was part of Russia before the Soveit Union.

Really? This is proof you have already made up your mind that it was Russia is at fault for everything even things they did not do. It is fact that it was Georgia who hit it.

You really don't read do you, I said you can't tell who hit it. It was in the middle of a big huge war zone with people firing from both sides. You saying it was Georgia is proof you have made up your mind that it is Georgia who is at fault for everything, even things they may not have done.

You see how you cry that am I am biased, and then go on ahead to state your own bias the very next sentance?

You really don't read do you, I said you can't tell who hit it. It was in the middle of a big huge war zone with people firing from both sides. You saying it was Georgia is proof you have made up your mind that it is Georgia who is at fault for everything, even things they may not have done.

You see how you cry that am I am biased, and then go on ahead to state your own bias the very next sentance?

Thet started this conflict and we are not at fault for that. They hit non-military targets. We have not.

It was part of Russia before the Soveit Union.

So what?

Or, do you admit that this is nothing more than Russian imperialist chauvinism?

Thet started this conflict and we are not at fault for that. They hit non-military targets. We have not.

Once again, as France 24 indicated, it is currently unknown who lit this conflict off, with each side claiming the other was responsible, and each side providing exactly the same amount of evidence as the other: None. We will likely never know who was initially at fault.

As for non-military targets, you are quite clearly using a very, very broad definition there.

So what?

Or, do you admit that this is nothing more than Russian imperialist chauvinism?

America is just as imperialist as us than.

That land was the N. Americans but you pushed them off.

Once again, as France 24 indicated, it is currently unknown who lit this conflict off, with each side claiming the other was responsible, and each side providing exactly the same amount of evidence as the other: None. We will likely never know who was initially at fault.

As for non-military targets, you are quite clearly using a very, very broad definition there.

A hospital is not a military target.

EVEN wiki knows it was Georgian forces.

America is just as imperialist as us than.

That land was the N. Americans but you pushed them off.

Tu quoque fallacy. Don't even try it, the best you can succeed with doing is obfuscating and diverting.

America is just as imperialist as us than.

That land was the N. Americans but you pushed them off.

that doesn't answer the question. Or if it does, you're not deny that you are just being imperialist.

that doesn't answer the question. Or if it does, you're not deny that you are just being imperialist.

I dont understand the question thats being asked.

A hospital is not a military target.

EVEN wiki knows it was Georgian forces.


Neither is the pictured apartment block, hit by a strategic bomber.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Russia-On-Verge-Of-All-Out-War-As-Troops-Clash-In-Georgias-South-Ossetia/Article/200808215074261

Neither is the pictured apartment block, hit by a strategic bomber.

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/World-News/Russia-On-Verge-Of-All-Out-War-As-Troops-Clash-In-Georgias-South-Ossetia/Article/200808215074261

The poilt missed its target and sadly it hit the apartment block.

The poilt missed its target and sadly it hit the apartment block.

Same thing for the hospital. Happy now?

Same thing for the hospital. Happy now?

No they hit it more than once and they knew it was a hospital.

The poilt missed its target and sadly it hit the apartment block.

And isn't it plausible that a similar situation happened with the Georgian artilleryman, who was operating an indirect-fire weapons system, in which, unlike the pilot, he couldn't even see the target he was firing at? Soviet-made artillery is notoriously inaccurate.

And isn't it plausible that a similar situation happened with the Georgian artilleryman, who was operating an indirect-fire weapons system, in which, unlike the pilot, he couldn't even see the target he was firing at? Soviet-made artillery is notoriously inaccurate.

It was a mistake they hit it more than once?

You don't know if it was Soviet made artillery.

It was a mistake they hit it more than once?

You don't know if it was Soviet made artillery.

All Georgian artillery is Soviet made. And Seeing as how is so hard to aim, if the Russians or Ossetians are based around or near the hospital, firing in that general direction with poorly made equipment, you are very likely to hit the hospital.

It was a mistake they hit it more than once?

Given how small the city of Tshkinvali is, it would not be a surprise.

You don't know if it was Soviet made artillery.

Given that they only have Soviet made artillery, it would make sense.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Georgia#Equipment_2

Given how small the city of Tshkinvali is, it would not be a surprise.



Given that they only have Soviet made artillery, it would make sense.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Georgia#Equipment_2

It would not suprize me if they ment to hit it.

The poilt missed its target and sadly it hit the apartment block.

You must have failed the Apologists exam. Read the following example -

'Any loss of civillian life is regrettable. Unfortunately, despite the care we take, Georgian forces continue to use civillian buildings as cover from which to launch counterattacks, and our forces must be able to defend themselves'.

Essentially be sorry and regretful but never look like you've said it a thousand times before, and remember to emphasise that you're really not trying to kill them.

E-mail this lot, they probably have some material they could send you.
linky (http://dover.idf.il/IDF/English/)

It would not suprize me if they ment to hit it.

And it wouldn't surprise me if Russia meant to blast the civilians in Gori. There, we're even.

You must have failed the Apologists exam. Read the following example -

'Any loss of civillian life is regrettable. Unfortunately, despite the care we take, Georgian forces continue to use civillian buildings as cover from which to launch counterattacks, and our forces must be able to defend themselves'.

Essentially be sorry and regretful but never look like you've said it a thousand times before, and remember to emphasise that you're really not trying to kill them.

E-mail this lot, they probably have some material they could send you.
linky (http://dover.idf.il/IDF/English/)

As you can see Georgian forces cares not for its people.

As you can see Georgian forces cares not for its people.

Thats the lad. 'They only want destruction'.

After you kill a few of them, you might add in 'We only want peace'.

Also, if they kill troops its a 'senseless act' and you just add 'savage' in for civillians.

Soviet-made artillery is notoriously inaccurate.
Says who?

Thats the lad. 'They only want destruction'.

After you kill a few of them, you might add in 'We only want peace'.

Also, if they kill troops its a 'senseless act' and you just add 'savage' in for civillians.

They hide behind civillians just like terrosits. We dont.

Says who?

It is.

When you have poorly trained people using it.

They hide behind civillians just like terrosits. We dont.

Exactly, and if somebody has a picture of Georgian or two tied to the front of a Russian tank or being dragged along like this (http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/hebron_human_shield1.jpg), its either (a) photoshopped (b) rebels being restrained for their own safety or (c) a new Extreme Sport the troops play with the locals to build bridges.

Exactly, and if somebody has a picture of Georgian or two tied to the front of a Russian tank or being dragged along like this (http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/hebron_human_shield1.jpg), its either (a) photoshopped (b) rebels being restrained for their own safety or (c) a new Extreme Sport the troops play with the locals to build bridges.

What the hell is this?

What the hell is this?

I think he might be taking the michael my old china. :wink:

Exactly, and if somebody has a picture of Georgian or two tied to the front of a Russian tank or being dragged along like this (http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/photos/uncategorized/hebron_human_shield1.jpg), its either (a) photoshopped (b) rebels being restrained for their own safety or (c) a new Extreme Sport the troops play with the locals to build bridges.

What, like most of the photoshopped "explosions and fire" over Lebanon, or the same wailing woman being used at various sites around Beirut, or the ambulance (with its central light missing) being touted as "hit by a missile"?

You know, the whole fautography scandal that Reuters admits was a photoshop nightmare?

Not saying the Georgians are photoshopping, but you should always consider that its possible. A lot of people seem to be doing it (the latest being the Iranians, who want to impress us with how many photoshop missiles they can "launch").

As you can see Georgian forces cares not for its people.

Make up your mind, for Christssake, are they Georgian or Russian?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7554507.stm

Looks like the Russian Army is striking out at Georgia from Abkhazia, after having Putin reject the EU backed ceasefire.

Never mind that Abkhazia has anything to do with South Ossetia, nor does the city of Sanaki. It is merely a strategically convenient crossroads between Tbilisi and the Port at Poti.

Just to add my small peice in the latest NSG newroom. Chechnya rebels were actually led by leaders who did not support terriosts actions and were made up of cooler heads. That is until a peace talk with the Russians turned into the leaders of Chechnya rebels being asrested or killed. Such creating a need for new people to take over leadership postions. Men who were more hot headed and more willing to do whatever they thought they had to to meet their golds. Like taking a school full of children over and holding them hosagte. The Russians have nobody to blame but themselfs for the terriosts methods becoming more extreme.

And the first rule of any hosagte situation is to save lifes. Not storm a building and kill those your trying to save because your to imcompelte to find a way to save them.

Bullshit, this isn't about South Ossetia, this is about dominating Georgia. This is about Russia wanting them back as a puppet.

And it wouldn't surprise me if Russia meant to blast the civilians in Gori. There, we're even.
This is nonsense. No side, in any of such conflicts, deliberately hits civilians. Hitting civilians is counterproductive and loses political points, which this war is all about (as n 100%). They only love to accuse each other of that.

But in reality there's only difference in how much discretion is used in selecting the targets. Say, Georgia needed to seize Tskhinvali in a single day, thus they were attacking it with indiscriminate weapons such as MLRS. Russia needed to stop Georgian reinforcements coming in, thus they hit the port, military bases, troops.
Hitting civilians is always counterproductive for local conflicts, it's accepted as collateral damage when the task is important.


Bullshit, this isn't about South Ossetia, this is about dominating Georgia. This is about Russia wanting them back as a puppet.
Somehow I doubt Georgians will start loving Russians and electing their puppets after this. On the contrary, Georgia will become even more hostile.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7554507.stm

Looks like the Russian Army is striking out at Georgia from Abkhazia, after having Putin reject the EU backed ceasefire.

Never mind that Abkhazia has anything to do with South Ossetia, nor does the city of Sanaki. It is merely a strategically convenient crossroads between Tbilisi and the Port at Poti.

Well, if I'm reading the article right, ground troops are in Georgia now. Looks like Putin wants Georgia after all.

Well, if I'm reading the article right, ground troops are in Georgia now. Looks like Putin wants Georgia after all.

I still don't see NSG up in arms about this. This whole thread contains a lot of "meh, as long as it's not Bush invading someone".

I see Andaluciae has taken up my futile attempt to instill reason in the mind of Soviet KLM Empire.

This is nonsense. No side, in any of such conflicts, deliberately hits civilians. Hitting civilians is counterproductive and loses political points, which this war is all about (as n 100%). They only love to accuse each other of that.

But in reality there's only difference in how much discretion is used in selecting the targets. Say, Georgia needed to seize Tskhinvali in a single day, thus they were attacking it with indiscriminate weapons such as MLRS. Russia needed to stop Georgian reinforcements coming in, thus they hit the port, military bases, troops.
Hitting civilians is always counterproductive for local conflicts, it's accepted as collateral damage when the task is important.

I was mocking Soviet KLM Empire, not being serious.

Somehow I doubt Georgians will start loving Russians and electing their puppets after this. On the contrary, Georgia will become even more hostile.

I doubt the Russians will allow the Georgians the benefit of free elections after this.

I still don't see NSG up in arms about this. This whole thread contains a lot of "meh, as long as it's not Bush invading someone".

True. But do we not hold the U.S to a higher standard then Russia which has been doing this for the last hundred years or so?

And besides it not like we NSGer are going to get platoon or something and go over their and how the Russians how it done either. Were just a bunch of losers talking about something that in the end doesn't affect us.Well,not yet anyway.

I see Andaluciae has taken up my futile attempt to instill reason in the mind of Soviet KLM Empire.

I once thought much as he did, only in regards to Iraq. I have been converted, I'm sure he can be too.

I once thought much as he did, only in regards to Iraq. I have been converted, I'm sure he can be too.

I argued with you about Iraq multiple times. You never thought like he does, trust me on that.

Well, if I'm reading the article right, ground troops are in Georgia now. Looks like Putin wants Georgia after all.

This is military conflict, of course our troops are in Georgia, takking out military targets. We will mot take all of Georgia.

It wouldn't be a smart move on our part unless we have to.

I argued with you about Iraq multiple times. You never thought like he does, trust me on that.

Thanks, I'd hate to be as locked in as he is.

You were quite right, I daresay.

This is military conflict, of course our troops are in Georgia, takking out military targets. We will mot take all of Georgia.

It wouldn't be a smart move on our part.

A lack of restraint in this area questions whether Putin planned for any sort of restraint whatsoever.

Combined with the fact that Putin has rejected the EU backed ceasefire, well, it's pretty clear what he wants now.

A lack of restraint in this area questions whether Putin planned for any sort of restraint whatsoever.

Combined with the fact that Putin has rejected the EU backed ceasefire, well, it's pretty clear what he wants now.

Georgia's goverment is guilty of Enthic Gencoide and must be forced to stop.

What needs to be done now is a ceasefire needs to be agreed to, and neutral peacekeepers need to be deployed to South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The Dutch and Spanish rapidly come to mind, because of their limited involvement in the region, and the Dutch expertise in regards to reconstruction and development.

Georgia's goverment is guilty of Enthic Gencoide and must be forced to stop.

Guilty, now, eh? Isn't there a court in the Netherlands that should decide that?

How about some evidence.

Georgia's goverment is guilty of Enthic Gencoide and must be forced to stop.

Proof?

What needs to be done now is a ceasefire needs to be agreed to, and neutral peacekeepers need to be deployed to South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The Dutch and Spanish rapidly come to mind, because of their limited involvement in the region, and the Dutch expertise in regards to reconstruction and development.

Georgia must not go unpunshied for the deaths of Russian peacekeepers and its war crimes. The people in South Ossetia must be allowed to be indepented ,along with Abkhazian. Only thing can a cease-fire be allowed. The leadership of Georgia also must step down for the crimes it has done.

What needs to be done now is a ceasefire needs to be agreed to, and neutral peacekeepers need to be deployed to South Ossetia and Abkhazia. The Dutch and Spanish rapidly come to mind, because of their limited involvement in the region, and the Dutch expertise in regards to reconstruction and development.

Putin doesn't have any incentive to agree to a ceasefire.

He has the military potential to take over all of Georgia if necessary.

He has a vital oil pipeline that the West (especially Europeans) need that he can eliminate at any time.

NATO has no real ability to stop him, short of having a major war in Europe, and we all know the Europeans have less stomach for any sort of war than the current US civilian (we're already tired of the idea).

You would have to put troops on the ground, and be willing to lose them. You would also have to bomb strategic targets inside Russia (such as airbases and bridges and railyards).

I'm sure that as soon as Putin replaces the Georgian government with someone more "reliable", he'll invite some "peacekeepers".

Georgia must not go unpunshied for the deaths of Russian peacekeepers and its war crimes. The people in South Ossetia must be allowed to be indepented ,along with Abkhazian. Only thing can a cease-fire be allowed. The leadership of Georgia also must step down for the crimes it has done.

What about the people of North Ossetia? When will they be independent? Or the Chechens? Russia hasn't been determined to give them the right to self determination.

Georgia must not go unpunshied for the deaths of Russian peacekeepers and its war crimes. The people in South Ossetia must be allowed to be indepented ,along with Abkhazian. Only thing can a cease-fire be allowed. The leadership of Georgia also must step down for the crimes it has done.

If that is so, then let a neutral party figure it out. Russia is a belligerent.

NATO succeeded in getting the war criminals out of Yugoslavia, I'm sure we could do so with Georgia as well. What we'd need to see, though, is some proof of these alleged crimes.

Georgia must not go unpunshied for the deaths of Russian peacekeepers and its war crimes. The people in South Ossetia must be allowed to be indepented ,along with Abkhazian. Only thing can a cease-fire be allowed. The leadership of Georgia also must step down for the crimes it has done.

What about the people of North Ossetia? When will they be independent? Or the Chechens? Russia hasn't been determined to give them the right to self determination.

You can look at my older post about the Chechen Wars.

North Ossetia never wanted indepentnce.

This is military conflict, of course our troops are in Georgia, takking out military targets. We will mot take all of Georgia.

It wouldn't be a smart move on our part unless we have to.

You can take out military targets with air strikes. Ground forces are almost only ever used for invasion and occupation.

You can take out military targets with air strikes. Ground forces are almost only ever used for invasion and occupation.

We are taking military bases with our ground troops.

We are taking military bases with our ground troops.

Then you're invading, you're not "striking military targets". The moment ground forces move in force uninvited inside somebody else's borders, it's an invasion.

Well, if I'm reading the article right, ground troops are in Georgia now. Looks like Putin wants Georgia after all.
Doesn't really look that way. Again, my opinion is that this will be like the Israel/Lebanon war a couple of years back. Things are happening in almost the exact same fashion, in fact.

Then you're invading, you're not "striking military targets". The moment ground forces move in force uninvited inside somebody else's borders, it's an invasion.

Weather it is a invasion or not, the goverment of Georgia must be forced out of power.

Doesn't really look that way. Again, my opinion is that this will be like the Israel/Lebanon war a couple of years back. Things are happening in almost the exact same fashion, in fact.

I really don't think Putin intends to make the mistakes Israel did, and what possible motivation could he have for moving into Georgia in force aside from an occupation? Sure, he may not want it for keeps, probably more trouble than its worth, but he's definitely going to want it for a while.

Weather it is a invasion or not, the goverment of Georgia must be forced out of power.

Do you know what they call it when you take over someone else's country, topple its government, and install one to your liking? "Regime change", the politically nice way of saying "invasion and occupation."

You can look at my older post about the Chechen Wars.

North Ossetia never wanted indepentnce.

Your older post about the Chechen was startlingly hypocritical. Your logic of which land belongs to who seems to amount to planting a flag somewhere and saying "This are Russian land! It are for Russian people!" There is no difference between what has happened in South Ossetia and what happened in Chechnya. Both featured ethnically driven secession movements. The only issue you have with Chechnyan independence is that its your country that loses land. Tell me, if North Ossetia did want independence, would you agree that they shoud get it?

This is military conflict, of course our troops are in Georgia, takking out military targets. We will mot take all of Georgia.

It wouldn't be a smart move on our part unless we have to.

Yeah but it sure is hell is conveint that even when the Georgians declare a ceasefire, like they did yesterday you continue to advance and bomb civilian targets.

Georgia's goverment is guilty of Enthic Gencoide and must be forced to stop.

Where is the proof of this, I have yet to see any news network major or small or from any nation other then your's claim ethnic genocide. Your nation as usual is lacking in the legitimacy department.

Georgia must not go unpunshied for the deaths of Russian peacekeepers and its war crimes. The people in South Ossetia must be allowed to be indepented ,along with Abkhazian. Only thing can a cease-fire be allowed. The leadership of Georgia also must step down for the crimes it has done.


The leadership of Georgia step down? This just shows you country is still the imperialist jerks they were in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Afghanistan, and Chechnya. You just don't want Georgia or the Ukraine to join NATO. You know I feel pretty bad for Russia, they still have communist imperialist authoritarian guys like Putin runnning around and ruining the country.

Putin is also trying to test and see how far along Russia can get before the West tries to actually stop it from happening. Or at least, that is how I'm viewing it.

I really don't think Putin intends to make the mistakes Israel did
Well yes...
and what possible motivation could he have for moving into Georgia in force aside from an occupation?
To scare the Georgian public absolutely shitless. If you're running a democracy, you have to look strong in the face of adversity. The current Georgian government looks extremely weak at the moment, and the pro-Russian opposition will play on peoples' fears at the next election.

This is, in effect, a slightly indirect regime change.
Sure, he may not want it for keeps, probably more trouble than its worth, but he's definitely going to want it for a while.
Nah, I don't think he's going to want to keep it for any amount of time.

Do you know what they call it when you take over someone else's country, topple its government, and install one to your liking? "Regime change", the politically nice way of saying "invasion and occupation."

If that happens than we are doing what America has done to Iraq.

To end a Regime which has done war crimes, such has enthic killings. A new goverment in Georgia should be put in place for the better of the country and the world.

If that happens than we are doing what America has done to Iraq.

To end a Regime which has done war crimes, such has enthic killings. A new goverment in Georgia should be put in place for the better of the country and the world.

Please recall how much the rest of the world hates us for doing that.

NATO has no real ability to stop him, short of having a major war in Europe, and we all know the Europeans have less stomach for any sort of war than the current US civilian (we're already tired of the idea).

You would have to put troops on the ground, and be willing to lose them. You would also have to bomb strategic targets inside Russia (such as airbases and bridges and railyards).
This is absurd and will never happen.
Bombing bridges and airbases within Russia will let it bomb the same objects within Europe.

Now, there's this problem.

http://dataservice.eea.europa.eu/getimg.asp?F=/dataservice/sharedfiles/applications/staticmaps/radF4E4F/English_V1/download/cover_politic55color/bigthumb.png

The only thing that the US (with insignificant support of Europe) can theoretically do is throw the Iraqi contingent through Turkey and into Georgia.

If that happens than we are doing what America has done to Iraq.

To end a Regime which has done war crimes, such has enthic killings. A new goverment in Georgia should be put in place for the better of the country and the world.

And who the hell is Russia to determine that? The majority of Georgia doesn't want a regime change, they just elected that guy into office. Your country is merely setting up puppet governments like it did during the Cold War. Russia hasn't changed a bit have they? They still march right in put in an authoritarian government no one supports and oppresses the general population. And when it comes to war crimes your nations military does not have an good record. Russia's military operates under a policy of terrorizing the civilian population, with their indiscriminate shelling and murder of civilians including their own.

To scare the Georgian public absolutely shitless. If you're running a democracy, you have to look strong in the face of adversity. The current Georgian government looks extremely weak at the moment, and the pro-Russian opposition will play on peoples' fears at the next election.

This is, in effect, a slightly indirect regime change.


Oh come now, Putin has ground troops moving into Georgia in force. The populace is going to be more concerned about being in the warzone in the face of an invasion than about how weak their government is. If anything, it will simply unite the populace, unless Mikhael's been absolutely rubbish to them too, against Russia.

If Putin had kept to airstrikes, I could see the argument, but invading to scare the population into voting for someone else just doesn't seem even logical.


Nah, I don't think he's going to want to keep it for any amount of time.

Long enough to install a pro-Russian government I think.