RotoGuru Politics Forum

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread


0 Subject: Russia and Georgia go at it

Posted by: Perm Dude
- [397487] Fri, Aug 08, 2008, 13:35

Could be a very big deal. NATO did something stupid in (all but) promising George a place at the NATO buffet. Thuggish Russia is acting like themselves.

This'll either blow up or blow away--the next couple of days will determine which way it goes.
1boikin
ID: 532592112
Fri, Aug 08, 2008, 14:43
I pretty much wrote this off as Russia acting like Russia, no big deal till i saw that Georgia is part of NATO. I have admit a bit worrisome.
2azdbacker
ID: 14713820
Fri, Aug 08, 2008, 23:22
Go Bulldogs.
3Pancho Villa
ID: 51546319
Sat, Aug 09, 2008, 02:12
I pretty much wrote this off as Russia acting like Russia

More like Ossetians(and Abkhazias) acting like Ossetians, who have always had a closer ethnic ties to Russia than Georgia, and declared their independence when the Soviet Union broke up.
No one has really explained why South Ossetia wasn't granted autonomy and why Georgia was allowed to annex it.

Why Georgia would want to maintain a relationship with the abomination that is Abkhazia is anyone's guess.
4Boxman
ID: 571114225
Sat, Aug 09, 2008, 06:12
Georgia is in NATO?
5sarge33rd
ID: 76442923
Sat, Aug 09, 2008, 08:34
Not yet, no.
6Perm Dude
ID: 397487
Sat, Aug 09, 2008, 15:15
It was pretty much promised to them, but now it is highly doubtful. NATO exists to give mutual military help--but NATO doesn't actually want to intervene militarily if it doesn't have to. Ironically, Russia's beligerance has effectively killed any chance of Georgia getting into NATO (which was probably one of the top aims anyway).
7Pancho Villa
ID: 51546319
Sat, Aug 09, 2008, 15:49
Russia's beligerance

It was the Georgian military that invaded South Ossetia that began this latest round of hostilities.

And, as I mentioned earlier, Georgia's claims on South Ossetia are specious at best, and genocidal at worst.

I'm especially amused at those who point to the UN never recognizing the legitimacy of South Ossetia's independence, when many of these same people don't recognize the legitimacy of the UN.

Additionally, there are many who support the US using military action in support of our allies and those who seek freedom, yet villify the Russians for doing the same thing, in an area that was part of Russia for several centuries, no less.
8Perm Dude
ID: 397487
Sat, Aug 09, 2008, 17:32
I'm not sure how one can say that Georgia's claims are "specious at best" for an area which declared its independence from Georgia itself. Was the Union's claim on South Carolina's succession "specious at best?" Not even Russia, to my knowledge, recognize the areas as an independent country, and the Russian "peacekeepers" appear largely there to ensure that Georgia doesn't interfere. They seem to like the area as a disputed land.

There certainly is a larger question of whether South Ossetia should be independent (I don't claim to know much of the history myself, but my limited reading says "yes.") But this action is nothing more than Russia trying to slap Georgia around because they (Russia) got all pissy about Georgia's possible membership in NATO. South Ossetia have been largely on its own for something like 15 years--Russia made the move in this case, not Georgia.
9Pancho Villa
ID: 51546319
Sat, Aug 09, 2008, 18:14
Russia made the move in this case, not Georgia.

Uh, no.

Violent clashes were underway Friday in South Ossetia as Georgia said its forces had surrounded the capital of the breakaway region.

At least 15 civilians were reported killed by South Ossetian officials as Tskhinvali came under heavy Georgian shelling.

"An attack is underway, clashes are taking place outside Tskhinvali," interior ministry spokesman Shota Utyashvili told AFP, just hours after reports that Georgia and South Ossetia agreed to meet Friday for talks.

The Georgian government has decided to "restore constitutional order" in the region which broke away from Tbilisi's control in the early 1990s, said the head of Georgian peacekeepers in the province, General Mamuka Kurashvili.

"Tskhinvali has been surrounded by Georgian forces," Georgia's Reintegration Minister Temur Yakobashvili told AFP.

However, he emphasised that Tbilisi did not intend to "to assault Tskhinvali, but to neutralise separatist positions."

He said eight South Ossetian villages had already been captured.

"Tskhinvali is being shot at by mortar and heavy weapons from the Georgian villages of Nikozi and Ergneti and some houses are burning," Ria-Novosti news agency quoted an official speaking for South Ossetia's ministry of emergency situations as saying.

"Violent attacks are underway," South Ossetian rebel leader Eduard Kokoity told Interfax news agency, describing the attack on Tskhinvali as a "perfidious and vile" act by Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili.


Georgia invaded South Ossetia. They even did it
just hours after reports that Georgia and South Ossetia agreed to meet Friday for talks.

The Russians got involved as a response to the invasion, since most South Ossetians consider themselves Russians and hold Russian passports. That's not to say that Russia isn't overstepping their bounds by sending bombing missions into Georgia, but it is fallacious to say that Russia made the move, not Georgia. Even the Georgians admit this.

"Tskhinvali has been surrounded by Georgian forces," Georgia's Reintegration Minister Temur Yakobashvili told AFP.


10Pancho Villa
ID: 51546319
Sat, Aug 09, 2008, 19:39
Here's the link for #9



11Boxman
ID: 571114225
Sat, Aug 09, 2008, 19:57
It was pretty much promised to them, but now it is highly doubtful. NATO exists to give mutual military help--but NATO doesn't actually want to intervene militarily if it doesn't have to. Ironically, Russia's beligerance has effectively killed any chance of Georgia getting into NATO (which was probably one of the top aims anyway).

I wouldn't say it was "promised" to them. I know W and others were strongly pushing for their membership. IIRC, Ukraine is another country in the same boat as Georgia.

South Ossetia is not worth fighting World War III over and I'm not sold on having a strong NATO presence (let's pretend for a second that NATO is actually strong) on the Russian border. It's almost like we're trying to provoke something with Russia.

Imagine Canada entering into an alliance with Russia and the anxiety that would cause over here.

There is a lesson to be learned in the Georgian-Russian conflict is that Georgia does not have nukes from what I've been reading online. I would hazard a guess that if they had them, Russia would not be so willing to attack them the way they are. Regardless of who actually started it. Iran is probably watching this and is learning a thing or two about the power of nuclear weapons and military theater operations.

With Georgia's geographical location relative to Turkey, I wonder if they will have an influx of Muslims who now see a second front (Chechnya being the other) on which to engage the Russians.
12nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 5047110
Sun, Aug 10, 2008, 08:02


Oil was getting too cheap, Russia is going to use these events to it's fullest advantage to attempt to run the price back up. Just a guess.

Russian fighter jets targeted the the major Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline which carries oil to the West from Asia but missed, Georgia's Economic Development Minister Ekaterina Sharashidze said on Saturday.

"This clearly shows that Russia has not just targeted Georgian economic outlets but international economic outlets in Georgia," she said at a news briefing.


Russia needs oil pries to stay up.

13Boxman
ID: 571114225
Sun, Aug 10, 2008, 08:13
If that's the Russian strategy it seems to be an early failure as oil dropped significantly on Friday even with this war going on. IIRC it was around a $6 per barrel price drop.
14nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 5047110
Sun, Aug 10, 2008, 14:08

If that's the Russian strategy it seems to be an early failure as oil dropped significantly on Friday even with this war going on. IIRC it was around a $6 per barrel price drop.

The news about attempting to hit the pipeline wasn't out yet. Give it time.

Maybe that's not what is up but the chess guy (Sakorov???) that was running against Putin was on Bill Maher's Real time and he claimed Putin's support for Iran and nukes was merely a smoke screen to create tension in the Middle East to keep the price of oil inflated...sounded plausable enough. Russia badly needs high oil prices.

15Boxman
ID: 571114225
Sun, Aug 10, 2008, 14:45
Maybe that's not what is up but the chess guy (Sakorov???) that was running against Putin was on Bill Maher's Real time and he claimed Putin's support for Iran and nukes was merely a smoke screen to create tension in the Middle East to keep the price of oil inflated...sounded plausable enough. Russia badly needs high oil prices.

Oh I'm not disputing your hypothesis. They DO need high oil prices and could be tearing a page out of the Iranian playbook by doing things to artificially drive them up. Russia under Putin/Medvedev wants to reassert themselves as a significant world power in a bad way and they've got enough oil reserves to be just that if prices remain high.

What's the reaction over in Dubai to this? Is there talk about Chechnya over there too?
16Boldwin
ID: 176322815
Sun, Aug 10, 2008, 15:34
Russian fighter jets targeted the the major Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline which carries oil to the West from Asia but missed

Or did they?
17nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 5047110
Sun, Aug 10, 2008, 16:03


What's the reaction over in Dubai to this? Is there talk about Chechnya over there too?

I haven't really checked out the local coverage. Front page glance of one rag was headlined "Brutal Carnage".

Also in the news today here, Kuwait telling Iran they need to chill on the nukes for the good of the region.

UAE is planning nuclear power with the blessing of the west. They will do it under specific guidelines and the fuel will not be produced here.

18nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 5047110
Sun, Aug 10, 2008, 16:13


PD are you giving Georgia a pass on this? No problem with the Russian civilians they killed in Ossetia before Russia ever invaded?

19Perm Dude
ID: 57191016
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 00:58
Russia keeps going.

nerve: No pass at all. Just mentioning that Russia is acting like the thugs they've become. Maybe they are acting thuggish for the right reasons (though they appear to be throwing away whatever righteousness they might have had by acting so angrily at Georgia).
20Boldwin
ID: 176322815
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 01:07
Russia just recently became thugs?
21nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 5047110
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 02:04


Sunday night Bloomberg...

Aug. 11 (Bloomberg) -- Crude oil rose from a 14-week low in New York as traders deemed last week's 7.9 percent drop as excessive and the Russia-Georgia conflict raised concern that Caspian Sea supplies may be disrupted.



22Pancho Villa
ID: 51546319
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 09:41
Russia just recently became thugs?

The Georgians rarely complained when the Russian Empire was protecting them from the Muslim hordes attacking from Persia and Turkey, not to mention from Dahgestani-born Islamic imam Shamyl, who terrorized the Caucasus for most of the first half of the 19th century.

There is also a question as to who is promoting freedom here.

the de facto independent republic governed by the secessionist government held a second independence referendum[6] on November 12, 2006, after its first referendum in 1992 was not recognized by the international community as valid.[7] According to the Tskhinvali election authorities, the referendum turned out a majority for independence from Georgia where 99% of South Ossetian voters supported independence and the turnout for the vote was 95%[8] and the referendum was monitored by a team of 34 international observers from Germany, Austria, Poland, Sweden and other countries at 78 polling stations[9]. However, it was not recognized internationally by the UN, European Union, OSCE, NATO and the Russian Federation, given the lack of ethnic Georgian participation and the legality of such referendum without recognition from the central government in Tbilisi.[10] The European Union, OSCE and NATO condemned the referendum.


link

It's hard to believe that most of the American blogoshere is so completely unobjective on this subject, likely because Georgia is pro-west and a US ally, at least as far as providing a route for an essential oil pipeline. And merely mentioning Russia's concerns about a US trained and funded Georgia military in a former Russian territory on their Southern border brings cries of America-hater, even though, as Boxman points out in #11, America would never stand for a Russian-trained and supplied military in Canada or Mexico.

There has been no condemnation of Georgia's action from any US government official that I've seen, even though Georgia invaded South Ossetia, bombarded their capital and killed civilians in scores, and created a refugee crisis where the South Ossetians are not fleeing to Georgia, but Russia.

On Sunday, Vice President Dick Cheney said that "Russian aggression must not go unanswered, and that its continuation would have serious consequences for its relations with the United States."

Bush, in an interview with NBC, said, "I've expressed my grave concern about the disproportionate response of Russia and that we strongly condemn the bombing outside of South Ossetia."

How about a condemnation for Georgia starting this whole mess?
23boikin
ID: 532592112
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 10:15
Bush, in an interview with NBC, said, "I've expressed my grave concern about the disproportionate response of Russia and that we strongly condemn the bombing outside of South Ossetia."

How about a condemnation for Georgia starting this whole mess?


I saw that interview and Bush claimed he asked the president of georiga what they were thinking, but in typical bush he miss speaks and referrers to him as the leader of Russia. Eigher way what was georgia thinking? clearly even if they are in the right, Russia was waiting for this excuse to come into the region, given how quickly they moved forces in.

If i had to guess South Ossetian and the Georgians are both going to lose in this mess. South Ossetian is not going to get independence, best case would be annexation into russia or some form of Russian puppet independence. Best case for georgia is they do not get occupied by the russians.
24Myboyjack
Dude
ID: 014826271
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 13:55
Georgia invaded South Ossetia. They even did it
just hours after reports that Georgia and South Ossetia agreed to meet Friday for talks.

The Russians got involved as a response to the invasion, since most South Ossetians consider themselves Russians and hold Russian passports. That's not to say that Russia isn't overstepping their bounds by sending bombing missions into Georgia, but it is fallacious to say that Russia made the move, not Georgia. Even the Georgians admit this.


Georgia invaded South Ossetian? What country is South Ossetian in?

You seem very sympathetic to Russia's "aid" of the ethnic Russians living there. What authority under international law does Russia have to do so?
25boikin
ID: 532592112
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 14:02
It is a de facto independent country inside of georgia. You know one of those places who internationally is inside the borders of another country but in reality rules its self. Georgia acctually has two such regions South Ossetian and Abkhazia.
26Myboyjack
Dude
ID: 014826271
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 14:13


Subterfuge for regaining a lost empire
Saakashvili argued that Georgia was targeted because "no country of the former Soviet Union has made more progress toward consolidating democracy, eradicating corruption and building an independent foreign policy than Georgia."

"This is precisely what Russia seeks to crush."

Georgia, he said, has "worked hard to peacefully bring Abkhazia and South Ossetia back into the Georgian fold, on terms that would fully protect the rights and interests of the residents of these territories."

Those efforts have been undermined by Russia's annexation of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, treating the Georgian regions as Russian provinces, his column said.

"While we appealed to residents of Abkhazia and South Ossetia with our vision of a common future, Moscow increasingly took control of the separatist regimes," he wrote. "The Kremlin even appointed Russian security officers to arm and administer the self-styled separatist governments."


At stake, he argued, is much more than Georgia's future.





Additionally, there are many who support the US using military action in support of our allies and those who seek freedom, yet villify the Russians for doing the same thing


When presented with a pair of antagonists, their a tendency by some in the US to always side with the totalitarian thugs over the democratic allies. See e.g......Israel, Cuba, and now Georgia.. How long before Jimmy Carter takes up the Russian cause by charging Georgia as genocidal apartiets for demanding thier legal borders be respected.
27nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 5047110
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 14:15


You seem very sympathetic to Russia's "aid" of the ethnic Russians living there. What authority under international law does Russia have to do so?

I'm not sympathetic to anyone but isn't this similar to England supporting Northern Ireland militarily in the past since a bunch of Brits settled there?

28Myboyjack
Dude
ID: 014826271
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 14:20
I'm not sympathetic to anyone but isn't this similar to England supporting Northern Ireland militarily in the past since a bunch of Brits settled there?

Maybe. I'm militantly against England's occupation of Ireland and it's historic subjugation of Gaelic people- so if this is similar then I'm against Russia's actions as well.
29Boxman
ID: 337352111
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 14:58
Any criticism for this idea......

Let the Russians have South Ossetia. I've looked at a map and it's the size of a thumbtack. Let Georgia fall back and continue on with democratic and peaceful reforms. Drop supplies or smuggle them into South Ossetia if needs be. Learn something from Israel & Palestine and don't conduct a 1,000 year war over a piece of land the size of a dairy farm.

Don't fall for the Russian trap of bombing villages and killing civilians.

Now if Russia seeks to occupy all of Georgia then that's another story alltogether.
30biliruben
ID: 38751812
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 15:00
I thought we are supposed to trot out the Hitler and Sudetenland analogies about now.

Boxman the Appeaser!
31Myboyjack
Dude
ID: 014826271
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 15:01
I think Russia has S.O. regardless - I have my doubts whether that'll satisfy them. They've already made the resignation of Georgia's democratically elected government a condition for a cease fire.
32nerveclinic
Leader
ID: 5047110
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 15:02


Any criticism for this idea......

Well the Georgians might have something to say since it is part of their country.
33Boxman
ID: 337352111
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 15:38
Boxman the Appeaser!

Hence the disclaimer; it's a hypothetical.

They've already made the resignation of Georgia's democratically elected government a condition for a cease fire.

Well then I guess it's a fight down to the last Georgian.

Where I was coming from was that Georgia is obviously isolated in this conflict militarily. The US or Europe aren't going to show up and help them duke it out. They can fall back and make South Ossetia a non issue or they can fight to the last Georgian.

A goal of Georgia's is to join NATO. South Ossetia was probably a HUGE stumbling block to their membership given that it could have led to conflit with Russia. With South Ossetia out of the mix, what is to hold up Georgian membership in NATO? They lose South Ossetia, but gain the allegiance of NATO which held off the Soviet Union for half a century.
34Khahan
ID: 1065339
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 16:36
I can't believe I'm saying this, but..
I agree with Boxman (post 29). :)

S Ossetia was Georgia's in name only. By all accounts I've read the people were Russian in both ethnicity and belief.

It seems that when the USSR fell apart and Georgia claimed independence they simply were opportunistic and picked up these postage stamp regions.

Regardless of the past though the question now is: Why would anybody in South Ossetia in their right mind WANT to be part of Georgia? Georgia came in and opened fire, killing hundreds (possibly thousands by some reports) destroying homes etc...
35Pancho Villa
ID: 51546319
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 17:13
Well the Georgians might have something to say since it is part of their country.

South Ossetia was an autonomous oblast within the Soviet Republic of Georgia during the USSR years, political borders set up by Moscow.

When Georgia seceded from the USSR, it basically annexed the entire Soviet Republic of Georgia, including the autonomous oblasts of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.
Within a year, the South Ossetians held a referendum to vote to be independent of Georgia.
It passed, they were ignored, so they fought the Georgians for autonomy. With Georgia continuing to lay claim to Soth Ossetia, they voted again in 2006 and overwhelmingly approved a referendum to be completely free of ties with Georgia. Again they were ignored by all pertinent world bodies.

In 2008, Georgia invaded South Ossetia in the middle of the night, shelling their capital city and either killing the civilians or driving them north across the incredibly rugged Caucasus Mountains into North Ossetia.

These are the facts.It can't be spun that Georgia has a longstanding claim on South Ossetia as part of their nation that was established in 1991, as if it were Maine or Minnesota.

Our leaders are not being realistic. Just because Georgia is an ally doesn't mean that allies always do the right thing. Condemnation of Georgia should have accompanied, if not preceded, condemnation of Russia. The will of the people of South Ossetia should have been at least recognized, if not championed by our leaders. There has been no consideration that two years ago, with international watchdogs, South Ossetians voted almost 100% for freedom from Georgia, including the handful of ethnic Georgians. Nary even a mention. Are we really so cynical that we only champion freedom for ethnic peoples when it's politically convenient? How many protests do you hear about Turkey's treatment of Kurds in Washington?

The Russians are proud and paranoid. They lost a huge part of their empire. Everywhere they look, the United States military is creeping closer and closer and surrounding them. The former Yugoslavia, Poland, Czech Republic, Ukraine, Turkey, Georgia, Iraq, Afghanistan, even Uzbekistan until recently.
I guarantee you the Russians remember fighting for their very existence at St.Petersburg, Stalingrad and outside Moscow.
This country needs leadership that assures Russia that their position and influence globally is imperative to a world where commerce and improving the quality of life for all citizens is a priority.

Instead, we're building high tech nuclear weaponry, plus training and arming militaries on multiple borders, including areas that were part of their nation less than 20 years ago. Then we wonder why Russia overreacts.

Ironically, just last week I had pretty much decided that I was beginning to favor McCain over Obama. However, after seeing McCain's reaction and response(including throwing Russia out of the G8)as opposed to Obama's measured reaction and response, I'm starting to lean back the other way.

This is an area(foreign policy) where change really is needed.
36Perm Dude
ID: 19751117
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 17:20
Instead, we're building high tech nuclear weaponry, plus training and arming militaries on multiple borders, including areas that were part of their nation less than 20 years ago. Then we wonder why Russia overreacts.

Well, sure. But what we've done more directly is to take out a country (Iraq) which we felt might be a threat, using fake evidence and conducted outside the UN.

How high-minded can we be anymore? Bush traded away any soft power we had, and actually wrote the blueprint for the kind of behavior Russia is following.
37boikin
ID: 532592112
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 17:33
There has been no consideration that two years ago, with international watchdogs, South Ossetians voted almost 100% for freedom from Georgia, including the handful of ethnic Georgians. Nary even a mention. Are we really so cynical that we only champion freedom for ethnic peoples when it's politically convenient? How many protests do you hear about Turkey's treatment of Kurds in Washington?

i think the handful of georigians is about 30%.

I don't think we have anyclue who was right or wrong to start with, but i think it is pretty clear that if the russians are moving troops in Georgia while there government is trying to reach a cease fire, the Russians are deffently looking like they are in the wrong.
38Myboyjack
Dude
ID: 014826271
Mon, Aug 11, 2008, 17:50
The Russians are proud and paranoid. They lost a huge part of their empire. Everywhere they look, the United States military is creeping closer and closer and surrounding them. The former Yugoslavia, Poland, Czech Republic, Ukraine, Turkey, Georgia, Iraq, Afghanistan, even Uzbekistan until recently.
I guarantee you the Russians remember fighting for their very existence at St.Petersburg, Stalingrad and outside Moscow.
This country needs leadership that assures Russia that their position and influence globally is imperative to a world where commerce and improving the quality of life for all citizens is a priority.


You understand this but feign amazement as to why Georgia might feel a little "paranoid" and desire control of a bufffer between themselves and their recent overlords? Really.

Again in a confusing battle between autocrats and democrats, I'll always err on the side of the democracy as a default position.

39Boldwin
ID: 176322815
Tue, Aug 12, 2008, 06:05
One of the bigger picture issues is that the USSR tried to 'russify' all their imperial acquisitions and there are Ossetia-like pockets throughout the former USSR. Probably the most desirable resource-rich pockets of those colonies. Is Russia setting the precedent for reclaiming all those old mining regions and oilfields?
40Perm Dude
ID: 19751117
Wed, Aug 13, 2008, 01:58
McCain to NATO: Save those Christian Georgians!

McCain's problem in this spat is that his chief foreign policy consultant, Randy Scheunemann, was until March a lobbyist for Georgia, and was the "point man" in an effort to assure Georgia that the US would back them militarily.

You'd think that they would have learned their lesson after we stabbed the Kurds in the back, but no.
41Seattle Zen
Leader
ID: 055343019
Wed, Aug 13, 2008, 11:01


Yeah, save those Southern Baptists!
42walk
ID: 181472714
Wed, Aug 13, 2008, 17:47
I read in the NY Times today that Human Rights Watch cannot substantiate the Russian claim that Georgia killed 2,000 citizens in South Ossetia to start the recent war. So far, they can only verify 100 or less...

NY Times, Aug. 13
43walk
ID: 217541319
Wed, Aug 13, 2008, 20:55
Georgia Sues Russia

If you can't beat 'em, sue 'em.
44boikin
ID: 532592112
Thu, Aug 14, 2008, 08:29
Is georgia the practice field for 21st century war? I came across this article while looking for one related to the story i saw last night on how days before the Georgian invasion of south ossetia there government was under a cyber attack, assumed to be from the Russians.
45Perm Dude
ID: 5975149
Thu, Aug 14, 2008, 11:09
A little under three months out, and I thing we have a Winner: Most ironic statement of the campaign
46Tree
ID: 67581211
Thu, Aug 14, 2008, 12:35
PD - that is amazing. and...scary.
47Boxman
ID: 571114225
Fri, Aug 15, 2008, 08:36
If Russia's strategy was to cause a spike in oil they have failed. Pre-market oil futures are at 112 and change right now which is relatively flat or perhaps lower than pre-war prices.

Now if they strongarm the pipeline that leads to the Caspian this could change somewhat but I think there's too much downward pressure on oil with the US economy and an emerging stronger dollar which will offset the effects of the Georgian/Russian conflict.
48Pancho Villa
ID: 51546319
Fri, Aug 15, 2008, 09:46
I was hoping Pat Buchanan, one of the few conservatives left with a keen sense of foreign policy, would weigh in on the subject.

After shelling and attacking what he claims is his own country, killing scores of his own Ossetian citizens and sending tens of thousands fleeing into Russia, Saakashvili's army was whipped back into Georgia in 48 hours.

Vladimir Putin took the opportunity to kick the Georgian army out of Abkhazia, as well, to bomb Tbilisi and to seize Gori, birthplace of Stalin.

Reveling in his status as an intimate of George Bush, Dick Cheney and John McCain, and America's lone democratic ally in the Caucasus, Saakashvili thought he could get away with a lightning coup and present the world with a fait accompli.

Mikheil did not reckon on the rage or resolve of the Bear.

American charges of Russian aggression ring hollow. Georgia started this fight -- Russia finished it. People who start wars don't get to decide how and when they end.

Russia's response was "disproportionate" and "brutal," wailed Bush.

True. But did we not authorize Israel to bomb Lebanon for 35 days in response to a border skirmish where several Israel soldiers were killed and two captured? Was that not many times more "disproportionate"?
Russia has invaded a sovereign country, railed Bush. But did not the United States bomb Serbia for 78 days and invade to force it to surrender a province, Kosovo, to which Serbia had a far greater historic claim than Georgia had to Abkhazia or South Ossetia, both of which prefer Moscow to Tbilisi?

Is not Western hypocrisy astonishing?


Refreshing to see a conservative being honest about this subject.
49Perm Dude
ID: 2872159
Fri, Aug 15, 2008, 14:19
Russia: Poland risks attack if they accept US missile system

A top Russian general said Friday that Poland's agreement to accept a U.S. missile interceptor base exposes the ex-communist nation to attack, possibly by nuclear weapons, the Interfax news agency reported.

This has gotten out of hand.
50Tree
      ID: 67581211
      Fri, Aug 15, 2008, 14:40
perhaps PD, but the US led the way in successfully showing you can lie to and scare people, and then start a war based on those lies and fears.
51walk
      ID: 181472714
      Fri, Aug 15, 2008, 14:49
Oh man...all of a sudden, a cold war. What are our options? Economic sanctions? Harsh words? I also read that Russa is not sure we are not sending in military aide to Georgia.
52walk
      ID: 181472714
      Fri, Aug 15, 2008, 15:12
Graphic Images
53Boxman
      ID: 571114225
      Thu, Aug 21, 2008, 06:26
PJB: Who Started Cold War II?

by Patrick J. Buchanan

The American people should be eternally grateful to Old Europe for having spiked the Bush-McCain plan to bring Georgia into NATO.

Had Georgia been in NATO when Mikheil Saakashvili invaded South Ossetia, we would be eyeball to eyeball with Russia, facing war in the Caucasus, where Moscow’s superiority is as great as U.S. superiority in the Caribbean during the Cuban missile crisis.

If the Russia-Georgia war proves nothing else, it is the insanity of giving erratic hotheads in volatile nations the power to drag the United States into war.

From Harry Truman to Ronald Reagan, as Defense Secretary Robert Gates said, U.S. presidents have sought to avoid shooting wars with Russia, even when the Bear was at its most beastly.

Truman refused to use force to break Stalin’s Berlin blockade. Ike refused to intervene when the Butcher of Budapest drowned the Hungarian Revolution in blood. LBJ sat impotent as Leonid Brezhnev’s tanks crushed the Prague Spring. Jimmy Carter’s response to Brezhnev’s invasion of Afghanistan was to boycott the Moscow Olympics. When Brezhnev ordered his Warsaw satraps to crush Solidarity and shot down a South Korean airliner killing scores of U.S. citizens, including a congressman, Reagan did — nothing.

These presidents were not cowards. They simply would not go to war when no vital U.S. interest was at risk to justify a war. Yet, had George W. Bush prevailed and were Georgia in NATO, U.S. Marines could be fighting Russian troops over whose flag should fly over a province of 70,000 South Ossetians who prefer Russians to Georgians.

The arrogant folly of the architects of U.S. post-Cold War policy is today on display. By bringing three ex-Soviet republics into NATO, we have moved the U.S. red line for war from the Elbe almost to within artillery range of the old Leningrad.

Should America admit Ukraine into NATO, Yalta, vacation resort of the czars, will be a NATO port and Sevastopol, traditional home of the Russian Black Sea Fleet, will become a naval base for the U.S. Sixth Fleet. This is altogether a bridge too far.

And can we not understand how a Russian patriot like Vladimir Putin would be incensed by this U.S. encirclement after Russia shed its empire and sought our friendship? How would Andy Jackson have reacted to such crowding by the British Empire?

As of 1991, the oil of Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan belonged to Moscow. Can we not understand why Putin would smolder as avaricious Yankees built pipelines to siphon the oil and gas of the Caspian Basin through breakaway Georgia to the West?

For a dozen years, Putin & Co. watched as U.S. agents helped to dump over regimes in Ukraine and Georgia that were friendly to Moscow.

If Cold War II is coming, who started it, if not us?

The swift and decisive action of Putin’s army in running the Georgian forces out of South Ossetia in 24 hours after Saakashvili began his barrage and invasion suggests Putin knew exactly what Saakashvili was up to and dropped the hammer on him.

What did we know? Did we know Georgia was about to walk into Putin’s trap? Did we not see the Russians lying in wait north of the border? Did we give Saakashvili a green light?

Joe Biden ought to be conducting public hearings on who caused this U.S. humiliation.

The war in Georgia has exposed the dangerous overextension of U.S. power. There is no way America can fight a war with Russia in the Caucasus with our army tied down in Afghanistan and Iraq. Nor should we. Hence, it is demented to be offering, as John McCain and Barack Obama are, NATO membership to Tbilisi.

The United States must decide whether it wants a partner in a flawed Russia or a second Cold War. For if we want another Cold War, we are, by cutting Russia out of the oil of the Caspian and pushing NATO into her face, going about it exactly the right way.

Vladimir Putin is no Stalin. He is a nationalist determined, as ruler of a proud and powerful country, to assert his nation’s primacy in its own sphere, just as U.S. presidents from James Monroe to Bush have done on our side of the Atlantic.

A resurgent Russia is no threat to any vital interests of the United States. It is a threat to an American Empire that presumes some God-given right to plant U.S. military power in the backyard or on the front porch of Mother Russia.

Who rules Abkhazia and South Ossetia is none of our business. And after this madcap adventure of Saakashvili, why not let the people of these provinces decide their own future in plebiscites conducted by the United Nations or the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe?

As for Saakashvili, he’s probably toast in Tbilisi after this stunt. Let the neocons find him an endowed chair at the American Enterprise Institute.
54Boldwin
      ID: 176322815
      Thu, Aug 21, 2008, 10:43
Pat Buchanan is always thot provoking and always suspect. You never really know exactly where he is coming from.

I take exception to this phrase..."when Mikheil Saakashvili invaded South Ossetia".

This would be in my mind a fact not entered into evidence. I will except that the 'russified' population of S. Ossetia have been for the most part emotionally closer to Russia than Georgia...but Saakashvili was afterall acting in his own country, the country that elected him. I know that Russia has convinced their own people that Georgia committed some atrocity resulting in near 2K deaths there but that hasn't been proven to be anything more than propaganda yet either.
55Boldwin
      ID: 176322815
      Thu, Aug 21, 2008, 10:45
But he is right that the administration has a neocon response, and not the sort of response the FF would have had most likely.
56nerveclinic
      Leader
      ID: 5047110
      Thu, Aug 21, 2008, 16:40

I didn't realize the article was by Buchanan until you mentioned it Baldy and I have to tell you it's spot on.

I've actually read the same argument in a couple other articles of a more liberal bent...strange bedfellows?

Like this article from Huffington's blog.

link

Huffington...Buchanan?

57Boxman
      ID: 571114225
      Thu, Aug 21, 2008, 18:32
I didn't realize the article was by Buchanan until you mentioned it Baldy and I have to tell you it's spot on.

That whole author line is kinda confusing isn't it. Who did you think wrote it? ;)
58nerveclinic
      Leader
      ID: 5047110
      Fri, Aug 22, 2008, 14:50


That whole author line is kinda confusing isn't it. Who did you think wrote it? ;)


Yeah I know but I just didn't read it. Can't blame it on smoking given where I am living though.

59Boldwin
      ID: 176322815
      Fri, Aug 22, 2008, 15:49
Brain damage prolly.
60Seattle Zen
      ID: 358591721
      Fri, Nov 07, 2008, 11:14


Hmm, maybe Pancho was really on to something.
The accounts suggest that Georgia’s inexperienced military attacked the isolated separatist capital of Tskhinvali on Aug. 7 with indiscriminate artillery and rocket fire, exposing civilians, Russian peacekeepers and unarmed monitors to harm.

The accounts are neither fully conclusive nor broad enough to settle the many lingering disputes over blame in a war that hardened relations between the Kremlin and the West. But they raise questions about the accuracy and honesty of Georgia’s insistence that its shelling of Tskhinvali, the capital of the breakaway region of South Ossetia, was a precise operation. Georgia has variously defended the shelling as necessary to stop heavy Ossetian shelling of Georgian villages, bring order to the region or counter a Russian invasion.

President Mikheil Saakashvili of Georgia has characterized the attack as a precise and defensive act. But according to observations of the monitors, documented Aug. 7 and Aug. 8, Georgian artillery rounds and rockets were falling throughout the city at intervals of 15 to 20 seconds between explosions, and within the first hour of the bombardment at least 48 rounds landed in a civilian area. The monitors have also said they were unable to verify that ethnic Georgian villages were under heavy bombardment that evening, calling to question one of Mr. Saakashvili’s main justifications for the attack.

Mr. Saakashvili sounds like he's out of his league. This can't help Georgia's chances of joining NATO
The brief war was a disaster for Georgia. The attack backfired. Georgia’s army was humiliated as Russian forces overwhelmed its brigades, seized and looted their bases, captured their equipment and roamed the country’s roads at will. Villages that Georgia vowed to save were ransacked and cleared of their populations by irregular Ossetian, Chechen and Cossack forces, and several were burned to the ground. At 6:10 p.m., the monitors were told by Russian peacekeepers of suspected Georgian artillery fire on Khetagurovo, an Ossetian village; this report was not independently confirmed, and Georgia declared a unilateral cease-fire shortly thereafter, about 7 p.m. During a news broadcast that began at 11 p.m., Georgia announced that Georgian villages were being shelled, and declared an operation “to restore constitutional order” in South Ossetia. The bombardment of Tskhinvali started soon after the broadcast.

According to the monitors, however, no shelling of Georgian villages could be heard in the hours before the Georgian bombardment. At least two of the four villages that Georgia has since said were under fire were near the observers’ office in Tskhinvali, and the monitors there likely would have heard artillery fire nearby. Moreover, the observers made a record of the rounds exploding after Georgia’s bombardment began at 11:35 p.m. At 11:45 p.m., rounds were exploding at intervals of 15 to 20 seconds between impacts, they noted. At 12:15 a.m. on Aug. 8, Gen. Maj. Marat M. Kulakhmetov, commander of Russian peacekeepers in the enclave, reported to the monitors that his unit had casualties, indicating that Russian soldiers had come under fire. By 12:35 a.m. the observers had recorded at least 100 heavy rounds exploding across Tskhinvali, including 48 close to the observers’ office, which is in a civilian area and was damaged. During a news broadcast that began at 11 p.m., Georgia announced that Georgian villages were being shelled, and declared an operation “to restore constitutional order” in South Ossetia. The bombardment of Tskhinvali started soon after the broadcast.

Mr. Grist said. “The attack was clearly, in my mind, an indiscriminate attack on the town, as a town.”
61Perm Dude
      ID: 438132822
      Fri, Oct 02, 2009, 11:29
Greenwald reminds us of how wrong the politicos got it.
62Razor
      ID: 57854118
      Fri, Oct 02, 2009, 13:13
Very interesting. Glad we elected the right guy. McCain's comments after the incident were at best "misguided" and probably closer to "reckless."
 If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect,
you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com 
RotoGuru Politics Forum

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread




Post a reply to this message: (But first, how about checking out this sponsor?)

Name:
Email:
Message:
Click here to create and insert a link
Click here to insert a block of hidden (spoiler) text
Ignore line feeds? no (typical)   yes (for HTML table input)


Viewing statistics for this thread
Period# Views# Users
Last hour11
Last 24 hours11
Last 7 days11
Last 30 days33
Since Mar 1, 20071777653