war in the caucasus

Well, they're different wars, of course, but the underlying elements behind them are quite the same. You have two nations involved in conflicts, who who says, "Bad, Bad!", even though the entire world is saying, "Bad, Bad!' to them regarding their own dubious conflicts, by political figures who still fully support the ongoing dubious conflicts.

I notice this a lot with the Bush Administration and similarly minded camps, that are quick to wag the finger at others, even though what they criticize is exactly what they are criticized for.
 
Raziaar said:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20080811/pl_politico/19061_1

Mccain warns of Russia's conflict with Georgia, how it can harm relations with USA, and forgets that he completely supports the war in Iraq and attempts to maintain moral high ground.
Click to expand...

At this point in time, neither the US or NATO can support a direct confrontation with Russia, because of US operations in Iraq and NATO in Afghanistan. That's why we probably won't see much more than strong words. Even if they try economic sanctions, it won't be too effective because too many countries rely on Russian exports. Russia is taking this opportunity to twist the screws and solidify its dominance of the Caucuses. You have to hand it to Medvedev and Putin, they're really playing their cards right.
 
And now for a not- so- related comment on the conflict.


In 2001 a game came out called "Ghost Recon", made by RedStorm. Where US special forces are deployed to T'bilisi, Georgia to deal with Russian invasion forces backed by ultra-nationalist hardliners.

The "future date" for this games storyline was... August 2008.


/cue twilight zone music
 
Georgia really made a foolish mistake invading SO and provoking Russia, what were they thinking would happen?
 
I'm surprised that Georgia thinks that the west would come in and rescue them. You start a war against the Russian's and you get your ass kicked, no one else is stupid enough to join you.
 
Raziaar said:
Well, they're different wars, of course, but the underlying elements behind them are quite the same. You have two nations involved in conflicts, who who says, "Bad, Bad!", even though the entire world is saying, "Bad, Bad!' to them regarding their own dubious conflicts, by political figures who still fully support the ongoing dubious conflicts.

I notice this a lot with the Bush Administration and similarly minded camps, that are quick to wag the finger at others, even though what they criticize is exactly what they are criticized for.
Click to expand...

I agree, but Russia did the same thing about a year ago.
Relations between the USA and Russia sank to the lowest point in a decade when Vladimir Putin harshly rebuked Washington for its criticism last week and compared the US to a hungry wolf that "eats and listens to no one". Although he refrained from mentioning the US by name, it was clear that the "wolf" in question referred to Washington.
Click to expand...
http://english.pravda***/russia/politics/12-05-2006/80197-wolf-0

Remember?
 
Oh, I wasn't excusing Russia or casting aside any hypocrisy they have either. Putin is a very hypocritical guy.
 
to summarize - World Leaders criticize other countries at every opportunity, but also leave themselves open to being criticized.

agreed.
 
alehm said:
And now for a not- so- related comment on the conflict.


In 2001 a game came out called "Ghost Recon", made by RedStorm. Where US special forces are deployed to T'bilisi, Georgia to deal with Russian invasion forces backed by ultra-nationalist hardliners.

The "future date" for this games storyline was... August 2008.


/cue twilight zone music
Click to expand...

The year is 2008, and the world is in peril.
Radical ultranationalists have seized power in Moscow. Their goal, the re-establishment of the old Soviet empire. Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan. One by one the nearby republics slip back in the Russian orbit.

:|

With that said, I have the strongest urge to compile a bunch of footage from this conflict and put the Ghost Recon intro soundfile over it.
 
Combine_Advisor said:
and when the americans attack iraq and afghanistan its "democratic"
Click to expand...

Don't forget the Soviet piping in the middle east. Also their occupation of Afghanistan.


French Ninja said:
The year is 2008, and the world is in peril.
Radical ultranationalists have seized power in Moscow. Their goal, the re-establishment of the old Soviet empire. Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan. One by one the nearby republics slip back in the Russian orbit.

:|
Click to expand...

Ukraine
Click to expand...

*runs back to the old country to kick some ultranationalist ass*
 
The five-day-old conflict began late on 7 August when Georgian forces bombarded the breakaway province of South Ossetia, where a majority of people hold Russian passports.

Russia quickly became involved, bombing targets throughout Georgia and sending troops in to recapture South Ossetia.
Click to expand...

Seems to me georgia started this and got what they deserved. Perhaps they thought they had the upper hand with western allies but seems not.

Sounds a little like the falklands war to me.
 
French Ninja said:
The year is 2008, and the world is in peril.
Radical ultranationalists have seized power in Moscow. Their goal, the re-establishment of the old Soviet empire. Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan. One by one the nearby republics slip back in the Russian orbit.

:|
Click to expand...




Ultra-nationalists have seized power in Russia, with plans to rebuild the government. Their first step is clandestine support of rebel factions in Georgia and the Baltic States. This is where the Ghosts come in: to silence the invasion.
Click to expand...

:| 10char
 
Had a big argument with some Russian dude about this over on the ZM forums and figured I might post my claims here for the undoubtedly more rigorous denizens of the Politics Forum to criticise at their leisure.

His post:

Notary said:
The only one target in Tbilisi was the airport, some military planes Georgian landed there. Russia bombs only military objects to prevent new air/rocket strikes from Georgia
Click to expand...
After I mused upon equivalence between Georgia's response to SO, and Russia's response to Chechnya...
Those situations are different. The republic of Chechnya was controlled by the terrorists. Everything could go in a peaceful way, but Chechens attackted the republic of Dagestan (which is a part of Russia) and started to blow up overcrowded places in Moscow and other cities. I still remember that explosion in Moscow subway, some buildings were blown up with people who didn't suspect anything, even the parade in honour of victory in WWII was blown up by those terrorists.

That would be alright if Georgia tryed to do this business in a diplomatic and peaceful way, but they prefered just to kill everyone and destroy everything. I don't know how many times should I repeat that over two thousands people died under their bombs and that Tskhinvali was destroyed, there's no water, power, hospitals, shcools, electricity there, this capital of South Ossetia. over 2000 thousands Ossetian people died, women and children, do you hear it? Obviously, this is not genocide. Can deaths of those people be denyed? Were they just nececarry casualties to finish the business between Georgia and Ossetia? Russia came there to defend people, and thanks to it, it stopped the carnage.

As for the rebeliious republics in general, the republic of Kosovo separated itself from Serbia, it is an official country now, why is Ossetia is not allowed to do the same then?
Click to expand...
 
My post:

Sulkdodds said:
Notary said:
The only one target in Tbilisi was the airport, some military planes Georgian landed there. Russia bombs only military objects to prevent new air/rocket strikes from Georgia
Click to expand...
Nope.

Notary said:
Those situations are different. The republic of Chechnya was controlled by the terrorists. Everything could go in a peaceful way, but Chechens attackted the republic of Dagestan (which is a part of Russia) and started to blow up overcrowded places in Moscow and other cities. I still remember that explosion in Moscow subway, some buildings were blown up with people who didn't suspect anything, even the parade in honour of victory in WWII was blown up by those terrorists.
Click to expand...

Things to consider:

1. Chechnya "was" controlled by terrorists, but continues to be controlled by criminals: Russian-backed forces in the area are accused of numerous human rights abuses by both international organisations and reputed journalists.
2. Russia had planned for a war against Chechnya months before the invasion of Dagestan.
3. Many such bombings have never been successfully linked to Chechen rebels; in fact, many events have cast a great deal of doubt on the Apartment Bombings. Three FSB agents who had planted a bomb were caught by local police - the FSB later claimed the bomb was a fake, intended for training purposes (o rly?). Alexander Litvinenko and Anna Politskovskaya (the latter a renowned journalist) both claimed that the bombings were a "false flag" attack - both of them were later assassinated. Two parliamentary motions for an investigation of the bombings were rejected by the State Duma in March 2000. An independent investigatory commission was hampered by government refusal to respond to its enquiries. Two members of the commission have now died, apparently of assassination.
4. The invasion of Chechnya was a dirty war in which Putin deliberately ordered revenge attacks on civilian targets, and fuel air bombs were dropped on uninvolved villages. Indeed, this article's description of Grozny circa 1999 begins to look very familiar: "by the time Chechen rebels lost the city, barely a single building stood intact, forcing residents to eke out an existence in cellars and basements". The article itself is one quite blatantly tinted, but my point is only to establish equivalence. At least in the case of the Grozny devastation, the facts seem to support the subjective account (The UN called Grozy the most destroyed city on earth) whereas, as we'll see later, the facts don't necessarily support the '2000 casualties' version of the Battle of Tshkinvali.
5. Georgia and South Ossetia both claim that the other one started the conflict. The Georgian invasion was provoked by border clashes; starting on August 1st, fighting began between Georgian troops and South Ossettian paramilitaries and it really isn't clear who started that combat. The Georgian president supposedly called for peace talks, and offered South Ossettia full autonomy. Next night, it's alleged that Georgian villages suffered a South Ossetian bombardment before the war began. Not so clear cut, hmm?
6. Russia still evidently considers all its old provinces to be its rightful territory. The Federal government thinks it has a right to everything it used to possess, as evidenced by (for example) its political meddling in Estonia.

So we can draw a few further parallels between Georgia and Chechnya.

In both cases, the question of "who is the aggressor" is very very unclear.
In both cases, the waw launched by the mother state to retake the seperatist state has been prosecuted with extreme prejudice and deliberate attacks on civilians.

Check out this article from the admittedly suspicious Jamestown Federation (of whom Sourcewatch say: "their bias is unabashedly Pro-American, but they are refreshingly without an obvious partisan slant"). Unreliable as it might be, it alleges that this entire situation is, in fact, Russian-instigated.

At 7:00 P.M. local time on August 7, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili spoke live on national television, announcing a unilateral ceasefire and asking the other side also to cease hostilities. In highly conciliatory words, Saakashvili called for talks “in any format”; reaffirmed the long-standing offer of full autonomy for South Ossetia; proposed that Russia should guarantee that solution; offered a general amnesty; and pleaded for international intercession to stop the hostilities (Rustavi-2 TV, August 7).

Following Saakashvili’s address, attacks on Georgian villages intensified. The village of Avnevi was almost completely destroyed, Tamarasheni and Prisi shelled, and the police station in Kurta, seat of the Sanakoyev administration, smashed by artillery fire. Civilians began fleeing the villages.
Click to expand...
So in fact, the Georgian president was prepared to "do this business in a diplomatic and peaceful way"?

Resemblances with the Russian interventions in the early 1990s in Transnistria and Abkhazia are unmistakable. In that scenario, the Russian media create a hysterical, brink-of-war atmosphere, portraying the small country targeted for attack as a dangerous aggressor. Russian-armed proxy troops, already in place on the target country’s territory, attack localities and seats of authority. Cossacks and North Caucasus “volunteers” are sent in. Russian officials can claim that the attackers act on their own, outside Moscow’s control. Russian military intelligence coordinates the operation, while air and ground forces provide cover and would intervene directly if the target country defends itself. In the final stage of this scenario, Russian “peacekeepers” perpetuate the gains achieved on the ground. Throughout the crisis, most Western governments are confused and react irrelevantly by urging restraint on “both sides,” ultimately tolerating the Russian faits accomplis.
Click to expand...

Indeed, despite talk of a ceasefire, Chechen, Cossack and Ossetian irregulars continue to follow the Russian forces which are advancing into Georgia. AP claims it saw tanks roaring into Gori. NYT says Czech journos were robbed by South Ossetian irregulars. All of which makes your statement rather hilarious in hindsight:

Notary said:
Russia came there to defend people, and thanks to it, it stopped the carnage...the peace is restored, agressor is punished, targets are achieved.
Click to expand...

Although what Georgia is doing cannot be called a "genocide" until specific intention for ethnic cleansing is demonstrated, it has clearly taken pretty awful and evil actions against the South Ossetian capital.

Yet you throw around this "2000 civilians" statistic as if many sure facts were known in this conflict. In fact, that's a figure delivered by Russian officials, and based on the number of wounded being treated in hospitals, may well be inflated. Even if we ignore the irresponsibility of taking such statistics at face value when it's still incredibly hard to work out exactly what's happening down there, I would not be inclined to believe statistics provided by a government which forces its media to have 50% 'positive' news and forbids opposition politicians to be mentioned on air.

Varied sources and the shape of events appear to call into question your portrait of Georgia as a made dog of a nation which is rabidly attacking without bothering to think things through. The very perception of Georgia as 'aggressor' is put into doubt. I am well aware of the danger that I am being hoodwinked by an intelligence machine (as has happened with the 'Free Tibet' issue - it's very clear that coverage of it is not neutral and is being influenced by Western political concerns, while the CIA is funding the Dala Lama). But as it is now, it appears increasingly clear that the story of Russia defending poor little South Ossetia against an aggressive foreign power might be, to put it bluntly, bullshit.

And let's face it. When the Defender of the Free World has used chicanery, deceipt and corruption to enact an aggressive and disasterous invasion of a foreign state, while pretending that it is really a force for good,should anybody really be surprised if a government that is run by spies does a similar thing?
Click to expand...
 
Thank You God for gracing France and Germany with the balls to tell GWB to sod off when he wanted that lunatic to join NATO. Hopefully a permanent deal will be made about Abkhasia and South Ossetia (preferably secussion) before Georgia are considered for membership again. What a complete wanker (Saakashvili).
 
It's really difficult for us ordinary people to know where the blame lies. On one hand, if Saakashvili did what Russia acuses him of (genocide, etc), then yes he deserves criminal prosecution.
On the other hand, there's stories going on about Russia provoking Georgia into a trap, in that they conspired this whole situation to happen.
Without the facts it's difficult to judge. All I know is that Ossetians and Georgians are suffering at the hands of the powers that be.
 
It's frustrating that the West (including my country) seems so pro-Georgia. Of course the Russians aren't doing what they are because they're good-hearted, but it seems the western media treats Georgia as a martyr that should immediately be helped. The Russians are pushing everything too far, but it's Georgia rejecting South Ossetia's right to be free.
 
The Georgians shouldn't have invaded SO. However, the SOs/Russians (and the Georgians) shouldn't have spent a week ramping up tensions with constant border skirmishes and sniper fire directly prior to the invaision. And if the Georgians had an ounce of sense they would have waited until they actually were NATO members rather than banking on the somewhat nebulous "uh yeah, sure, sometime you can join our club" situation they were in. Mind you, I still don't think the alliance would have done a great deal even if Georgia were a full member.

Unfocused, I'm sure its so much pro-georgian as anti-russian. Many of the nations taking the hardest line on this situation are the ex-Warsaw Pact members, seemingly fearing a return of the old times and so insisting that Russian troops completley withdraw and the borders of Georgia to be completly restored.
 
Georgia was wrong in attacking South Ossetia in the first place (and deserve to be criticised for it), but the Russian response was so exaggerated it's ridiculous.
 
I am still undecided as to which side is actually at fault here. Saakashvili's live appearances on American news are entertaining though. If he is to be believed then I would consider Russia at fault, but it's very hard to tell.

AJ Rimmer said:
Russians don't do "small".
Click to expand...

"Vodka" translates to "little water" in Russian, so they do small, just small with a bang ;)
 
Ennui said:
I am still undecided as to which side is actually at fault here. Saakashvili's live appearances on American news are entertaining though. If he is to be believed then I would consider Russia at fault, but it's very hard to tell.



"Vodka" translates to "little water" in Russian, so they do small, just small with a bang ;)
Click to expand...

Okay, so they do small, but only in very large quantities? Which robs the smallness of one of its intrinsic qualities.
 
Bob_Marley said:
Unfocused, I'm sure its so much pro-georgian as anti-russian.
Click to expand...

I agree. Probably even more anti-Russian than pro-Georgian.

So is there a definite version? Was Georgia's attack a retaliation for SO's militia attacks?
 
The Monkey said:
Georgia was wrong in attacking South Ossetia in the first place (and deserve to be criticised for it), but the Russian response was so exaggerated it's ridiculous.
Click to expand...

so belongs to russia they had every right to try contain the separatists there.
 
unozero said:
so belongs to russia they had every right to try contain the separatists there.
Click to expand...

South Ossetia has never belonged to Russia, don't know where you got that idea... :dozey:
Sure you don't mean North Ossetia? They were part and are part of Russia.
 
Nemesis6 said:
South Ossetia has never belonged to Russia, don't know where you got that idea... :dozey:
Sure you don't mean North Ossetia? They were part and are part of Russia.
Click to expand...

**** I ment to say Georgia :(
dont know why I said russia lol
 
Nemesis6 said:
South Ossetia has never belonged to Russia, don't know where you got that idea... :dozey:
Sure you don't mean North Ossetia? They were part and are part of Russia.
Click to expand...

Well, SO (and Georgia too) has belonged to Russia since the days of the Russian Empire, right up until the end of the Soviet Onion (unless you consider the Soviet States as not belonging to Russia de-facto in that time).

But no, SO does not belong to Russia, it is an internationally recognised part of Georgian territory.
 
The problem is SO declared independence on the '90s, yet for some reason it's not internationally considered as independent. According to wiki, in 2006 there was a referendum and 99% voters voted for independence (with a turnout of 95%!). They have every right to be independent, I don't understand why they aren't recognised as such.
 
To be honest, after this latest massacre by Georgia, the Georgians really have no right to it anymore. The Ossetians of course have shown to be quite insane, too, but on a smaller scale.
 
****ing commies man....oh well thank god Poland is sticking up for Georgia unlike the pussie nations France,Germany and Holland.
 
unozero said:
****ing commies man....oh well thank god Poland is sticking up for Georgia unlike the pussie nations France,Germany and Holland.
Click to expand...

It was the French that made the ceasefire deal between Russia and Georgia.
 
unozero said:
****ing commies man....oh well thank god Poland is sticking up for Georgia unlike the pussie nations France,Germany and Holland.
Click to expand...

I don't see how you can stick up for anything else than the Ossetian people in this conflict - Georgia starts by massacring civilians by indiscriminately shelling a capital city, Russia steps in and does the same to the Georgians, and the Ossetians tag along to do the same. The only part that should be supported is the Ossetian civilians, because clearly, all governments involved are crazy, deranged lunatics.
 
Nemesis6 said:
I don't see how you can stick up for anything else than the Ossetian people in this conflict - Georgia starts by massacring civilians by indiscriminately shelling a capital city, Russia steps in and does the same to the Georgians, and the Ossetians tag along to do the same. The only part that should be supported is the Ossetian civilians, because clearly, all governments involved are crazy, deranged lunatics.
Click to expand...

I think it's more like they choose whether to support Georgia or Russia in the conflict.

Of course it's the civilians that suffer most, in SO and Georgia.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Tollbooth Willie
To Those That Stand, Those That Fell
Replies
6
Views
2K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
TechnoHippyChic
Forum Artifact Preservation Project
2
Replies
63
Views
7K
Raziaar
Raziaar
Chris D
Half-Life: Alyx announced
Replies
32
Views
25K
Tollbooth Willie
Tollbooth Willie
TechnoHippyChic
The Many Diversions of THC's Work Lunches
Replies
3
Views
2K
TechnoHippyChic
TechnoHippyChic
Lizardizzle
2019: The year of Half-Life SFX videos
Replies
4
Views
2K
Ennui
Ennui
Back
Top