WAR!!
If we do not back Georgia, we are being bullied by Russia!!! Just like we did nothing to fucking back Myamar!
<
<
Comments
-
I don't agree with this guy at all, but it's pretty interesting commentary:
http://exiledonline.com/war-nerd-south-ossetia-the-war-of-my-dreams/ -
what do you disagree with? (besides, i'm guessing, the enthusiasm for videos of casualties.)
disclaimer: i know only as much about this as one can glean from 2.5 times articles and a little bbc. -
from the same site (thanks, carny), on mccain's response
-
Subject: Re: WAR!!
sneakyonstmarks wrote: If we do not back Georgia, we are being bullied by Russia!!! Just like we did nothing to fucking back Myamar!
yeah blind cold war anger! go america! screw the rooskies!
< -
ahahahah NO OIL in russia.. of course bush punk ass dont care.. ahahahah
-
Rice should be on a plane to Moscow and NATO should be having an emergency meeting regaridng accelerating the membership of Georia and Ukraine.
-
why?
the georgians don't exactly come across as boy scouts here....
it's a mess, but it's a regional mess. getting NATO into it just seems like an invitation to make a bigger mess of it. not to mention, it's hardly as if we have the spare troops to intimidate anyone with. -
Subject: Re: WAR!!
Boygabriel wrote: yeah blind cold war anger! go america! screw the rooskies!
Oh, ya know - when a state that's pretty much a massive criminal enterprise attacks a much smaller democracy, some slight peevishness might be in order. Anyway, here's hoping diplomacy works better here than it did in that Darfur situation. -
It's pretty simple: this is Kosovo in reverse, with Russia playing NATO and Georgia playing Serbia. Bomb Belgrade? Bomb Tiblisi. Kosovo's recent unprecedented unilateral declaration of independence greenlights the same kind of tactics in all sorts of disputed territories; Russia made that clear at the time.
-
but is that what happened? this is a genuine question. that's not the impression i'm getting.
seems like georgia hasn't been the controlling power in south ossetia for some time, and it's more like georgia attacked a de facto russian possession and the russians counterattacked. it also doesn't sound like south ossetia is very interested in being part of georgia.
my knowledge on this subject is not at all deep, though. please feel free to set me straight. -
sweet tea wrote: but is that what happened? this is a genuine question. that's not the impression i'm getting.
As I understand it, South Ossetia (which I honestly hadn't heard of before the current conflict) is historically part of Georgia, not Russia, and that even now, Russia has not made any claim to the actual land. However, many of the people of South Ossetia are ethnically Russian, and in the last few years, Russia has been quietly issuing them Russian passports, which has now given them a pretext to go in to "protect Russian citizens" even though the territory isn't theirs.
seems like georgia hasn't been the controlling power in south ossetia for some time, and it's more like georgia attacked a de facto russian possession and the russians counterattacked. it also doesn't sound like south ossetia is very interested in being part of georgia.
my knowledge on this subject is not at all deep, though. please feel free to set me straight. -
sweet tea wrote: what do you disagree with? (besides, i'm guessing, the enthusiasm for videos of casualties.)
Yeah, what I disagree strongly with is the general enthusiasm for war, not the analysis of the actual facts of the conflict, which I thought was really interesting (otherwise I wouldn't have posted the link).
disclaimer: i know only as much about this as one can glean from 2.5 times articles and a little bbc. -
sweet tea wrote: but is that what happened? this is a genuine question. that's not the impression i'm getting.
South Ossetia is part of Georgia; Russia always considered this to be a temporary arrangement, whereas Georgia didn't. Russia has been using the age-old gag of protecting ethnic Russians - after encouraging them to agitate the Georgians - in the area as an excuse for invading. Georgia was caught pretty flat-footed by all this, which makes Russian claims that they were machine-gunning old ladies in their beds suspect, but that's just my read. It seems to me that if they were going for a wipeout of the Russian population, they would have set up a defense in advance; the approaches to Georgia from Russia are limited, and a relatively small force could defend them for a good while, particularly against a bungling military like Russia's.
seems like georgia hasn't been the controlling power in south ossetia for some time, and it's more like georgia attacked a de facto russian possession and the russians counterattacked. it also doesn't sound like south ossetia is very interested in being part of georgia.
my knowledge on this subject is not at all deep, though. please feel free to set me straight. -
sweet tea wrote: why?
Ukraine was officially promised admission to Nato during its April summit.
the georgians don't exactly come across as boy scouts here....
it's a mess, but it's a regional mess. getting NATO into it just seems like an invitation to make a bigger mess of it. not to mention, it's hardly as if we have the spare troops to intimidate anyone with.
A vote on Goergia's membership was tentatively scheduled for December.
They are (imperfect) aspiring democracies and critical strategic allies as Russia continues its slide back to Stanlinist mafia-led oligarchy where people disappear every five mintues. Expect to see the return of the gulag archipelego. -
sounds like south ossetia hasn't wanted to be part of georgia at least since the 1800s. and like georgia has been pretty happy to wipe out big crowds of ethnic ossetians in the past.
i agree with the sentiments against contemporary russia in general, but i'm having a hard time swallowing the notion that georgia is so great, either. -
sweet tea wrote: sounds like south ossetia hasn't wanted to be part of georgia at least since the 1800s.
Typically in history, nation states haven't been much in the habit of letting ethnic minorities set up their own seperate countries with their borders. "Opt-out" hasn't usually gone over very well either, as the CSA found out.
I'd be in favor of seccession from New York State, though. -
sweet tea wrote: but is that what happened? this is a genuine question. that's not the impression i'm getting.
Pretty much. Kosovo was historically part of Russian-backed Serbia but the ethnic Albanians wanted out. S.Ossetia was historically part of Western-backed Georgia but the ethnic Russians wanted out. The time-lines are a bit different, since this is round 2 for S.Ossetia, and you can debate the rights and wrongs of behavior on all sides. But the post-cold-war precedent of going in and kicking ass on behalf of a local minority to break a piece off a country without UN approval was established in Kosovo, and Russia was very pissed off and taking notes.
I expect the US to complain a lot, but do nothing, as did Russia in Kosovo. -
okay.
what i'm reading (the news, wikipedia, the site carny linked to) talks about georgians, russians, and ossetians. are ossetians ethnically russian? my impression is that there are ethnic ossetians in both georgia (s. ossetia) and russia (n. ossetia). and that, whatever their allegiances, they are not ethnically russian. correct? -
sweet tea wrote: okay.
Good point. I'm not sure.
what i'm reading (the news, wikipedia, the site carny linked to) talks about georgians, russians, and ossetians. are ossetians ethnically russian? my impression is that there are ethnic ossetians in both georgia (s. ossetia) and russia (n. ossetia). and that, whatever their allegiances, they are not ethnically russian. correct? -
Subject: Re: WAR!!
Drano wrote: [quote=Boygabriel]yeah blind cold war anger! go america! screw the rooskies!
Oh, ya know - when a state that's pretty much a massive criminal enterprise attacks a much smaller democracy, some slight peevishness might be in order. Anyway, here's hoping diplomacy works better here than it did in that Darfur situation.
both sides carry pretty strong responsibility for the conflict and the dead civilians. the problem with a lot of calls to "protect a democracy against evil Russia" is that this 'democracy' is far from blame free.
The world should be preventing conflicts whenever possible, but these calls for us to protect a lovely little democracy from evil Russia isn't using accurate starting points. It's a lot of left over cold war hubris, IMO. -
Russia just announced that they are ending their "Georgia operation".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7555858.stm -
Here's some more background on the conflict, and why South Ossetia frequently aligns with Russia (and why Georgia is so deadset on keeping S. Ossetia).
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4498709.ece -
Subject: Re: WAR!!
Boygabriel wrote: both sides carry pretty strong responsibility for the conflict and the dead civilians. the problem with a lot of calls to "protect a democracy against evil Russia" is that this 'democracy' is far from blame free.
Disagree. Indications are that Russia's been manufacturing this for years, and - your sarcasm aside - Georgia has in fact been on the right path recently. I do agree that cold war hubris has a lot to do with this, but on the Russian end; they wouldn't mind regaining (or at least dominating) the empire they lost in their period of weakness after the cold war. The very real concern now is that Russia is feeling strong again; combined with their traditional sense of aggrievement and paranoia, they will create a lot of problems if they aren't checked. That's why the reaction to this situation matters. And Hell, even if Georgia were as bad as you think they are, they're no threat to anybody. -
Boygabriel wrote: Here's some more background on the conflict, and why South Ossetia frequently aligns with Russia (and why Georgia is so deadset on keeping S. Ossetia).
My takeaway (confirming the obvious) from that article is that Russia is "deadset" on maintaining a presence in S. Ossetia. I won't quote the whole thing (but it's good and I encourage people to read it), but check it out:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4498709.ece
"Russia’s policy is driven by a mixture of emotion and calculation. The Russian security establishment likes the Ossetes, who have been Russian allies for more than 250 years. They loathe the Georgians for their antiRussian nationalism and alliance with the US. For a long time they hoped to use South Ossetia initially to keep Georgia within the Soviet Union and later in a Russian sphere of influence.
That Russian ambition has been abandoned largely in the face of the Georgians’ determination to escape from this influence.
What remains is an absolute determination not to be defeated by Georgia and not to suffer the humiliation of having to abandon Russia’s South Ossete client state, with everything that this would mean for Russian prestige in other areas." -
Let the Russians have Georgia. Remember when John Rocker made all those comments about riding the subway to Shea Stadium with punks and homos. Never cared for Georgians after that. Good Riddance.
-
supreme_ian wrote: ahahahah NO OIL in russia.. of course bush punk ass dont care.. ahahahah
Not true.. there is lots of oil in Russia. In fact Russia is the world's second largest producer of oil. -
Very interesting article from Slate, talking about how Bush & Cheney recklessly encouraged Georgia to stand up to Russia, without any intent of actually coming to Georgia's aid.
Regardless of what happens next, it is worth asking what the Bush people were thinking when they egged on Mikheil Saakashvili, Georgia's young, Western-educated president, to apply for NATO membership, send 2,000 of his troops to Iraq as a full-fledged U.S. ally, and receive tactical training and weapons from our military. Did they really think Putin would sit by and see another border state (and former province of the Russian empire) slip away to the West? If they thought that Putin might not, what did they plan to do about it, and how firmly did they warn Saakashvili not to get too brash or provoke an outburst?
Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 40K All Categories
- 27.1K Neighborhoods
- 5.1K Crown Heights/Prospect Lefferts Gardens
- 7.1K Prospect Heights
- 2.3K Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy
- 8K Park Slope
- 549 Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Bushwick
- 442 Flatbush/Midwood/Ditmas Park
- 657 BoCoCa (Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens)
- 151 Red Hook
- 104 Gowanus
- 304 Bay Ridge/Bensonhurst
- 130 Coney Island, Brighton Beach, Sheepshead Bay
- 270 Brooklyn Heights, DUMBO and Downtown
- 598 Windsor Terrace / Kensington
- 673 Greenwood Heights and Sunset Park
- 749 Brooklyn and Beyond
- 6.3K Stuff
- 86 Brooklyn Back When
- 1.2K Brooklyn Pets
- 257 Brooklyn Kids
- 241 Brooklyn Eats
- 51 Brooklyn Booze
- 3.6K The Lounge / Random Stuff
- 611 Brooklyn Politics
- 122 Brooklyn Sports and Fitness
- 111 Brooklyn Photos
- 339 Site Issues
- 8 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
- 6.2K Listings
- 1.1K APARTMENTS and REAL ESTATE
- 1.3K Sales Openings Events
- 2.3K The Classifieds