Russia vs. Georgia

welsh said:
But now we have Russian troops moving across Georgia with irregular forces burning and looting. Georgia got a lot of Western sympathy for being a democratic state, but had it ended at the breakaways, than I think the argument that Russia was defending territory against invading forces for humanitarian reasons- might have been believable.

Wait a second. You don't know if it's Russian troops 'burning and looting', or if it isn't organized bands of robbers, rapists and murderers that always spring up during armed conflicts.

Now? I doubt it. Would this have happened had Georgia been in NATO? Remember NATO was created to stop Russian tanks from invading Europe. I think Russia just managed to remind Europe of that.

Hah. Fat fucking chance. Nobody's going to jeopardize the whole of Europe for the internal quarrels of Georgia.

NATO was created in an anti-soviet spirit, a few decades ago. That doesn't mean NATO doesn't have more important and immediate, real threats to deal with in the Real World right now.

And dude, get real. Russia isn't going to invade Europe anytime soon, if ever. It's just not profitable in any way.
 
And dude, get real. Russia isn't going to invade Europe anytime soon, if ever. It's just not profitable in any way.
What if some of the countries in Europe give green light to US missile shield project and russia gets ignored similarly as it was during Kossovo incident? Would that warrant a demonstration of force. Hell lets go even that far and say they do it to spite russia, I mean what could it do eh?
 
GreyViper said:
And dude, get real. Russia isn't going to invade Europe anytime soon, if ever. It's just not profitable in any way.
What if some of the countries in Europe give green light to US missile shield project and russia gets ignored similarly as it was during Kossovo incident? Would that warrant a demonstration of force. Hell lets go even that far and say they do it to spite russia, I mean what could it do eh?

What about the russian squirrels? You forgot what if the russian squirrels get offended by the polish gerbils. WHAT COULD IT DO THEN? WHAT IF WHAT IF WHAT IF!!!!

You are pulling reasons out of your arse, and none of those will lead to russian attacks on nato countries.
 
Wooz said:
Wait a second. You don't know if it's Russian troops 'burning and looting', or if it isn't organized bands of robbers, rapists and murderers that always spring up during armed conflicts.

There seems to be quite a bit of looting done both by Georgian troops and Russian irregular forces, both probably without the approval of their governments. Nevermind how the Ossetians and Abkhazians are behaving, they're dawgs.

Note that the Russian-Georgian treaty didn't stipulate Russia needed to leave Georgia immediately. Russia had the right to stay in Georgia for security reasons for an indefinite time.

They're withdrawing now.
 
German tabloid Berliner Kurier:

putin_ossetien.jpg


Rough translation:

Putin: the Bloody Bombing Vengeance. In small caps: 2000 people dead, 15 towns under fire, survivors hiding in underground cellars, the situation is a catastrophe.

The image used is a Reuters image of an improvised hospital in Tskhinvali. Ouch.


Rather funny Fox News video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8XI2Chc6uQ :roll:

GreyViper said:
What if some of the countries in Europe give green light to US missile shield project and russia gets ignored similarly as it was during Kossovo incident?

1) The person who thinks Russia is gonna attack Europe is a dangerous schizophrenic. It's about as likely as France invading Canada.

2) Despite the fact, that Europe isn't as cool as it used to be in early 90s, it still defines our view of a political, economical and cultural success. This concept is the only thing we have that remotely resembles ideology. It is the only concept that everyone buys. Both Kremlin and opposition are actively using it to gain support. We understad Europe way better that you understand us, see 1), and it's not our fault that European perception of Russia is stuck somewhere in the bottom of Middle Ages. You guys are jerks.
 
liberty rogue said:
2) Despite the fact, that Europe isn't as cool as it used to be in early 90s, it still defines our view of a political, economical and cultural success. This concept is the only thing we have that remotely resembles ideology. It is the only concept that everyone buys. Both Kremlin and opposition are actively using it to gain support. We understad Europe way better that you understand us, see 1), and it's not our fault that European perception of Russia are stuck somewhere in the bottom of Middle Ages. You guys are jerks.

I'm not sure that's accurate. Not in that Russia is more interested in the EU than vice versa, obviously that's true because that's always true of more powerful/richer nations vs less powerful/smaller nations.

That said, Russia has indeed used Europe to leverage a self-view since Peter the Great, a logical move since you never constituted much of a nation state. But I would put some question marks to whether or not this ever actually amounted to understanding.

If I look at the skewed way Russia views the Ukraine in history and present I'm thinking quite a lot of things get skewed that way. True, Ukraine is more a part of the pan-slavist discourse, but the whole window to the west thing has always been subject to several pressures, not the least from the Slavophile philosophers.

The fact that your politicians can so easily abuse the views of Europe for populist means usually tells of an inaccurate world-picture. A real world-picture tends to be too complex to be used for political means; no politician could actually sell the hard truth of things as complex as - say - Islamist terrorism or global warming, especially since both subjects have so many question marks surrounding them. But you can't sell that. Truth doesn't sell.
 
Brother None said:
That said, Russia has indeed used Europe to leverage a self-view since Peter the Great, a logical move since you never constituted much of a nation state. But I would put some question marks to whether or not this ever actually amounted to understanding.

If I look at the skewed way Russia views the Ukraine in history and present I'm thinking quite a lot of things get skewed that way. True, Ukraine is more a part of the pan-slavist discourse, but the whole window to the west thing has always been subject to several pressures, not the least from the Slavophile philosophers.

Russian views of Ukraine? Nation state?

Understanding? The modern Europe has yet to produce something that would be a challenge to understand. The European politics and cultural advancements were picked apart and apart and apart for such a long time, that, well, Europe isn't by any means a New World, it's a Good Old One. (Jerks).

Or are you talking about some sort of European mindset? The good question here, is if there is something special or even admirable about it, since the best things about Europe are valued because of their simplicity. Democracy, Liberal government, Free speech, Free market. I guess, the point I'm trying to make is that any normal Russian thinks in association with these concepts and did so for a while now.

Any serious move against it will probably mean a political death for a cretin that approved it. Of course, since it's Russia we a talking about here, we have all sorts of political entities making all sorts of insane statements. Those people are enjoing their 5% approval ratings.

Brother None said:
The fact that your politicians can so easily abuse the views of Europe for populist means usually tells of an inaccurate world-picture. A real world-picture tends to be too complex to be used for political means; no politician could actually sell the hard truth of things as complex as - say - Islamist terrorism or global warming, especially since both subjects have so many question marks surrounding them. But you can't sell that. Truth doesn't sell.

Role the European symbolism plays in Russian political and everyday culture is a critical, yet rather simple one. It's something that became fundamentally important to how we perceive ourselves and our future, beyond the daily political currents. It isn't something you sell to somebody. It's like fueling a car; it just won't go on anything other that gasoline*.

I don't know if Peter the Great is relevant here. Europe was probably associated with different things in his time.

* I actually don't know how the cars operate, because I hate the damn things (also Jeews).
 
And in other news from georgia, the president has changed his diet:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jb2clcZu9Tg&feature=related[/youtube]
 
It's all fun and games for Russia until after a few months/years Georgian wack jobs start suicide bombing Moscow. Maybe taking a little lesson from the Chechens. If you can't beat them in a stand up fight, then a little terrorism goes a long way. Especially since Russia has done a great job of destroying Georgias infrastructure. Leaving hundreds of thousands of young men without a way to provide for themselves or their families. But, maybe I'm completely wrong...


PS. I don't really favor one side over the other, but I think Russia's extreme heavy handedness will again come back to bite them. You can't blast a nation into pulp, then leave the nation in shambles, and not expect reprisals in the future from those that survived. Just human nature.
 
i dont exactly know what angela merkel is doing in georgia/with saakashvili. is that just the preemptive obedience towards our big brother or is there something else going on?
 
liberty rogue said:
Russian views of Ukraine? Nation state?

Russian construction of the nation state has always contained a pan-Greater Slavic discourse in which Ukraine-Russia-Belorussia are seen as one "nation" in the modern sense. The whole Kiev Rus thing.

liberty rogue said:
Understanding? The modern Europe has yet to produce something that would be a challenge to understand. The European politics and cultural advancements were picked apart and apart and apart for such a long time, that, well, Europe isn't by any means a New World, it's a Good Old One.

See? Simplification belies understanding. This is about as much understanding of Europe as the average US citizen has, which is close to nil.

liberty rogue said:
Democracy, Liberal government, Free speech, Free market.

What? Those aren't what I'd call central European values, at all. Not even the French Revolution heritage contains those values, let alone modern Europe.
 
Shoveler said:
It's all fun and games for Russia until after a few months/years Georgian wack jobs start suicide bombing Moscow. Maybe taking a little lesson from the Chechens. If you can't beat them in a stand up fight, then a little terrorism goes a long way. Especially since Russia has done a great job of destroying Georgias infrastructure. Leaving hundreds of thousands of young men without a way to provide for themselves or their families. But, maybe I'm completely wrong...


PS. I don't really favor one side over the other, but I think Russia's extreme heavy handedness will again come back to bite them. You can't blast a nation into pulp, then leave the nation in shambles, and not expect reprisals in the future from those that survived. Just human nature.

Wait, let me check it... yes, that's basically all wrong.

Simplification belies understanding.

This is something to think about, pan-Greater Slavic discourse. From here it looks like Europe have been busy converting whatever political stock they have left in Russia to things, designed to alienate it. The Russians yearn for respect in the same way as a street kid with a knife. Right. From the shitstorm raging in press now, one can only assume that inner workings of Europe are about as mysterious as inner workings of mongol horde.

Wooz said:
Um, what?

Uh, sorry if I've been unclear on something. I've learned all English I know by playing Fallout and Transport Tycoon.

DJ Slamák said:
Meanwhile, the Ukraine is next in line for a "colour counter-revolution"... maybe?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...sia-distributing-passports-in-the-Crimea.html

(Note that, unlike South Ossetia, there actually IS a Russian minority in the Ukraine.)

Welcome to 2004. Please share your secret, how you separate Russian Crimeans from Ukrainian Crimeans, because I've been there like 5 times and still have no clue.

EDIT:

It appears, the wagh wasn't as disasterous as Caucasian waghs usually are. Tskhinvali suffered a lot, but only every tenth building is completely destroyed. The city still lacks electricity or water. Initial casulty reports were exaggerated. Most villages on Georgian-Ossetian border were deserted and looted by both Georgians and Ossetians.

Gori is a ghost town. After the army, police and general population left, marauders looted everything. We continued our disarming campaign by taking some 55 tanks nearby NATO-standard military base.

Georgians are all about informational warfare now.

0018pesh


Apparently, we have stripped them from invaluable automobile resource.
 
liberty rogue said:
Uh, sorry if I've been unclear on something. I've learned all English I know by playing Fallout and Transport Tycoon.

I read you hate cars and Jews. I hope, for your sake, that you were joking.
 
liberty rogue said:
This is something to think about, pan-Greater Slavic discourse.

Uh, what? It's a term often used to describe one of the views on Russian nation-building seen clearly in the 18th, 19th and 20th century. Both Russian and non-Russian writes have analysed these views and the way it sees Ukraine-Russia-Belorus as one nation. A view that is seen by most anthropologists as pertinently false.

Nor does Russia have any business going back on its accords with Ukraine now when it comes to how the borders have been drawn. It's too late for that.

liberty rogue said:
From here it looks like Europe have been busy converting whatever political stock they have left in Russia to things, designed to alienate it.

What?

I honestly don't understand this sentence.

liberty rogue said:
From the shitstorm raging in press now, one can only assume that inner workings of Europe are about as mysterious as inner workings of mongol horde.

What shitstorm would that be? I don't exactly read all the papers out there, but several media have been highlighting both sides of the story, underlining that Georgia struck first and that this is the consequence of an age-old struggle. I picked this up in, say, the Dutch Volkskrant or American IHT.

And how would the response by the press reflect the inner workings of Europe? Isn't that a simplified analysis?

Seriously, you're not making a good case for Russia's understanding of "Europe" here.
 
liberty rogue said:
Shoveler said:
It's all fun and games for Russia until after a few months/years Georgian wack jobs start suicide bombing Moscow. Maybe taking a little lesson from the Chechens. If you can't beat them in a stand up fight, then a little terrorism goes a long way. Especially since Russia has done a great job of destroying Georgias infrastructure. Leaving hundreds of thousands of young men without a way to provide for themselves or their families. But, maybe I'm completely wrong...


PS. I don't really favor one side over the other, but I think Russia's extreme heavy handedness will again come back to bite them. You can't blast a nation into pulp, then leave the nation in shambles, and not expect reprisals in the future from those that survived. Just human nature.

Wait, let me check it... yes, that's basically all wrong.

Sure Liberty, no bias in your opinion at all, what're you like 3 blocks off Red Square? Your comrades said the same thing after deciding to level Chechnya....school hostages, apartment building bombings, multiple plane bombings....no consequence there at all. The proof is in the pictures, infrastructure destroyed out of spite.
 
Shoveler said:
Sure Liberty, no bias in your opinion at all, what're you like 3 blocks off Red Square? Your comrades said the same thing after deciding to level Chechnya....school hostages, apartment building bombings, multiple plane bombings....no consequence there at all. The proof is in the pictures, infrastructure destroyed out of spite.

Actually some independent proof indicates that after initial bombings (which did target infrastructure, as that's a normal tactic), Russia actually guarded the roads and cities against looters.

The kind of attack that happened on Grozny sure as heck didn't happen here. If anything, this fighting was reminiscent of the 1992 fighting, and would most likely have the same results. It's really not comparable to Chechnya.
 
A bridge out of the capitol was bombed 3 hours before Russia signed the cease fire. A full week after the counter offensive by the Russians started. It was blown for spite. Mentioning the ceasefire, the Russians are not pulling out of Georgia, I wonder why.
 
Back
Top