PDA

View Full Version : Russia-Georgia Dispute



MidnightsPaleGlow
Aug 27th 2008, 09:44 PM
I've been watching the drama between Russia and Georgia lately and have been observing it very closely, any one else here agree with me that this event could be a sign of the old Soviet Empire rising again before our eyes?

Rufus_1611
Aug 27th 2008, 10:07 PM
I've been watching the drama between Russia and Georgia lately and have been observing it very closely, any one else here agree with me that this event could be a sign of the old Soviet Empire rising again before our eyes? True, that could be the case. It could also be a sign of more U.S. imperialistic expansion...I guess it always depends on what color the glasses are one is looking through.

MidnightsPaleGlow
Aug 28th 2008, 10:54 AM
True, that could be the case. It could also be a sign of more U.S. imperialistic expansion...I guess it always depends on what color the glasses are one is looking through.

True, it could have two meanings, I didn't even think about. I don't really agree with the U.S. imperialism thing since the way I see it, based on how poorly this country is being run and how things seem very bleak in America right now (bunch of idiots running/ruining this country, I have ZERO faith in Washington right now, persistently bad economy, wide open borders/home insecurity, and a whole laundry list more but I'm not going there), but you do make a good point. I personally believe that within the next 50 years America is going to fall apart completely and view this Georgia crisis as evidence of Russia preparing to fill the void that we'll be leaving, much like we did in 91 after the Soviet Union collapsed. I have a very pessimistic outlook when it comes to the future of America unfortunately.

Rufus_1611
Aug 28th 2008, 01:55 PM
True, it could have two meanings, I didn't even think about. I don't really agree with the U.S. imperialism thing since the way I see it, based on how poorly this country is being run and how things seem very bleak in America right now (bunch of idiots running/ruining this country, I have ZERO faith in Washington right now, persistently bad economy, wide open borders/home insecurity, and a whole laundry list more but I'm not going there), but you do make a good point. I personally believe that within the next 50 years America is going to fall apart completely and view this Georgia crisis as evidence of Russia preparing to fill the void that we'll be leaving, much like we did in 91 after the Soviet Union collapsed. I have a very pessimistic outlook when it comes to the future of America unfortunately. Good points all. I share the same pessimistic perspective. We're badly in need of revival and if revival doesn't come, I fear judgment will.

redeemedbyhim
Aug 28th 2008, 02:23 PM
U.S. imperialistic expansion :rolleyes:

Teke
Aug 28th 2008, 02:33 PM
I've been watching the drama between Russia and Georgia lately and have been observing it very closely, any one else here agree with me that this event could be a sign of the old Soviet Empire rising again before our eyes?

No I don't believe it is the old rising. Russia has made great strides since the collapse of the USSR.

Some of our politicians make this look like Russia's fault and seem to want to compare it to past USSR activity. Nothing is further from the truth.

During the night of Aug 8 Georgia launched a military attack killing hundreds of peacekeepers and civilians, and resulting in some 30,000 refugees. Of course Russia had to respond. Who else is going to help these people.

There has been a "fragile" peace in South Ossetia, which the Georgia political leader, president Mikheil Saakashvili, has now upset. And he did so against the wishes of his own people. Both Russian and Georgia Orthodox Christians are calling for an end to this blood shed and violence of Christians.

Since 1992 Russia and Georgia were to be in a joint peace keeping operation of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

Fenris
Aug 28th 2008, 02:44 PM
Russia is backsliding into what it was before 1991.



TBILISI, GEORGIA – Virtually everyone believes Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili foolishly provoked a Russian invasion on August 7, 2008, when he sent troops into the breakaway district of South Ossetia. “The warfare began Aug. 7 when Georgia launched a barrage targeting South Ossetia,” the Associated Press reported (http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/08/23/europe/EU-Georgia-Russia-Looting.php) over the weekend in typical fashion.


Virtually everyone is wrong. Georgia didn't start it on August 7, nor on any other date. The South Ossetian militia started it on August 6 when its fighters fired on Georgian peacekeepers and Georgian villages with weapons banned by the agreement hammered out between the two sides in 1994. At the same time, the Russian military sent its invasion force bearing down on Georgia from the north side of the Caucasus Mountains on the Russian side of the border through the Roki tunnel and into Georgia. This happened before Saakashvili sent additional troops to South Ossetia and allegedly started the war.



Read the whole article here (ahttp://www.michaeltotten.com/archives/2008/08/the-truth-about-1.php)

Rufus_1611
Aug 28th 2008, 03:25 PM
U.S. imperialistic expansion :rolleyes: Troops in 144 out of 192 countries. Over 1,000 "military advisers" in Georgia, many of whom are Blackwater mercenaries :rolleyes:

Fenris
Aug 28th 2008, 03:34 PM
Troops in 144 out of 192 countries.
An embassy with three marines guarding it hardly counts, and that's the only way we have troops in 144 countries.

Rufus_1611
Aug 28th 2008, 03:57 PM
An embassy with three marines guarding it hardly counts, and that's the only way we have troops in 144 countries.

Please see the following rebuttal to your argument:

Guarding the Empire (http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance20.html) by Laurence Vance

tango
Aug 28th 2008, 04:01 PM
I've been watching the drama between Russia and Georgia lately and have been observing it very closely, any one else here agree with me that this event could be a sign of the old Soviet Empire rising again before our eyes?

It could be. Looking at it through very cynical eyes it could be a distraction to keep the eyes of the world away from another area.

Fenris
Aug 28th 2008, 04:04 PM
Please see the following rebuttal to your argument:

Guarding the Empire (http://www.lewrockwell.com/vance/vance20.html) by Laurence VanceYour article really doesn't rebut my point.

redeemedbyhim
Aug 28th 2008, 04:27 PM
im·pe·ri·al·ism http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.png /ɪmˈpɪərhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngihttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngəˌlɪzhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciationpeer[/B]-ee-[I]uh-liz-uhhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1.the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies.



U.S. imperialistic expansion :rolleyes:

Clavicula_Nox
Aug 28th 2008, 04:31 PM
Troops in 144 out of 192 countries. Over 1,000 "military advisers" in Georgia, many of whom are Blackwater mercenaries :rolleyes:

Please.

Blackwater is not the only security firm in the country or the world.

*edit*

I'm not going to waste my time or energy breaking down our force composition in Georgia.

Fenris
Aug 28th 2008, 04:35 PM
U.S. imperialistic expansion :rolleyes:
We're imperialist because we export our culture. You know, big macs and Hollywood.

If you want an example of real imperialism, look at Germany in the 30s and 40s or the Soviet Union from the 20s until 1991.

Rufus_1611
Aug 28th 2008, 04:47 PM
im·pe·ri·al·ism http://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.png /ɪmˈpɪərhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngihttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngəˌlɪzhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciationpeer[/B]-ee-[I]uh-liz-uhhttp://cache.lexico.com/dictionary/graphics/luna/thinsp.pngm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1.the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies.

U.S. imperialistic expansion :rolleyes: That definition sounds about right. Did the U.S. not extend their de facto authority over Iraq? Afghanistan? Panama? Are they not extending their authority now over Iran? What is the U.S. military doing in these regions and what does being in all of these places have to do with a Constitutional Republic?

Rufus_1611
Aug 28th 2008, 04:49 PM
Please.

Blackwater is not the only security firm in the country or the world. Please quote the post where someone said that Blackwater is the only security firm in the country or the world.


*edit*

I'm not going to waste my time or energy breaking down our force composition in Georgia. Of course. No doubt your time is too valuable to break that down. You probably have more pressing matters, like posting on a message board somewhere.

Rufus_1611
Aug 28th 2008, 04:51 PM
We're imperialist because we export our culture. You know, big macs and Hollywood.

If you want an example of real imperialism, look at Germany in the 30s and 40s or the Soviet Union from the 20s until 1991. Germany, the country the United States has 70,000+ troops stationed in?

Fenris
Aug 28th 2008, 04:53 PM
Germany, the country the United States has 70,000+ troops stationed in?
Are you being deliberately obtuse?

Fenris
Aug 28th 2008, 04:54 PM
That definition sounds about right. Did the U.S. not extend their de facto authority over Iraq? Afghanistan? Panama?
And here I thought they held elections. Silly me.:rofl:

Rufus_1611
Aug 28th 2008, 05:02 PM
Are you being deliberately obtuse? No. Just pointing out that this would be another country that the U.S. Military has a significant presence in. Considering WWII ended 60 some years ago...seems like we could bring them home now.

Teke
Aug 28th 2008, 05:07 PM
Pro western leaders in the east will always make waves when they rise.

President Mikheil Sakashvili of Georgia likes US and Israeli support.
Then there is also the underlying matter which makes any of this world news worthy, which is the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline which carries oil from the Caspian to Europe. And the US is pretty dependent on this oil.

IPet2_9
Aug 28th 2008, 05:14 PM
And here I thought they held elections. Silly me.:rofl:

Russia has elections, too. And the term "Russian election" is a pretty famous one.

Fenris
Aug 28th 2008, 07:02 PM
No. Just pointing out that this would be another country that the U.S. Military has a significant presence in. Considering WWII ended 60 some years ago...seems like we could bring them home now.
So now we are 'occupying Germany'?

Fenris
Aug 28th 2008, 07:02 PM
Russia has elections, too. And the term "Russian election" is a pretty famous one.
So the elections in Iraq were fixed by us? Gee, you'd think we could have installed some leaders who like us more...:hmm:

IPet2_9
Aug 28th 2008, 07:42 PM
So the elections in Iraq were fixed by us? Gee, you'd think we could have installed some leaders who like us more...:hmm:

Iraq is ruled by the U.S.. Who are we kidding?

Clavicula_Nox
Aug 28th 2008, 08:20 PM
Iraq is ruled by the U.S.. Who are we kidding?

Iraq is ruled by Shi'a politicans, many of whom answer to Tehran.


Of course. No doubt your time is too valuable to break that down. You probably have more pressing matters, like posting on a message board somewhere.

No, my time is too valuable to try to explain military matters to a civilian who thinks they know more because they can read internet blogs.

Rufus_1611
Aug 28th 2008, 09:22 PM
So now we are 'occupying Germany'? 70,000+ U.S. Troops are.

Rufus_1611
Aug 28th 2008, 09:28 PM
Iraq is ruled by Shi'a politicans, many of whom answer to Tehran. So...we shed blood and money to overthrow an enemy, so the new country could ally with an enemy? Do you consider this to have been a wise play?


No, my time is too valuable to try to explain military matters to a civilian who thinks they know more because they can read internet blogs. Wow, you know a lot about me. Which internet blogs do I read?

Clavicula_Nox
Aug 29th 2008, 12:57 AM
So...we shed blood and money to overthrow an enemy, so the new country could ally with an enemy? Do you consider this to have been a wise play?

No I don't. You can search for posts I've made on this board relative to the subject.


Wow, you know a lot about me. Which internet blogs do I read?

I dunno, you tell me. It's obviously an over-generalization, you seem a little high-strung.

Rufus_1611
Aug 29th 2008, 01:06 AM
No I don't. You can search for posts I've made on this board relative to the subject. Great, then what are we arguing about?



I dunno, you tell me. It's obviously an over-generalization, you seem a little high-strung. I probably am. You seem a little proud.

Clavicula_Nox
Aug 29th 2008, 01:29 AM
Great, then what are we arguing about?


I probably am. You seem a little proud.

I don't think we're arguing about anything. Anyways, I'm not sure what you want the US govt to do about Iraq's elected officials. It would seem a bit strange if we made a big show of giving the Iraqi's democratic elections...and then giving some kind of approval veto just because we don't like who they elect.


I am very proud, the giving of my own blood for that country has made me so.

Rufus_1611
Aug 29th 2008, 02:03 AM
I don't think we're arguing about anything. Anyways, I'm not sure what you want the US govt to do about Iraq's elected officials. It would seem a bit strange if we made a big show of giving the Iraqi's democratic elections...and then giving some kind of approval veto just because we don't like who they elect. I want them to stay out of other countries affairs and stop being the globocop for the United Nations. I want them to return to constitutional gov't...that's all.



I am very proud, the giving of my own blood for that country has made me so.

MidnightsPaleGlow
Aug 29th 2008, 05:08 AM
I want them to stay out of other countries affairs and stop being the globocop for the United Nations. I want them to return to constitutional gov't...that's all.

Agreed, I think it's high time we withdraw from the United Nations, and kick them off our soil. We should also pull out of NAFTA, WTO, World Bank, IMF and every other globalist organization that we are currently involved in. We're whoring out our resources as a result of being involved in all that garbage.

CHUCK BALDWIN 2008:

http://baldwin08.com/

Fenris
Aug 29th 2008, 11:25 AM
70,000+ U.S. Troops are.
So we use our troops to force Germany to follow US policy? :hmm:

We're not doing a very good job of it.:lol:

Rufus_1611
Aug 29th 2008, 01:23 PM
So we use our troops to force Germany to follow US policy? :hmm: What country are those 70,000 occupying if they are not occupying Germany? Japan? Oh wait there's another 30,000 troops not occupying Japan too.

None of this has anything to do with defending the citizens of the states of the United States of America but it has everything to do with extending the influence and policies of the United States government into the countries of the world.

More Americans die every year at the hands of an invasionary force from her southern neighbor then died on 9-11. We have two behemoth organizations responsible for the "defense" of the United States, that being the DOD and DHS and yet, neither of those entities defends the life, liberty and property of the citizens of the respective United States. Even with that being the case, this country continues to expand and continues to build military bases in all parts of the world. What are they doing if they are not building an empire?

"Peace, commerce and honest friendship with all nations; entangling alliances with none." - Thomas Jefferson

"We Americans have no commission from God to police the world." - Benjamin Harrison

"If we don’t stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, we’re going to have a serious problem coming down the road." - George W Bush



We're not doing a very good job of it.:lol: All the world's a stage.

Fenris
Aug 29th 2008, 02:41 PM
What country are those 70,000 occupying if they are not occupying Germany? Japan? Oh wait there's another 30,000 troops not occupying Japan too. Maybe it had something to do with the cold war. I'm not sure...



"If we don’t stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, we’re going to have a serious problem coming down the road." - George W Bush



Our enemies export their ideology. If we don't do the same, we will be in trouble.

Clavicula_Nox
Aug 29th 2008, 06:00 PM
I want them to stay out of other countries affairs and stop being the globocop for the United Nations. I want them to return to constitutional gov't...that's all.

What you want isn't the reality.

Rufus_1611
Aug 29th 2008, 06:05 PM
What you want isn't the reality. That is true...I desire that it become reality.

Clavicula_Nox
Aug 29th 2008, 06:30 PM
That is true...I desire that it become reality.

That's fine, but until you get that reality, you have to work with what you have.

Rufus_1611
Aug 29th 2008, 08:48 PM
That's fine, but until you get that reality, you have to work with what you have. What are you proposing specifically?

Clavicula_Nox
Aug 29th 2008, 09:04 PM
Radical draw down of government isn't possible at this time. The Executive branch is too well-entrenched, with no real incentive to back down anyways. The Legislative branch, which was formerly the primary branch, has found much of it's power diminished in the past 60 years (FDR), but because We, The People have fostered this idea that the President should be running things, we have allowed that Legislative branch to die over time.

What needs to happen is fairly simple, but will take time, and I don't believe it will ever happen if the government is allowed to continue on it's own. Congress needs term limits. Professional politicians stymie the entire process and completely stonewall ideology. Limit congressional terms, 2 for the House, 1 for the Senate, and this will allow reformers to seep in. From there, it can go either way, but it's one step back to what we were when the country was founded.


Now, about the spread out military. Guarding our embassies is simply a smart thing to do. Our ambassadors are attacked throughout the world on a semi-regular basis, I can name three off the top of my head that have happened in the last 6 years.

Pull all troops out of Japan. Like you, I really can't figure out why they're there, bring them out. Germany is a bit more complicated, because the idea is to stop the evil Russians from invading, but Russia isn't going to invade anyways so that's a non-issue. The problem is, that having our troops stationed in Europe gives us a lot of coverage for this that pop up.

If we draw our government back to it's isolationist beginnings, then pull them out too. You may be interested in noting that over the next few years, 17 Army installations in Germany are being closed, and many of those soldiers are returning CONUS - CONtinental United States.

Now,we have several missions on-going throughout the world, most of them are at the request of the host nation. I say leave them there, all of them are there for a really really good reason. If Maliki, and the Iraqi people, want us out of Iraq, then I say fine. Let them have it. Kharzai is cooperating with us....the only problem is that the man has almost no influence through Afghanistan. The locals refer to him as "The Mayor of Kabul," meaning nobody in-country really cares about him, anyways. He's a non-entity.

I say draw out of Afghanistan to coincide with the other pull-backs, if that is what's going to happen. The fight in A-stan is important, but it's stagnating and turning into a jihadist meat grinder. There are alot of cultures that are traditional enemies who are suddenly coming together to fight us. The problem with leaving is that I don't believe they would suddenly quit fighting. The first Afghan Mujahideen didn't just quit when the Soviets were kicked out, they returned to their own nations and started their own wars in Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, Yemen, a few others.

I guess what I'm getting at is that, even if we pull back and do all the little things the "bad guys" want us to do, they will still come after us, and when they do, what then? How do we deal with it?


*edit*

A slight correction, 15 bases in Germany, not 17.