Georgia moves against separatists

[MigBuster 2,875]

MigBuster, What I meant was that The Russians see The US weak.

Thay see the US preoccupied on two fronts, Iraq and Afganistan and they probably say to them selfs.

The US are not stupid. they will not open another front now. not against Russia.

 

I Know my friend - but im not sure anyone can see the US as being weak politically or militarily - particularly when any front opened against Russia might not involve conventional forces only.

[MigBuster 2,875]

Emotional Georgian press:

 

IRAKLI ALADASHVILI IN GEORGIA'S KVIRIS PALITRA

 

Georgia is presently alone in the fight against a huge country like Russia. In truth, we should not pin too much hope on lazy old Europe. Countries that have experienced the grip of Russia's tentacles... are likely to give us stronger moral and, more importantly, material support than Germany, France or Italy... Immediate deployment of US armed units in Georgia is the best option today.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7554065.stm

 

Im kinda thinking that "Immediate deployment of US armed units in Georgia is NOT the best option today"

[kesegy 5]

i have to agree in the assesment you quoted, MigBuster, regarding involement of countries which have experienced the russian way of doing business.

 

i think if push really comes to shove, that ukraine and turkey and maybe the baltic states (especially estonia - who allegedly sent a number of its hacker elite to georgia to fight the cyberwar against russia) may come to the aid of battered georgia.

 

i believe then that even the remote posibility of engagement of a nato member state (like turkey) will be enough of a deterrent to putin. but with that man one can never tell really.

[+whiteknight06604 932]

Emotional Georgian press:

 

IRAKLI ALADASHVILI IN GEORGIA'S KVIRIS PALITRA

 

Georgia is presently alone in the fight against a huge country like Russia. In truth, we should not pin too much hope on lazy old Europe. Countries that have experienced the grip of Russia's tentacles... are likely to give us stronger moral and, more importantly, material support than Germany, France or Italy... Immediate deployment of US armed units in Georgia is the best option today.

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7554065.stm

 

Im kinda thinking that "Immediate deployment of US armed units in Georgia is NOT the best option today"

 

I think the US already has some military advisors in Georgia.Russia may have been able to claim some moral highground but that has long sence passed.they have drove far into Georgia and are bombing and shelling large areas of Georgia.Georgai want a cease fire Russia is continuing to push deeper into areas of Georgia that are not in dispute.While there was a claim to be made that Russia had a right to defend what they believe are their people they are now just using it as an excuse to claim the areas that they didn't want georgiahave when the country was established.It just so happenes that that is where the main oil pipeline is hmmm must be a coincedence.Also it speaks volumes that Russia had ammo and supplies stockpiled in the area and ready to go.And I'm Sure Putin visiting the Generals in charge of the millitary action and not Medvewhateverov is just Putin helping him rather than him being the one in control.Georgai while they did make the initial moves is being pounded way out of proprtion to what is needed to restore peace.

[kesegy 5]

Fox reports the Russians have entered the Black Sea port of Poti. So economic blockade of Georgia is on the humanitarian agenda this evening.

[+whiteknight06604 932]

We have had pretty positive reports of normal Russian life the past few years - has problems but there are a lot more happy normal Russians these days - and they seem to love this Putin bloke - are there any Russians on here that can comment on this??.

 

Thats quite a statement to make - US is no more weak than its ever been surely - if being weak is not threatening military action against Russia but keeping them in check then so be it. Despite whos in power Russia is quite an important partner in regards to negotiating with both North Korea and Iran it would appear.

 

There were lots of positive reports about the workers utopia under the communist but the reallity was much different.If it wasn't for US wheat in the 70's there would have been wholesale famine in Russia.The reason Russians are happier now isn't that things are good it's they are better...big difference.Also The Germans thought very highly of Hittler and look how that turned out.Just because somone rouses a little national pride with his sabre rattleing dosn't mean he's a good guy.I'm pretty sure the US isn't weak,the only reason caution has to be takken is russias Nuclear weapons,without those any US troop sent into the region would disasemble any russian resitance.casulties would be higher than in Iraq but the outcome would be the same.

[eraser_tr 29]

No the outcome wouldn't be the same, we're best at conventional warfare as opposed to guerilla warfare.

[Emp_Palpatine 501]

US army is actually good (and improving) at COIN operations now. Things have been learned the hard way, but in research material, be sure american ways of doing such operations are now inspiring influences.

The fact is COIN-based wars are just "more difficult" to win, as assymetrical (don't even now how to translate "assymétrie", don't even think about "Dissymétrie") warfare is by nature an hard job. Most armies are used to the classical way of fighting, but I don't doubt a second Russian forces would be quickly wiped out in open field.

Edited August 11, 2008 by Emp_Palpatine

[+Julhelm 266]

Just like Kosovo is part of Serbia, gentleman. Just give a look at internationally recognized borders.

[Emp_Palpatine 501]

Did I wrote I supported intervention in Kosovo?

[+whiteknight06604 932]

No the outcome wouldn't be the same, we're best at conventional warfare as opposed to guerilla warfare.

 

your right I was referiing to the initial invasion of Iraq.most russian line units are about as good as the "top of the line" Iraqi republican guard units.though slightly better equiped.Russia historical has has issues with iregular warfare...at least post WW2

 

Yeah it looks like this was planed well ahead of time Russian troops and the fleet were well prepared in advance,many Russian troops were in the area in the weeks leading up to the conflict repairing and expanding rail lines and roads to move troops and supplies.This is starting to really stink.All they needed was a reason to attack.that was Georgias mistake.It's only a matter of time before Russia moves on the Ukraine,Russia is already threatening them for not letting Russian ships dock in Ukrainian ports.Looks like Russia may be out of the G-8 soon too.Just need Europe to risk their oil suppies and showw some resolve.

Edited August 11, 2008 by whiteknight06604

[Emp_Palpatine 501]

Yeah it looks like this was planed well ahead of time Russian troops and the fleet were well prepared in advance,many Russian troops were in the area in the weeks leading up to the conflict repairing and expanding rail lines and roads to move troops and supplies.This is starting to really stink.All they needed was a reason to attack.

 

And don't forget the giving out of russian passports.

 

.Just need Europe to risk their oil suppies and showw some resolve.

Europe do import Gas. At least, in France, we still have our own civil nuclear network, so Gas does not count that much. Germany and others might soon understand the meaning of "energy independence".

But speaking of resolve, remember our executive just cut out military spending here in France, arguing "Military role is now a security one, protecting from terrorists and do police forces over seas" "States against states confrontation are things of the past".

Bulls**t... Resolve? I'm afraid Europe won't have any, even if there were Russian troops in Riga, Tallin and Vilnius or Warsaw (East-european -or close cousins, as Georgians- do understand what freedom is and would stand, but in Western europe... ).

Edited August 11, 2008 by Emp_Palpatine

[+whiteknight06604 932]

And don't forget the giving out of russian passports.

 

 

Europe do import Gas. At least, in France, we still have our own civil nuclear network, so Gas does not count that much. Germany and others might soon understand the meaning of "energy independence".

But speaking of resolve, remember our executive just cut out military spending here in France, arguing "Military role is now a security one, protecting from terrorists and do police forces over seas" "States against states confrontation are things of the past".

Bulls**t... Resolve? I'm afraid Europe won't have any, even if there were Russian troops in Riga, Tallin and Vilnius or Warsaw (East-european -or close cousins, as Georgians- do understand what freedom is and would stand, but in Western europe... ).

 

Europe may wring thier hands at threats that are out of Europe but I still have hope that when push comes to shove enough people remember what happens when you don't listen to the warnings of danger right on their doorstep.I'm not advocating sending in NATO troops but Russian should be made to leave the G-8,and the UN really needs to revoke Russian veto power in the security council(never gonna happen)Eastern Europe remembers how things were with Russia controling their lives.Poland and maybe a few others of the newer NATO members can be counted on to be more agressive in their support.most of the strongest allies in Iraq were from Eastern Europe.Not forgeting the contributions of all but it was nice to see newly freed countries helping others.

[Emp_Palpatine 501]

The fact is newly freed countries in Europe had two main goals for their diplomacy: joining NATO and joining the EU. In this priority:

 

- Nato is the only key to security, as behind Nato there are the United States might and will. They are not fools and do not -still today- count on western europe to help them against any threat (read Russia).

- The EU was there as a symbol of being back into Europe, no longer be a soviet puppet, and as a mean to gain more prosperity. But it was the second priority, the first one being survival and security. Nato.

 

All these countries always choose the Atlantic and NATO before the EU when confronted to conflicting options, and I do think they are very right. But you might be used to my ongoing "love" for the EU and my poor appreciation of my western european fellows (my own country men included).

 

And another point: there are more people that want the US being stripped from their veto in UN than Russia. Don't play with that... Just wish a thing: get ride of the UN! That stuff isn't good to resolve political crisis. It might do good jobs on other issues (humanitarian or whatever), but just a new League of Nations on the political scene. Useless and most dangerous, as its General Assembly do have a majority of dictatorships and other radical countries in.

Edited August 11, 2008 by Emp_Palpatine

[+whiteknight06604 932]

Oh I'm no fan of the UN at all they for the most part are corupt and have no sence of right and wrong(how many resolutions condemniong Israel but nothing on the Arabs and terror.Abu Gharib villianised as the unltimate evil but dictarorships and thugs on human rights councils and countries the are state users of real tourture and terror are looked at as victoms or heros) oh i understand that the UN isn't anything now it still holds sway over the third world and developing countries.it give a hint of legitamancy I guess.It's invouge to bash the US.It's really a combination of jelousy and guilt.Jelousy that we have the power to act on the world stage and guilt that they wouldn't act even if they had the power.Just look at the runup to the Iraq war everyone in Europe was quick to condemn Iraq and vote resolution after resolution to punish and threaten but when it came time to act very few stood up.

[MigBuster 2,875]

There were lots of positive reports about the workers utopia under the communist but the reallity was much different.If it wasn't for US wheat in the 70's there would have been wholesale famine in Russia.The reason Russians are happier now isn't that things are good it's they are better...big difference.Also The Germans thought very highly of Hittler and look how that turned out.Just because somone rouses a little national pride with his sabre rattleing dosn't mean he's a good guy.I'm pretty sure the US isn't weak,the only reason caution has to be takken is russias Nuclear weapons,without those any US troop sent into the region would disasemble any russian resitance.casulties would be higher than in Iraq but the outcome would be the same.

 

 

 

Trust me the Soviet Union was always portrayed as a place you just would never want to go let alone live during the cold war years - not quite sure how or why you got the idea it was ever portrayed as a Utopia?

 

 

The casualties really would be unbelievable in a conventional war - especially over that terrain - and there is no way you could ever compare it to the 1 sided Iraq fiasco with their army out in the Desert and practically no Air support.

[+whiteknight06604 932]

Trust me the Soviet Union was always portrayed as a place you just would never want to go let alone live during the cold war years - not quite sure how or why you got the idea it was ever portrayed as a Utopia?

 

 

The casualties really would be unbelievable in a conventional war - especially over that terrain - and there is no way you could ever compare it to the 1 sided Iraq fiasco with their army out in the Desert and practically no Air support.

 

 

The large armour formations would be shreaded from the air by munitions delivered by stealth aircraft.Anyone who thinks in a limited engagement Russia would last very long is dreaming.Command and control would be the keys.Us intelligence would know where and when any Russian move was to be made and Stopped.Russian ground forces out of direct control would not be of much use other than in a tactical situation.The Russian army would not have much air support for long.

 

Russian(soviet) propganda always was showing the workers and peasents living an idealic life.with the state taking care of all their wants and needs with uncle joe replacing Jesus as the man who should be praised.the reality was far from that.social classes were markedly differnt but still contrasted.Instead of people who went out and made money the "wealthy in the USSR were people who were useful to the state.If you had a skill or were a scientist you got to live well and have more access to western goods.The street sweepers and factory workers got sh!t on.during the 80's the Russian people in large sections of the country were living the same way they were 100 years before.technologicaly that is.

Edited August 11, 2008 by whiteknight06604

[eraser_tr 29]

The UN isn't corrupt so much as a bureaucratic mess. As for a sense of right and wrong, their sense is usually just fine, and there are on the arabs and terror. The process really needs alot of changing, and membership to human rights bodies needs to be more strict, I forgot what country it was, but a while back doing research for Model UN (I see so much of this on a constant basis) that made me do a double take at how they were allowed on the HRC.

 

The security council doesn't work because there are generally two different poles when it comes to a conflict. Russia and China always wind up on one side, the US, UK and france on the other. Veto powers on both sides means total gridlock, it may shift around slightly, but there's always that one P5 that is against the others. I think all veto powers should be removed from everyone, and permanent membership expanded.

 

That, and GA resolutions are not legally binding like treaties and SC resolutions.

 

I saw a story on CNN about Condi Rice meeting with leaders of the G8 and russia being excluded, so their booting may be in the works already. The problem with the west taking a stand against russia is force is essentially off the table because of several thousand nuclear warheads unless something can be done to absolutely prevent their use by any side regardless of how the conventional battles pan out. Beyond that happening, what, if anything is worth pressing the button and ending more lives in a heartbeat than all of world war 2 combined, and likely the human race within a few years.

[MigBuster 2,875]

The large armour formations would be shreaded from the air by munitions delivered by stealth aircraft.Anyone who thinks in a limited engagement Russia would last very long is dreaming.Command and control would be the keys.Us intelligence would know where and when any Russian move was to be made and Stopped.Russian ground forces out of direct control would not be of much use other than in a tactical situation.The Russian army would not have much air support for long.

 

Russian(soviet) propganda always was showing the workers and peasents living an idealic life.with the state taking care of all their wants and needs with uncle joe replacing Jesus as the man who should be praised.the reality was far from that.social classes were markedly differnt but still contrasted.Instead of people who went out and made money the "wealthy in the USSR were people who were useful to the state.If you had a skill or were a scientist you got to live well and have more access to western goods.The street sweepers and factory workers got sh!t on.during the 80's the Russian people in large sections of the country were living the same way they were 100 years before.technologicaly that is.

 

 

You are right about the Soviet propaganda - and it was made clear to us that thats all it was at the time - it was only after the end the cold war the majority of western people got to see the actual state of what it was like over there.

 

 

I just cant see that any conventional engagement against Russia wouldnt be a real war - their missile tech is excellent - I really dont think effective close Air Support could be given by launching standoff weapons from 20000 ft, 15 miles away with ground based FACs only.

Air superiority would be VERY hard to achieve over their territory -mainly due to missiles - and we are not talking about a centralised C&C structure with modified obsolete SA-2/6s backed up by SA-16s here - you could be looking at any Satelites being blinded or taken out for a start and an enemy that knows a bit about electronic warfare and has had many years to watch and learn from its mistakes.

 

Its defo not propaganda about systems like the S-300/S-400 unless the propaganda is being put out by our guys to worry us.

 

It really doesnt even bear thinking about the bloodbath that the ground war would be.....and I would certainly never underestimate them based on the hilariously one sided conflicts of recent times.

 

 

 

 

anyway - the beat goes on:

 

"Russian-backed rebels in Abkhazia say they have begun an operation against Georgian forces, as UN moves to achieve a ceasefire failed to make progress.

 

The rebels say they are trying to push Georgian forces from a strategic gorge in the west of the breakaway province.

 

France's president is visiting Russia and Georgia on Tuesday, despite Russian criticism of a new draft UN resolution.

 

In Georgia, troops have withdrawn to positions around the capital, Tbilisi, to defend against any Russian assault.

 

Reports say that Russian troops now control many key bridges and roads across Georgia, leaving the capital isolated.

 

Many residents have been stocking up with food and fuel, and correspondents in Tbilisi say there have been clear signs of panic and confusion in the city.

 

US President George W Bush meanwhile has strongly attacked what he called Russia's "invasion".

 

Mr Bush said the Russian actions in Abkhazia and the other breakaway province of South Ossetia were "unacceptable in the 21st Century" and that Moscow was guilty of a "dramatic and brutal escalation". "

 

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7555359.stm

[Emp_Palpatine 501]

Trust me the Soviet Union was always portrayed as a place you just would never want to go let alone live during the cold war years - not quite sure how or why you got the idea it was ever portrayed as a Utopia?

May be not in Britain.

But trust me, it was on this side of the Chanel: strength of the Communist party and movements and the hegemonic influence of Marxist-communist intelligentsia.

Soljenistsine was one of the wake up call, but the way he was received here is sufficient enough to show how intelligentsia (apart from the few conservative intellectual) saw Soviet Union. In 1989, some said, in december: "Sovietism balance is positive".

[+allenjb42 4,164]

Some analysis of Soviet, er I mean Russian, intentions here:

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7555155.stm

[Emp_Palpatine 501]

The UN isn't corrupt so much as a bureaucratic mess. As for a sense of right and wrong, their sense is usually just fine, and there are on the arabs and terror. The process really needs alot of changing, and membership to human rights bodies needs to be more strict, I forgot what country it was, but a while back doing research for Model UN (I see so much of this on a constant basis) that made me do a double take at how they were allowed on the HRC.

Wasn't it Libya?

(Funny, when you know how Qaffafi likes to loath "western" human rights and want to promote is own-written "Green Charter of Human rights" (whose efficiency, while living in Libya, I haven't found obvious ).

Cuba also is or was in the HRC. So was China, etc...

[SayethWhaaaa 245]

It's not an occupation when we do it

 

No seriously, we're guilty of it too, but at least we're not as repressive and more careful about civilians. Or stay as long, we were out of Europe by the 50's, it took russia until the berlin wall came down to leave.

 

I do have to say, it's bloody ironic listening to the US administration condeming Russia's actions as "attempting to orchistrate a regime change in Georgia." I mean, that took big brass ones, IMHO.

 

It's interesting listening to what's the Georgians and Russians are saying, respectively. I think the only statements I've heard that I think that are lacking in spin the most are the statements I'm hearing on the BBC from Georgian and S-Ossetian refugees.

[Hawk MMS 0]

This just in...

 

RUSSIA orders halt to military ops

 

Foxnews.com

 

BREAKING NEWS — Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said on Tuesday he had ordered an end to the military operation in Georgia, Interfax news agency reported.

 

Meanwhile, Russia's foreign minister says that Georgia's president must leave office and Georgian troops should stay out of the breakaway South Ossetia region for good.

 

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov says that Moscow won't talk to President Mikhail Saakashvili and Saakashvili "better go."

 

Lavrov's statement sets a tough stage for Russia's talks with French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who is heading to Moscow Tuesday to negotiate an EU-brokered truce for the fierce conflict over the breakaway region.

[Emp_Palpatine 501]

Might be related to George Bush strong speech yesterday (or this morning, don't know with that jet lag).