You seem to be forgetting or ignoring the fact that South Ossetia succeeded from Georgia way back in 1992. As a result, Russia has a UN Peace-Keeping mandate in the region. So, yes they did have a right to be in the area. And they were attacked in a military-assault by Georgia first.
Actually the peacekeeping "mandate" as you refer to it was a Russian brokered deal to which Georgia agreed. The UN took no part in the discussions.
The war ended through a Russian-brokered ceasefire that established a joint peacekeeping force and left South Ossetia divided between the rivaling authorities.
In the face of inner instability following the military coup against President Zviad Gamsakhurdia, Georgia agreed to the negotiations to avoid the confrontation with Russia. On 24 June 1992, the Head of the State Council of Georgia, Eduard Shevardnadze and Russian President Boris Yeltsin met to discuss the question of South Ossetia. A ceasefire was agreed upon and on 14 July 1992, a peacekeeping operation began, consisting of a Joint Control Commission and joint military patrols of Georgians, Russians and Ossetians (North and South Ossetians).
And I never claimed the Russians had no right to be in South Ossetia. I said they had no right to enter Georgia proper.
Even the Russians acknowledged this at the beginning, but they were of course lying. As usual.
On Monday 11 August 2008 Russian Colonel General Anatoly Nogovitsyn, deputy chief of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces, said that Russia would abide by the terms of the peacekeeping agreement for South Ossetia worked out between Georgia and Russia in 1992. "We are not moving beyond the boundaries," Nogovitsyn said. "This is a matter of principle. The 1992 agreement, which was signed by the Georgian side too, clearly defines the boundaries of responsibility of the Russian contingent, and the peacekeepers do not have the task of invading Georgian territory."
And the Russians were not attacked in the initial assault. Read up on the time lines. They are available all over the web. I have provided a few, but I am sure that you can find your own.
And in typical Neocon fashion, you are seemingly advocating U.S. military involvement in the area, and looking to prompt a World War.
I am not amused by this. Firstly, you, along with too many others here, have a delight for labelling anyone who disagrees with your position as a neo con. The fact is that I am not one, so kindly cease and desist on that front.
Secondly, please indicate for me where I have ever advocated for US military involvement in that area. Once you have done this, then I may continue with you on this particular ridiculous claim you have made.
I have only advocated for Russian withdrawal and for the Ossetians and the Georgians to resolve this matter internally as it should have done from the beginning. Without Russian interference and supplying of criminal gangs and militias and other so-called separatists that continue to stage attacks against ethnic Georgians in the area and Georgian infrastructure in Georgia proper.
The U.S. has poked its nose in too many conflicts in the past, and this is one conflict that is not a concern to us, militarily. I have no problem with the U.S. acting as a peace-keeper and negotiating between both parties ... however the U.S. taking the side of Georgia, as is to be expected in the ideology of NeoConservatism, is clearly making matters more complicated. The U.S. does not need to become involved in every single Global conflict.
I do not disagree with you. The US should not involve itself militarily in this conflict. However, the US support for Georgia has nothing to do with ideology, but rather the fact that Georgia is a US ally. It is the responsibility of an ally to support another ally. Hence the word. Ally. See how that works?
I am still suspicious that given how badly Bush wanted this Missile Defense Shield and wasn't getting it, that he goaded Georgia into this conflict, knowing what the result would be ... which he used as justification for the shield.
There is more evidence that Russia and its proxies goaded Georgia into this conflict than that Bush would have had anything to do with it. Anything else is pure conspiracy theorist conjecture. The only one who wins from this is Russia.
If Poland and the Ukraine are beginning to rethink their initial reluctance to participate in Bush's scheme, it is only understandable, considering how they have both been the victims of Russian aggression and occupation and would prefer not to have to endure a testosterone crazed Putin on their doorstep any time soon. I do not blame them. Russia's actions clearly brought this on. They have to deal with the consequences.
