Russia Goes Rogue

[Kulindahr]

There was no Ukraine and Ukrainian nation in 17 century. And of course there was no Russian nation in 17-18 centuries.

There were just villains (peasants) and feudal lords! One Polish vassal Bogdan Khmelnitsky changed his vassalage from Polish to Muskovitan.

All European countries were empires (like Austria) or colonies (like Czechia) before XX century. East-slavic peasants could be owned by Polish, Austrian or Russin lendlords.

So, I don't understand than modern people use modern categories, talking about the past.

The Kievan Rus, a Russian nation, arose in the 9th century, and in the 10th and 11th was the largest and most prosperous state in Europe. After their collapse, due to the Mongol invaders and a corrupt ruling family, the Grand Duchy of Moscow became preeminent among the Russian states, and steadily expanded by annexation and conquest, eventually forming the Russian Empire in the 17th century.

Ukraine was never a nation in the legal sense until 1920, but they did have an identity, enough so that they attempted to achieve independence from the aggressors around them such as Austria-Hungary and Russia, most notably after World War One. Their brief flirtation with true nationhood ended in 1922 when Ukraine became one of the original "republics" of the Soviet Union.

 

[Lostlover]

Where as I was critical at first of American coverage towards this, as Georgia did initiate the attack in South Ossetia, Russia responded in what one could argue was to a very disproportionate degree. As unfortunately the United States did, as well, in response to 9/11. It makes us look like all the more hyprocrites scolding other countries for this type of thing, when we have invaded other countries ourself, that were of no threat to us.

Russia, however, has more than proved their point. It is time for Russia to pull back and get out of Georgia.

Obviously, they will eventually. They just don't want it to look like they are being ordered to pull back. Russia wants to pull back slowly, and on their own terms, so they look like they are in charge of the situation.

Exactly, Bush has no room to talk. And his constant sermonizing the Russians just makes himself look more foolish.

This is extra reason why Europe needs to step up to the plate. We're not an unbiased party here for starters and we can't talk about appropriate military tactics after the Iraq debacle.

 

[Kurn]

Will South Ossetia and Abkhazia ever be fully integrated within Georgia? Probably the time will come – just as Northern Ireland looks like finally becoming a fully integrated part of Britain. But the British experience should be quite salutary for the Georgian government – here is a country that once ruled a third of the world (in fact the largest empire in history) – with huge military power – that had to eventually “do a deal” with insurgents/terrorists to regain control of part of it’s own territory

These "integrations" can never really happen. Abkhazian refers to a language and culture that is very different from Georgian. Ossetians have somewhat more in common with Georgians. But both groups have been adversely affected by Georgian nationalists and will have nothing to do with Georgia.

 

[AsianDream]

These "integrations" can never really happen. Abkhazian refers to a language and culture that is very different from Georgian. Ossetians have somewhat more in common with Georgians. But both groups have been adversely affected by Georgian nationalists and will have nothing to do with Georgia.

As I've said - i don't think the government of Georgia are the "good guys" in the current problems.

On the other hand pragmatic self interest is a great promoter of intergration. So if the Georgians will treat Abkhazian with respect - and allow them some element of self government - then this story may have a happy ending.

 

[MystikWizard]

As I've said - i don't think the government of Georgia are the "good guys" in the current problems.

I don't think the problem is as simple as "good guys" and "bad guys". I think thee are shades of grey with this situation in which both countries are at fault.

 

[Hugedickboy]

Today's Neeeeeeeeewssss





Russian Troops Are Setteld In Town Poti They Made "sangars" And Aren't Going Anywhere.


Also The Other Russain Blogsposts Are On Their Place And Other Go Round The Villages And Continue Robbing.



The Russian Soldiers Attacked On The Gighway The "transit Truck" Which Was Caring 6 Cars From Turkey And They Robbed This Cars And Then Burnt The Trailer With The Cars.




Now See What Things Happen Everyday Horrible Things














Russia Has Sent The Most Cruel And Homless Soldiers Armies Here Most Cruel Murderers The Armies 58 And 43 The Msot Cruel Armies To Simply Distroy Georgia That's All.

 

[Hugedickboy]

Breaking Newssssss



Russian Troopps Don't Alow The Juranlists To Enter The Cities Also Euto's People Couldn't Enter For Hours But Then They Could.



They Occupy Everything And Don't Let The Humanitar Help To Enter.


Today Was Found Pregnant Women With Two Children Aside Dead. In A Region Of Georgia.


Mathias Yiorsh Is In Shock. He Was There.

 

[Kulindahr]

Russian Troops Are Setteld In Town Poti They Made "sangars" And Aren't Going Anywhere.


Also The Other Russain Blogsposts Are On Their Place And Other Go Round The Villages And Continue Robbing.

I think a "sangar" is a fortified position, but I don't get "Blogsposts". Any help here?

 

[Hugedickboy]

yeah sangars arre the holes where soldiers hide while attacking and blogposts are "posts" places where the soldiers are satteled.

together they stay there and don't let buses cars to go through that places


they are almost everywhere and aren't going to go from our conuntry

russian president says that they must go and already are going and they stay here

soemthing very mess up is going in the russian's mind or the soldiers just don't care what Medvedev says they are of PUTIN"S and I feel that in russia thre will be huge conflict between this presidents.

I swear this

 

[AsianDream]

I don't think the problem is as simple as "good guys" and "bad guys". I think thee are shades of grey with this situation in which both countries are at fault.

I think the phrase “Both countries” rather simplifies things. As there are many different concepts of what a country is that are involved.

The people of both Abkhazian and South Ossetia view themselves as separate nations to Georgia.

Just as most people in Georgia think of themselves as a separate country to Russia – though this was not historically the case.

Interestingly – a large part of 20th century soviet history can be viewed as a takeover of the whole Russian empire by Georgia – which is where Stalin came from.

 

[R.B.S.]

To Kulindahr - Sure, I just meant, that building of nation is very complex process. For example, Siberians didn't describe themselves as Russians till late XIX century, they described themselves as Siberians.

To others

After the war: recognising reality in Abkhazia and Georgia
Neal Ascherson

http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/after-the-war-recognising-reality-in-abkhazia-and-georgia

The Russian soldiers are not the worst. They have won their victory, and now hang about Georgia mopping up. Much more terrible are the civilians and volunteers who come behind the soldiers, the big-bellied men with guns, knives and army jackets thrown over their T-shirts. They are doing the murdering, the looting and burning, the "cleansing" as they drive the last Georgians out of South Ossetia. The flight of the Georgian army has let them into Georgian territory as far as Gori, so they are following and killing them there.


They are Ossetians, helped by savage warriors from other nationalities in the northern Caucasus and by ultra-patriotic Russian "Cossacks". A year ago, most of these Ossetians probably lived in neighbourly peace with the local Georgians in the next village. But the spark of war ignites madness. The neighbours become "other": traitors, spies, saboteurs, snipers. They must be rooted out, exterminated.

 

[Kulindahr]

The Russian soldiers are not the worst. They have won their victory, and now hang about Georgia mopping up. Much more terrible are the civilians and volunteers who come behind the soldiers, the big-bellied men with guns, knives and army jackets thrown over their T-shirts. They are doing the murdering, the looting and burning, the "cleansing" as they drive the last Georgians out of South Ossetia. The flight of the Georgian army has let them into Georgian territory as far as Gori, so they are following and killing them there.


They are Ossetians, helped by savage warriors from other nationalities in the northern Caucasus and by ultra-patriotic Russian "Cossacks". A year ago, most of these Ossetians probably lived in neighbourly peace with the local Georgians in the next village. But the spark of war ignites madness. The neighbours become "other": traitors, spies, saboteurs, snipers. They must be rooted out, exterminated.

Here is where Russia can truly be called rogue: advancing into another country, and dragging vermin along with them. They either welcome these inhuman parasites or tolerate them; either way, the Russians show themselves to be encouragers of vermin.

 

[Chalchalero]

If our peacekeepers are "illegal", why UN didn't change them to "legal"?

I am not certain as to what it is you are trying to say here, but I never implied in any way that the presence of Russian peacekeepers in their zone of South Ossetia, as agreed in 1992 was illegal. I said their presence in Georgia proper was and continues to be illegal.

Russian peacekeepers were perfidiously killed by Geogians. And then our Army had entered South Ossetia - Georgians ran away, leaving the weapons.

NATO must train Georgians more strenuously. Georgian troops haven't the Virile Spirit. Good soldier doesn't run away, leaving the weapons to the enemy.

This is just typical Russian silliness, and a perfect example of from whence the problem derives. If this is how Putin has been indoctrinating you people to think, then we are all in trouble.

When Ukraine was the victim of Russian aggression? Tell me, please.

So you know nothing of the Ukrainian War of Independence of 1917-1921, Stalin's industrialisation and collectivisation policies which decimated the Ukrainian peasantry, the Holodomor, when millions of Ukrainians died as a result of the famine caused by Stalin's policies (recognised as an act of genocide on the part of Russia by most of the civilised world); Stalinist political and cultural repression which resulted in the systematic elimination of four-fifths of the Ukrainian cultural elite...

How much more do you need, I wonder?

And about Russia supporting gangsters and separatists. The USA supported Albanian separatists, who killed people and stole their organs.

This again is just silliness, and does nothing to address the fact that South Osettian "separatists" are really nothing more than criminal gangs and thugs who prey on the innocent under the guise of "freedom fighters" and with the full and overt support of the Russian government and people, who are all fully in support of the killing and maiming of innocent Georgians, as they, after all, are not Russians, right?

 

[Chalchalero]

1. They've been de facto independent since 1992.
2. During that time, they successfully governed themselves.
3. Geogia has been doing just fine without them.

I think those three items alone should be sufficient to establish their claim to be a separate people.

1. They have not been independent, but were granted a level of autonomy, which is not the same.

2. Their "government" was a semi-autonomous one under the auspices of a Georgian regional director, and was subsequently not recognised by Saakashvili, and is not recognised by the international community.

3. I agree with you, and feel they should have been tossed over to the Russians years ago. This does not alleviate the fact that the region still belongs to Georgia, right or no.

 

[Chalchalero]

Hugedickboy
If you have the facts about Ossetian partisans or Russian soldiers raping and killing people, you should go to HRW.

It may be the truth. I don't say that Ossetian partisans or Russian soldiers are angels. They may be very cruel. But your president Saakashvili told us so much unverified information - that I don't now what to think.

Saakashvili said that Russia bombed the oil pipeline Baku-Tbilsi. Then British Petroleum said that it wasn't true.

BP is presently in the middle of a huge dispute with Gazprom and their other Russian "partners", who are only minutes away from doing to them what was done to Yukos, which could cost them billions of dollars. They are not in any position to go against the official Russian line at the moment, and so their claims are suspect in this regard.

 

[R.B.S.]

Chalchero

The burning pipeline is not an easy thing to hide! So, this is very absurd idea! Otherwise, Putin is some magician from "Narnia"! Maybe, he is the son of Queen Jadis

MIKHAIL GORBACHEV: Russia Never Wanted a War

I totally agree with these words:

For some time now, Russians have been wondering: If our opinion counts for nothing in those institutions, do we really need them? Just to sit at the nicely set dinner table and listen to lectures?

Indeed, Russia has long been told to simply accept the facts. Here’s the independence of Kosovo for you. Here’s the abrogation of the Antiballistic Missile Treaty, and the American decision to place missile defenses in neighboring countries. Here’s the unending expansion of NATO. All of these moves have been set against the backdrop of sweet talk about partnership. Why would anyone put up with such a charade?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/20/opinion/20gorbachev.html

H.D.S. Greenway from The International Herald Tribune has the same opinion:

Taking former bits of the Soviet Union into NATO is a needless provocation - especially Georgia's entry, which the Bush administration backs. For say what you will about NATO no longer being an anti-Russian alliance, no one in Russia believes it. And no one in Georgia or Ukraine believes it either.

Russia feels about the Caucasus as the United States views Central America - its own backyard, an area not to be trifled with.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/19/opinion/edgreenway.php

By the way, why the USA sent Georgia "some humanitarian assistance" on two large military ships. Just being curious. Sure, it's your government's bussiness, but why the ships are military?

 

[opinterph]

… By the way, why the USA sent Georgia "some humanitarian assistance" on two large military ships. Just being curious. Sure, it's your government's bussiness, but why the ships are military?

It is not unusual for US military vessels to be tasked in efforts of humanitarian assistance. According to the US Department of Defense, the ships involved are:

• USS McFAUL – an ARLEIGH BURKE - class Guided Missile Destroyer (a sister ship to the better known USS COLE). Another sister ship of this class (USS LASSEN) had been scheduled to participate in joint naval exercises with Russia, prior to the Georgia conflict. The primary mission of the USS McFAUL is “to conduct prompt and sustained combat operations at sea in support of national interests.”

• USCGC DALLAS – one of the largest class of vessel in the United States Coast Guard and generally assigned to the task of maritime drug interdiction.

• USS MOUNT WHITNEY – a BLUE RIDGE - class command ship. This vessel carries enough food to feed its crew for 90 days and can transport supplies to support an emergency evacuation of 3,000 people. It also has the ability to distill over 100,000 gallons (400 cubic meters) of fresh water per day.

 

[AsianDream]

Here is where Russia can truly be called rogue: advancing into another country, and dragging vermin along with them. They either welcome these inhuman parasites or tolerate them; either way, the Russians show themselves to be encouragers of vermin.

An interesting parallel -

If Halliburton (Cheney & associates) and other "Defence Contractors" that follow in the wake of misguided US Military adventures can't be called "Vermin" then who else could be?

Though in the case of both Russian and US military adventures - "Vultures" is maybe an equally accurate description as "Vermin".

 

[Kulindahr]

1. They've been de facto independent since 1992.
2. During that time, they successfully governed themselves.
3. Geogia has been doing just fine without them.

I think those three items alone should be sufficient to establish their claim to be a separate people.

1. They have not been independent, but were granted a level of autonomy, which is not the same.

2. Their "government" was a semi-autonomous one under the auspices of a Georgian regional director, and was subsequently not recognised by Saakashvili, and is not recognised by the international community.

3. I agree with you, and feel they should have been tossed over to the Russians years ago. This does not alleviate the fact that the region still belongs to Georgia, right or no.

They have been de facto independent; Georgian "supervision" has been meaningless. De jure, they've been part of Georgia all along, but so what? If they've shown they can rule themselves -- which they have -- and if Georgia hasn't made any effort in all this time to reclaim them -- which it hasn't -- then as far as I'm concerned, Saakashvili and the international community are acting the part of the tyrant.

 

[Kulindahr]

Chalchero

The burning pipeline is not an easy thing to hide! So, this is very absurd idea! Otherwise, Putin is some magician from "Narnia"! Maybe, he is the son of Queen Jadis

Was the pipeline said to be burning? It's possible to bomb a line so the oil just spills, and doesn't burn.

MIKHAIL GORBACHEV: Russia Never Wanted a War

I totally agree with these words:

For some time now, Russians have been wondering: If our opinion counts for nothing in those institutions, do we really need them? Just to sit at the nicely set dinner table and listen to lectures?

Indeed, Russia has long been told to simply accept the facts. Here’s the independence of Kosovo for you. Here’s the abrogation of the Antiballistic Missile Treaty, and the American decision to place missile defenses in neighboring countries. Here’s the unending expansion of NATO. All of these moves have been set against the backdrop of sweet talk about partnership. Why would anyone put up with such a charade?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/20/op...gorbachev.html

Maybe Russia needs to show the world that it's a civilized country and not some throwback to the eighteenth century. All those countries want to join NATO because they still remember the cruel tyrant Moscow, the naked oppression and crushing of their national pride. Putin acting like a dictator, stripping away freedoms gained, invading other countries, tells all the people on this side of the picture that Russia is just the Soviet Union in a slimmer form, with no respect for human rights, for other countries, or anything but what its own power will grasp and hold.
Talk of partnerships was for the nation emerging into the light of day with freedom of speech, freedom of the press, and many other liberties that make a nation civilized. But Putin has systematically choked those off, establishing a de facto dictatorship -- and no one wants a barbarian for a partner.

H.D.S. Greenway from The International Herald Tribune has the same opinion:

Taking former bits of the Soviet Union into NATO is a needless provocation - especially Georgia's entry, which the Bush administration backs. For say what you will about NATO no longer being an anti-Russian alliance, no one in Russia believes it. And no one in Georgia or Ukraine believes it either.

Russia feels about the Caucasus as the United States views Central America - its own backyard, an area not to be trifled with.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/08/...edgreenway.php

"Provocation"?
That's like saying a woman threatened with beatings and rape by a former boyfriend is making a "provocation" by installing a security system in her house!

And of course no one believes that NATO isn't not a alliance protecting against Russia -- because Russia is the only country threatening the sovereignty of others, thoe only one that has shown it will impose "friendly" governments by naked force, the only one that has the signs of being an empire bent on conquest.

By the way, why the USA sent Georgia "some humanitarian assistance" on two large military ships. Just being curious. Sure, it's your government's business, but why the ships are military?

For starters, since people are in a shooting situation over there, using military ships is only sensible. Second, our Navy is being paid to sail around from place to place anyway, so this way no one has to hire extra ships and pay extra hands. Third, humanitarian assistance is something our Navy trains for, and is supposed to be ready to do fast and efficiently.

I think the question shows a warped perspective from Russia's side: that anything military is threatening. Russia's military is definitely threatening, given how Putin has used to to invade an innocent country, but the U.S. military -- the Navy especially -- is used for humanitarian work fairly often.