International Politics Thread

[-Snafu- 78]

Medvedev: 'Gee Putin whadda ya wanna do tonight?'

Putin: 'The same thing we do every night Medvedev. Try to take over the world!'

[MK1 0]

Yea, nice. The USSR, poland or france should just stay and wait when the nazis invaded.

You just don't listen, do you? This is a morden day conflict, not WWII.

Quote[/b] ]It didn't show any attacks of other civilians, just that lone unprofessional SU-25, the only plane Georgia uses. The road is no Georgian position, probably there were no Georgians at all there.

The plane attacked a position on Georgian side. Just check this clip again if you don't belive it.

Quote[/b] ]And why would russians attack civilians? They have no interests in killing of them. Georgia has.

Both sides have, like I already said.

Quote[/b] ]What about Yugoslavia? The "defence"-alliance NATO bombed Belgrade and invaded the country. Then they overthrew an elected socialist government when there was an internal conflict. Hardly ten years ago. Sure it isn't the 21th century...

It was a UN-based mission. They had their reasons.

Quote[/b] ]Russia had all right to be in Georgia, and when they attacked russian troops russia has the right to defend itself.

Yea yea.. when ever peacekeepers are attacked on any peacekeeping mission the peacekeeping country should and has the right to storm the aggressor's country in full affect. Luckily this only happens in your visions.

Quote[/b] ]It's a fact from all sides that Georgia was the aggressor, they invaded S.O. .You're trying to rewrite history with wishful thinking.

Yes, in this battle it was Georgia, but you need to look at the history on the long run to make any conclusions who's the real aggressor here.

I'm not rewriting anything at all, just proving you wrong with facts you don't want to believe.

Quote[/b] ]The oil line would only be moved to Armenia, and the pipes don't go through S. O. it's far south. Russia isn't interested in annexing anything. If they were they would've attacked Tblisi on the first day and taken it a few days later.

Since you seem to know better than all the world's political analysts what Russia really wants I assume you could tell me what is it that they fear so much in this western world.

Quote[/b] ]Your question about SO. shelling Russian troops is absurd and for me it shows you have not understood the conflict.

There's nothing absurd in a hypothetical question. How come it's so difficult for you to answer? Let's say the shelled them by accident or because they want to stage a setting that makes it look like Georgia did it and later on it is revealed who actually did it.

Your ability to not answer the question shows that you indeed are very much biased towards Russia and it makes this discussion rather pointless.

Quote[/b] ]I don't like the OFP-story, but I like the rest of the game. In all western games, russians, north-koreans, aliens or monsters are the most common enemies. You think that's a coincidence or a reflection of what's in society?

There are reasons for that which you can find if you go through the history books.

Quote[/b] ]In an armed conflict there's no such thing as "overkill".

Yes there is indeed. They could have retreated their troops and let the UN handle the rest. All in all, Russia is as wrong as Georgia in what they did.

Quote[/b] ]Georgia attacked Russia on foreign territory.

The last I looked SO is Georgian territory.

[Spokesperson 0]

Quote[/b] ]

You just don't listen, do you? This is a morden day conflict, not WWII.

So what? What's the difference? I could've related to roman times. However I could easily think of a modern example so I gave you the one of Yugoslavia. Yet you talk about WW2.

Quote[/b] ]The plane attacked a position on Georgian side. Just check this clip again if you don't belive it.

So what? Everything is "Georgian" side. Russian troops were in what you call Georgian side. And according to some non-NATO western journalists Georgians attacked BBC to gain sympathy as Russia would get the blame. From the vid it's evident it's the SU Frogfoot. A georgian used plane which was used for bombing Tshkinvali.

Russians don't attack with lone planes and not with that ammunition.

Quote[/b] ]It was a UN-based mission. They had their reasons.

Wishful thinking. If you don't know the facts don't pretend you do. It was no UN based mission. However, when the war ended UN-troops went in there to secure the peace by killing off all who ruin it.

Quote[/b] ]Yea yea.. when ever peacekeepers are attacked on any peacekeeping mission the peacekeeping country should and has the right to storm the aggressor's country in full affect. Luckily this only happens in your visions..

They didn't. They blew military installations, like radars and airfields around the country. They didn't attack Georgia in full scale at all. Just secured the borders. Which means that you strike air-fields and artillery on the other side of it.

Quote[/b] ]Yes, in this battle it was Georgia, but you need to look at the history on the long run to make any conclusions who's the real aggressor here.

I'm not rewriting anything at all, just proving you wrong with facts you don't want to believe.

"Real" aggressor. So by attacking, Georgia was no aggressor? Do you think this is fiction? There's no need for the word "real". Are you proving me wrong that this is reality? I don't want to believe that?

Quote[/b] ]There's nothing absurd in a hypothetical question. How come it's so difficult for you to answer? Let's say the shelled them by accident or because they want to stage a setting that makes it look like Georgia did it and later on it is revealed who actually did it.

Your ability to not answer the question shows that you indeed are very much biased towards Russia and it makes this discussion rather pointless.

You're too concerned with fiction. The fact is that all sides, even Georgia, admit that Georgia attacked South Ossetia. Why are there dead georgian troops in South Ossetia? Someone placed them there? There's nothing to "reveal". That's wishful thinking by you.

S. O. didn't break the peace by killing peacekeepers or civilians. S. O. didn't burn their own homes or villages. If they for some reason shelled peacekeepers by mistake it would be of no importance. Georgia didn't launch a full-scale assault by mistake.

Lol, biased towards Russia "making a discussion pointless". So people are not supposed to have opinions in a politics thread? What about you? You are biased towards west, what you read in your newspapers is not unbiased, it's heavy propaganda just like the russian press. The difference is that I read both western and eastern press.

I'm against west and capitalist Russia. But in this conflict Russia does the right thing. It's evident as it is no aggressor. Georgia is. Russia defended the peace. They didn't want this conflict and they didn't start it.

Quote[/b] ]The last I looked SO is Georgian territory.

You should see a difference between separatist territory, and Georgian by now. The separatists have held their land since Georgia turned into a independent state. Georgia has never had control over those territories.

[Spokesperson 0]

*IMG removed by MOD*

Medvedev: 'Gee Putin whadda ya wanna do tonight?'

Putin: 'The same thing we do every night Medvedev. Try to take over the world!'

Yea. Excellent analysis. A cartoon depicting the evil guys shows everything.

I feel that's PhD level. Not kindergarten reasoning.

[-Snafu- 78]

It's just a bit of humour. Most people have a sense of humour. It's not a serious analysis of the situation, which I think is pretty obvious.

You boggle the fcuking mind you do.

If I posted the US version you would not have complained. Why not jump on otk-member's post? He did something similar earlier on. People didn't complain though, guess why? They knew it was a laugh.

Your not supposed to quote images either.

[MK1 0]

Yet you talk about WW2.

I think Nazis are related to WWII. You're already forgetting your own lines.

Quote[/b] ]So what? Everything is "Georgian" side. Russian troops were in what you call Georgian side. And according to some non-NATO western journalists Georgians attacked BBC to gain sympathy as Russia would get the blame. From the vid it's evident it's the SU Frogfoot. A georgian used plane which was used for bombing Tshkinvali.

You just keep coming up with your own theories.

Quote[/b] ]Wishful thinking. If you don't know the facts don't pretend you do. It was no UN based mission. However, when the war ended UN-troops went in there to secure the peace by killing off all who ruin it.

Wishful? There's nothing wishful in it. Just check http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legitimacy_of_NATO_bombing_of_Yugoslavia

I've no views on the Yugoslavia matter as I've not studied it at all.

Quote[/b] ]"Real" aggressor. So by attacking, Georgia was no aggressor? Do you think this is fiction? There's no need for the word "real". Are you proving me wrong that this is reality? I don't want to believe that?

Real, as in the source of hostilities when the conflict originally started years ago.

Quote[/b] ]You're too concerned with fiction. The fact is that all sides, even Georgia, admit that Georgia attacked South Ossetia. Why are there dead georgian troops in South Ossetia? Someone placed them there? There's nothing to "reveal". That's wishful thinking by you.

Yet you think I'm wishing something and this time I am: that you would answer my question and not go around it for the 10th time. Why do you find it so difficult to image such a hypothetical situation?

Quote[/b] ]Lol, biased towards Russia "making a discussion pointless". So people are not supposed to have opinions in a politics thread?

Sure, but you're the worst kind of person to have a discussion with since you are so strongly biased in your views that even well known facts won't change your mind. You simply want to believe your truths.

Quote[/b] ]What about you? You are biased towards west, what you read in your newspapers is not unbiased, it's heavy propaganda just like the russian press. The difference is that I read both western and eastern press.

Sorry to prove you wrong, but I do follow both eastern and western media. I'm not towards west. I condemn the Georgian attack, but also the Russian assault. Our difference is that you think it was legitimate.

Quote[/b] ]You should see a difference between separatist territory, and Georgian by now.

I'm not gonna argue over a definition of a word here.

[baddo 0]

From this Estonian article:

http://gruusia.postimees.ee/?id=26483

a Finnish news website has translated for me something:

http://www.mtv3.fi/uutiset....6

...which I will now translate into English. Might be interesting to this discussion:

(sorry for the little bit poor translation, the sentences would need more re-arranging to make it better... which I am not going to do now)

Quote[/b] ]Estonian commander: Russia prepared the strike to Georgia for a long time

Published 13.08.2008 14:52 (updated 14:55)

MTV3-Antti Halinen

A commander of the Estonian Defence Forces, Lieutenant General Ants Laaneots estimates that Russia  was preparing the strike to Georgia for a good time. In an interview by the Postimees-newspaper Laaneots says that many military and political matters point to this.

The nerves of the Georgian leaders didn't hold under different Russian provocations, but it gave a reason for Russia's military actions by invading into South Ossetia.

The commander of the Estonian Defence Forces says that Moscow planned and prepared its operations for a long time. According to Laaneots to that points among other things that Russia fixed a railroad in Abhasia which goes to the Russian border, it made possible to transfer troops quickly. Russia also transfered their troops in advance to positions in North Ossetia, from which they came quickly through tunnels to Georgia. In addition among other things heavy military equipment were supplied for the separatists of Abhasia and Ossetia.

Of the planning of the operation tells also, according to Laaneots, that during last months Moscow apparently had given a job for the separatist leaders to provocate Georgia into a military strike. The nerves of the Georgian leaders did not withstand under pressure, and it made its strikes to South Ossetia and Moscow got the excuse for its operation. The commander compares this to the shelling of Mainila [1], done by the Red Army itself, from which the Soviet Union got an excuse to attack Finland in 1939.

According to the commander of the Estonian Defence Forces Georgia's biggest weakness was the lack of intelligence. Georgia could not get enough information of what the Russian troops are going to do and of their movements and positioning in the area quickly enough.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelling_of_Mainila

To summarize the signs that Russia planned the war:

1) Russia fixed a railroad in Abhasia. The railroad goes to the Russian border. It provides quick transportation for troops.

2) Russia transfered troops in advance to positions in North Ossetia. From there they came quickly through tunnels to Georgia.

3) The separatists of Abhasia and Ossetia were supplied with heavy military equipment.

4) During last months Moscow apparently had given a job for the separatist leaders to provocate Georgia into a military strike.

So, this Estonian military commander has the opinion that Russia prepared the whole thing well in advance.

[Rhodite 3]

Spokesperson

You have been around long enough to know the rules regarding quoting images (and it not being permitted).

+1WL

[Baff1 0]

otk-member, photos or links to sites that contain explicit material are prohibited on this forum.

Ok, i got it. Sorry.

For all of you, who want to understand a russian reaction - try to imagine, that Serbia attack Kosovo when US peacemakers was there.

And for you - all be a clear.

Russia wasn't just "peacekeeping" in South Ossetia. The Russians were giving South Ossetia citizens Russian passports too. Doesn't that seem like an attempt to unofficial annex South Ossetia into Russia?

There are some key differences between Kosovo and South Osseita. And, I just pointed out one of them.

Is that a big problem then?

I mean a government is supposed to serve it's people right, so if it's people would rather be ruled by another government isn't that their right?

Or at least wouldn't we all like them to be free to chose.

Do you feel for example that the government owns your home. Owns your land.

Is your house yours or your governments.

Why should Ossetia belong to the Georgians?

Because the Georgians say it does?

Is soveriegnty soveriegnty because you have the power to take it, or because your people give it to you?

If it is because you have the power to take it, then both Georgia and Russia were right to use force.

If it is because your people give it to you, then only Russia was right.

@Snafu

On the humor front.

http://ru.youtube.com/watch?v=NPpzFQOu6vk

[-Snafu- 78]

@Snafu

On the humor front.

http://ru.youtube.com/watch?v=NPpzFQOu6vk

Seen it. There's another one where Bush (the Dad) takes his kid (Georgia) and lets him poke the bear (Russia) at a Zoo. Georgia gets mauled while Bush walks away. Funny stuff.

Here's another article that may be of interest:

War Nerd: South Ossetia the War of My Dreams

[Balschoiw 0]

Quote[/b] ]What about Yugoslavia? The "defence"-alliance NATO bombed Belgrade and invaded the country. Then they overthrew an elected socialist government when there was an internal conflict. Hardly ten years ago. Sure it isn't the 21th century...

You sure would speak with a different tongue if your family members had been victims of the serbian initiated genocide, but as long as others die it´s not your socialist brainwashed problem, right ? With this kind of attitude you would fit great into the rows of people neglecting the mass genocide of jews during the 3rd Reich and still protest the involvement of allied forces to fight and bring down the 3rd Reich. If you think that we are that naive that we buy every inch of your phantasy-socialist-overcome-communist-nonsense you better go and look for another spot to toot your visions of rewritten history.

Quote[/b] ]Russia had all right to be in Georgia, and when they attacked russian troops russia has the right to defend itself.

While it is true that you are allowed to shoot back when shot upon on UN missions (at least most of the times) this does not mean that your role automatically changes to offenders. This is certainly not allowed and granted under the UN mandate. Any, I repeat, ANY agressive maneuvers that follow an attack on UN troops of whatever nation do NOT give the troop-spending country the right to go an offensive of any kind. This is simply not granted by the UN mandate. It´s self defense in your camp, at your convoi, at your installation. NOTHING else. I´ve personally been on such missions, so don´t try to tell me shit and stop trying to spread that nonsense in the forums here.

It´s your personal science fiction, but reality is different.

The massed russian forces operating on the ground and in the air indicate that this was a preplanned russian operation who were only waiting for a reason to go in. There is no way such machinery could be mobilized within days in Russia today. For me it´s a show of "strength", the living example of the new presidential powers, a course showing clearly to the west that Russia is still powerfull military wise, let´s say it was a show meant to demonstrate that Russia is still a military top-player, but for me it only demonstrated that even in an orchestrated scenario the russian military didn´t look too well. That´s the bottom line for me.

[Spokesperson 0]

No, I don't have humour when it comes to pro-west bashing.

Quote[/b] ]You just keep coming up with your own theories.

Check that video yourself again. The theory isn't mine, I got it from a western newspaper that interviewed non-british western military experts. That plane really is a SU-25, and it's lone.

Quote[/b] ]

Sorry to prove you wrong, but I do follow both eastern and western media. I'm not towards west. I condemn the Georgian attack, but also the Russian assault. Our difference is that you think it was legitimate.

Yes, that's the difference. I think that self-defence, no matter how much, is legitimate.

Quote[/b] ]So, this Estonian military commander has the opinion that Russia prepared the whole thing well in advance.

Naturally -Russia- is the one that prepared the whole thing in advance. They planned the georgian attack and planned their victory. The attacker didn't prepare anything beforehand even though maps of an invasion of abchazia were captured today.

So Georgia attacked? But Russia planned? The boot lickers in Estonia are more or less allied with Georgia. It's like listening to Mussolini's opinion on Hitler.

Georgia increased their military budget last year by 500% or more, that's a world record. US-troops have been training them and have more than 1k people there. Georgia was just waiting for a suitable time to attack when a russian counter-attack wasn't plausible. They gambled and lost, as a french diplomat expressed it.

Quote[/b] ]Spokesperson

You have been around long enough to know the rules regarding quoting images (and it not being permitted).

+1WL

Ok, what about my two other warning levels? I've had that stuff for more than a year I think.

Quote[/b] ]While it is true that you are allowed to shoot back when shot upon on UN missions (at least most of the times) this does not mean that your role automatically changes to offenders.

The thing is that the russians are no offenders.

Quote[/b] ]It´s your personal science fiction, but reality is different.

The massed russian forces operating on the ground and in the air indicate that this was a preplanned russian operation who were only waiting for a reason to go in. There is no way such machinery could be mobilized within days in Russia today. For me it´s a show of "strength", the living example of the new presidential powers, a course showing clearly to the west that Russia is still powerfull military wise, let´s say it was a show meant to demonstrate that Russia is still a military top-player, but for me it only demonstrated that even in an orchestrated scenario the russian military didn´t look too well. That´s the bottom line for me.

Things have changed. You still view Russia in the light of the 90ies. Probably Saakashvili did too when he threw his dice. The russian reinforcements are minor. A few hundred tanks is nothing. 10 000-20 000 trooops is nothing. Only in Chechnya (hardly one day away) there are more than 50 000 troops. There are probably more than 100 000 in the region. Also add that it's a border to a NATO-friendly country. It wouldn't surprise me if there's a military presence of more than 100 000 around the baltics too.

[-Snafu- 78]

Quote[/b] ]No, I don't have humour when it comes to pro-west bashing.

I feel sorry for you. I really do. If you are not able to step back, relax and have a laugh you will go through life as a miserable old sod. I can see the humour in my piece and Baff1's. Why can't you?

Also the that little piece was mine. It wasn't from some corporation or government.

[Spokesperson 0]

Quote[/b] ]No, I don't have humour when it comes to pro-west bashing.

I feel sorry for you. I really do. If you are not able to step back, relax and have a laugh you will go through life as a miserable old sod. I can see the humour in my piece and Baff1's. Why can't you?

Also the that little piece was mine. It wasn't from some corporation or government.

I've seen too much to be able to laugh about it.

[-Snafu- 78]

You can never see too much Pinky and the Brain.

Quote[/b] ]The thing is that the russians are no offenders

I'm pretty sure he means offensive.

[Baff1 0]

War Nerds had me laughing. Thanks for that one.

So did this.

Quote[/b] ]I've seen too much to be able to laugh about it.

[Clavicula_nox4817 0]

Quote[/b] ]No, I don't have humour when it comes to pro-west bashing.

I feel sorry for you. I really do. If you are not able to step back, relax and have a laugh you will go through life as a miserable old sod. I can see the humour in my piece and Baff1's. Why can't you?

Also the that little piece was mine. It wasn't from some corporation or government.

I've seen too much to be able to laugh about it.

Yeah, being an internet Che Guevera is real tough work.

[Spokesperson 0]

One day I will be the one to laugh. The people of South America, Nepal, Cyprus are already. There your kind of people have been stripped of all their US-backed power. The american economy is going down for good, and with it the entire capitalist system. It might take decades, but we'll be there. And we'll celebrate.

[-Snafu- 78]

You can have a laugh now. It's not that hard, honest.

On a serious note this article seems to show that Georgia had been gearing up for an offensive.

Global Security article

[billybob2002 0]

I mean a government is supposed to serve it's people right, so if it's people would rather be ruled by another government isn't that their right?

Or at least wouldn't we all like them to be free to chose.

Do you feel for example that the government owns your home. Owns your land.

Is your house yours or your governments.

Why should Ossetia belong to the Georgians?

Because the Georgians say it does?

Is soveriegnty soveriegnty because you have the power to take it, or because your people give it to you?

If it is because you have the power to take it, then both Georgia and Russia were right to use force.

If it is because your people give it to you, then only Russia was right.

My thought on secession is that if you want to secede, prepare for war. History has told us this. Anyway, the Russians were supposed to facilitate peace between Georgia and South Ossetia; however, they had their own interests that compromised them being neutral in this matter. They abused their authority on this matter by giving South Ossetia the option to get Russian passports and etc. I'm sure you would be pissed if a foreign country gave certain people in a region of your country passports.

[scubaman3D 0]

One day I will be the one to laugh. The people of South America, Nepal, Cyprus are already. There your kind of people have been stripped of all their US-backed power. The american economy is going down for good, and with it the entire capitalist system. It might take decades, but we'll be there. And we'll celebrate.

Well one good thing is that you'd finally shutup

But on the other hand, in your place will come those that will be just like you but will stand for freedom instead of tyranny - and you will crush them and suppress their ideas and beliefs because, after all, they are different from yours.

[USSRsniper 0]

I mean a government is supposed to serve it's people right, so if it's people would rather be ruled by another government isn't that their right?

Or at least wouldn't we all like them to be free to chose.

Do you feel for example that the government owns your home. Owns your land.

Is your house yours or your governments.

Why should Ossetia belong to the Georgians?

Because the Georgians say it does?

Is soveriegnty soveriegnty because you have the power to take it, or because your people give it to you?

If it is because you have the power to take it, then both Georgia and Russia were right to use force.

If it is because your people give it to you, then only Russia was right.

My thought on secession is that if you want to secede, prepare for war. History has told us this. Anyway, the Russians were supposed to facilitate peace between Georgia and South Ossetia; however, they had their own interests that compromised them being neutral in this matter. They abused their authority on this matter by giving South Ossetia the option to get Russian passports and etc. I'm sure you would be pissed if a foreign country gave certain people in a region of your country passports.

First of all south ossetia belongs to ossetians, and they decide what they want not georgians. They want to be part of russia, they even voted, but nooo georgia wants them. Id the would let the osetia go, there would be no separatists fighting with georgians. And don't forget people living in caucausus always fough agains't each other,  and Mr. Bush thinks he can fix it by helping Georgia becoming NATO. Russia kept peace there, but Georgians killed the russian peacekeepers. Israel got 3 soldier captured and started war, why russia can't when 8 soldiers KIA? Russians didn't force the passports to South ossetians they choose to get one, because ossetians want to be part of russia. The problem with US is, they stick their noses and start conflicts. And georgians can't understand it, US used them in Iraq, now US is not even helping their best friend Saakashvili, they just transported troops back to georgia and left them  

Russia didn't really invade, they started to fight back because georgians atatcked the south osetia with arty. and kileld russia peacekeepers. Ossetians are fighting for independance since 1990's. Not only some south ossetians have russian passports, but they use russian currency...

"South Ossetians nearly unanimously approved a referendum on November 12, 2006 opting for independence from Georgia. The referendum was hugely popular, winning between 98 and 99 percent of the ballots, flag waving and celebration marked were seen across South Ossetia, but elsewhere observers were less enthusiastic. International critics claimed that the move could worsen regional tensions, and the Tblisi government thoroughly discounted the results."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Ossetia

Where is democracy? when 99% had voted...

And funny how Spokesperson doesn't laugh... but i bet he does  laugh when somebody makes  jokes about US

This is basically what happend in south osetia... Saakashvili should use his head next time, if he survives.....

[Shadow NX 1]

About time someone posted that cartoon, sums things up pretty nicely me thinks...

[Albert Schweitzer 10]

well this cartoon has a few flaws and a few unwanted implications.

A) Ossetia obviously being portrayed as the child of russia here.

Children are expected to do everything their parents tell them to. They have no legal voice, they have limited civil rights and they are not allowed to sign contracts. So yes, Ossetia realy is a child, but is it the of russia or that of Georgia. In reality it is the child of both. Russia and Georgia are liked a divorced couple and Ossetia like the child without a real voice,  too subjective and corrupted by cheap presents.  

B)  

Quote[/b] ]First of all south ossetia belongs to ossetians, and they decide what they want not georgians

Incorrect, Ossetia still belongs to Georgia as Bavaria belongs to Germany.

Just because people want independance does not imply that they have the right to get it. It is pretty ironic that a country like russia defends the right to "vote" and "chose". Given the history of the USSR this position is not only higly opportunistic, no it is even impious. The ossetians dont want to be russian, they want to be independant. Is a child independant?

And is handing out free russian passports realy an indicator that russia wants Ossetia to find their own will.

[MK1 0]

Oh dear me..

"South Ossetia's Kokoity said the United States and Europe were responsible for the "genocide" in his nation.

"Georgia did not act on its own - most European countries, and the United States, are to blame for the genocide against the South Ossetian people," Kokoity said."

http://en.rian.ru/world/20080814/116036401.html

I wonder what he plans to achieve with that comment.