International Politics Thread

[kavoven 4]

Quote[/b] ]40% is not a majority.

Did I say majority? 40% is high as there are 3 options. And it's increasing.

Sorry, but thats rubbish.

German media would tastefully represent every single person of those 40 % if the number was correct.

Don't trust a poll you didn't fake yourself!

You just have to ask the right people. There was a report a few weeks ago saying over 60% couldn explain what the GDR was. So how can there be 40% saying it was better?

[-Snafu- 77]

Quote[/b] ]I put the 70% in the top (UPI):

You can't read. It says 67%. Not that it changes the main point. Also it does not say why they want it back which would have made it more useful.

Quote[/b] ]Did I say majority? 40% is high as there are 3 options.

No you didn't say but my point still stands.

Quote[/b] ]And it's increasing.

Pray tell.

Quote[/b] ]

I think it's very easy to tell what's happened. On friday Georgia launched an invasion of South Ossetia. The next day there were reinforcements for the russian side. Nobody disagrees with this. Still you question what I say. There were no georgian soldiers in South Ossetia at all before friday. How did they appear?

That's a general overview of the events which is not even what I questioned.     Nobody really knows exactly what happened or what's happening. Like how those Peacekeepers got hit or if Georgia actually committed ethnic cleansing.

Anyway this is what I originally questioned:

Quote[/b] ]To me it's quite evident who's right in this conflict:

My bold.

The whole situation is a cluster fuck. I think it's pretty hard to tell who is right and wrong in this especially given the fact that both countries scrambled very quickly to the world media to shed good light on themselves and bad light on the other. Check this out.

Quote[/b] ]Yes, compared to most of you, not all, I do.

Thanks for admitting your full of shit.

Quote[/b] ]I think she should be put in a rehabilitation camp just like the last Chinese emperor. If she hadn't been that old, maybe she could've worked as a toilet cleaner.

Didn't answer the original question. Yet another troll post.

Oh and most people here don't seem to care what you think.

EDIT:

Quote[/b] ]Jeez, the numbers are not from the rus government. They are from the South Ossetians. And they, if anybody, should be the only ones who are able to provide the correct numbers. If they want.

From linked article above:

Quote[/b] ]The figures for death tolls was also disputed. South Ossetian officials claimed at least 1,400 people died in the first night of artillery shelling, but have yet to fully substantiate this claim.

Quote[/b] ]But your ignorance shows that western media has avoided to inform you about it.

Your basing that off one person?

LOL

I knew about it and many others such as my friends and people I have seen post on other forums.

[Teo 0]

In relation to the ongoing conflict in Georgia I personally believe Russia has overstepped the mark by moving south beyond the South Ossetian and Abkhazia borders. If Russia had stopped at the borders of each province Georgia would have lost the international public relations war, but they did not.

If Russia does not agree to a ceasefire after negotiations with the French foreign minister and after the NATO Russian talks they will be deemed to the 'uncompromising aggressor'.

I do believe the Russian mobilisation of their 58th Army had been planned and was executed as such and it is a bit suspicious considering both the US and EU presidents were both in Beijing at the time.

However I do believe that the Georgian forces started this conflict (source: http://www.janes.com/news/security/iwr/iwr080808_1_n.shtml)

It reminds me of Israel's invasion of Lebanon in July 2006. I'm guessing Russia will keep a short term buffer of 30 or 50 miles south of each border until an agreement can be reached.

Get out your old copies of Ghost Recon and see what the terrain is like in Georgia.

Oh and if the Russians (God forbid) push for Tbilisi or the oil pipeline well I can imagine the Iraqis might get their American troop pull out as they wished.

[kavoven 4]

Reuters reported Georgian combat choppers still attacking hostile positions... Perhaps there are some generals who don't accept the cease fire ordered by there president.

Reuters also says that information given by Georgia regarding the occupation of the city Gori aren't correct and that there are no Russian troops visible on the streets.

Furthermore Bush says that the invasion of a sovereign neighbouring country isn't acceptable in the 21st centuary. I think he is the only person on the whole planet I don't believe these words...

[Teo 0]

Yeah I read that bit about the Georgian air attack in South Ossetia, find it odd though that the Russians haven't taken out the Georgian air bases or have they?

Any news on where the 2,000 Gerogian troops from Iraq have been based?

We all know that after this it's going to be a guerilla war.

[Spokesperson 0]

Are you kidding? The "exact" value is 67% yes. How many would think that in the west? All we learn is that commies are crap and that all hated socialism, when it really is the other way around.

If the USSR still existed like a majority wanted (78%), this kind of nationalist-inspired war would never happen. Georgians, ossetians and russians lived together peacefully for decades. Now there's a new element of nations and flags, so everyone has to kill eachother for the sake of a border and pride. What good is nationalism? Georgians and russians loved eachother, now there's only hate. And this is due to west installing puppets like Sakashvili and Jushenko through heavily funded modern coup d'etats. All who support the west are "democracies" like Saudi Arabia or Ukraine, while Belorussia is called a dictatorship. Just like all other anti-west countries.

Well, I think Russia does what's correct based on the fact that Georgia attacked a peacekeeping force. If you shoot from the other side of the border, only a fool would stay like a sitting duck. This is 100% certain information and not subject to the "propaganda war".

Apparently Saakashvili had minor imperialist ambitions in his neo-liberal head that grew out of proportion. He punched a wall and now the roof falls over him. Just like all those old british queens and kings who had their workers and peasants slaughtered in millions on their private battlefields while taking the fruits of other people's labour.

There will hardly be a guerilla war as Russians won't occupy Georgia. They just want to make sure that this crazy president signs a truce, ie to retreat all troops from those territories and promise to never attack them again.

This doesn't seem to be understandable terms for EU and the US.

If he won't sign the peace treaty, Tblisi will probably be taken and Sakashvili brought before justice.

[-Snafu- 77]

Your too easy to rile up.  

Quote[/b] ]All we learn is that commies are crap and that all hated socialism, when it really is the other way around.

ORLY?

Studied at every educational establishment in the West have we?

Also the words exact and propaganda war don't need " around them.

Quote[/b] ]Georgia attacked a peacekeeping force

Intentionally? Nobody is that stupid.

Quote[/b] ]If you shoot from the other side of the border

Georgians fired into the Russian border?

[echo1 0]

They just want to make sure that this crazy president signs a truce, ie to retreat all troops from those territories and promise to never attack them again.

The president called for an immeadiate cease-fire, and actually has put his signature to one. How the Russians respond? By making more and more incursions into soveirgn Georgian territory. What's your point again?

[otk-member 0]

He asked ceasefire from west, but his army still fired in our troops.

He declade a ceasefire at 5.00 10th august, but his army possible dont hear about it.

He is a liar.

New movie - watch on TV and News sites!

[akm74 1]

Quote[/b] ]Oh and if the Russians (God forbid) push for Tbilisi or the oil pipeline well I can imagine the Iraqis might get their American troop pull out as they wished

LOL.  Georgian army was trained by US as far as I know. If they were trained by "novaScotian" or any other 3rd world country instead, they may last much longer than 2 days.

Good video by CNN

http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up....rc=news

They "tactical retreat" so fast... leave all armor behind. Now i know HOW to defeat Taliban in 24 hours.

[scubaman3D 0]

LOL. Georgian army was trained by US as far as I know. If they were trained by "novaScotian" or any other 3rd world country instead, they may last much longer than 2 days.

They "tactical retreat" so fast... leave all armor behind. Now i know HOW to defeat Taliban in 24 hours.

um...shto?

As a minor point, that was a BBC video, not CNN.

But I'm confused by your other statements. Nova Scotia is a Provence in Canada, which I'm sure you're aware, is not a 3rd world country.

Second, what does the Taliban have to do with Georgia?

Also, I think we're capable of having a more intelligent conversation than "my country could beat your country in a war..."

Russia invaded a sovereign, democratically elected country on the pretense of "defending civilians". This is ridiculous and simply is not consistent with their actions. Dropping unguided weapons in exclusively civilian populated areas is resulting in many civilian deaths.

Lets face it - Russia has one of the most horrifying human rights records of the last 100 years and they aren't exactly the beacon of freedom and integrity in the world.

[otk-member 0]

Russia invaded a sovereign, democratically elected country on the pretense of "defending civilians". This is ridiculous and simply is not consistent with their actions. Dropping unguided weapons in exclusively civilian populated areas is resulting in many civilian deaths.

Ok. I'll try to see a history...

USA invaded a sovereign, democratically elected country on the pretense of "defending civilians". This is ridiculous and simply is not consistent with their actions. Dropping unguided weapons in exclusively civilian populated areas is resulting in many civilian deaths.

I talk about Serbia. Remember that??

Or, Israel invaded a sovereign country on the pretense of "save 2 peoples". This is ridiculous and simply is not consistent with their actions. Dropping unguided weapons in exclusively civilian populated areas is resulting in many civilian deaths.

Anymore? Iraq - a sovereign country. USA invaded on the pretense of "destroy chemical and nuclear weapons". They still dont find it... But they make a most terrorism state of world there.

So, claim down and relax. We do our job, like we want.

[gsleighter 0]

Nobody here's defending US actions in Iraq. In fact, most US citizens aren't happy with the war in Iraq, and Bush Jr is most likely going to be remembered as the worst president the US has ever had. However, I'm allowed to think and say all those things, and even post them online or in a letter to my newspaper (Which is privately owned, and has nothing to do with the government and can print whatever they want) without fear of reprisal or the secret service or Putin coming for me in the middle of the night. So yeah, my administration lied and put my country in a bad spot, costing thousands of lives and billions of dollars. The US will pay for the mistakes of our elected leaders for decades, so tell me something I don't know, because this information on the invasion of Iraq is common knowledge and not at all relevant to what's going on in Georgia.

Here's what's going on now, though. Russia's talked about defending civilians and now seems to be mounting an invasion of the country, and will probably use their "Bring the president to justice for war crimes" rhetoric to justify a complete occupation of Tblisi and conquer the country.

I've been pragmatic about this while more information became available, and it's looking less and less like a limited-style peacekeeping operation and more like an invasion to conquer Georgia every passing day.

[Spokesperson 0]

Quote[/b] ]Intentionally? Nobody is that stupid.

They didn't care about it. They invaded the city and province the peace keepers were set to protect and killed ten of them.

What do you want them to do? Everything apart from shooting back? Why? Because they are russians?

Quote[/b] ]Georgians fired into the Russian border?

They keep firing into the border of South Ossetia, where russian peace keepers are stationed.

Quote[/b] ]The president called for an immeadiate cease-fire, and actually has put his signature to one. How the Russians respond? By making more and more incursions into soveirgn Georgian territory. What's your point again?

Why would they sign a peace treaty at that time? Georgian troops were still shooting in South Ossetia and Abchazia. The Georgian troops have to be moved back to their old positions first. And they have to promise never to attack again. So unless Georgia accepts those terms it's quite clear that you attack until you reach the president and force him to sign.

Now the russians have reached their objectives, but naturally they won't pull back out of Georgia like west wants.

And who cares if a country has "democratically" elected leaders? Some of us remember the Georgian elections, and besides a capitalist system can never be democratic. Now the Georgians attacked South Ossetia and its peace keepers. They started the war. Now suddenly when they are losing territory themselves west talks about them being democratic and nice, which somehow means that you can't fight them back.

[MK1 0]

Quote[/b] ]Intentionally? Nobody is that stupid.

They didn't care about it. They invaded the city and province the peace keepers were set to protect and killed ten of them.

What do you want them to do? Everything apart from shooting back? Why? Because they are russians?

So, based on this view Austria, China, Canada and Finland should have attacked Israel when they bombed a UN observation station two years ago?

Come on! You can't seriously believe that this would justify a full scale assault on Georgia?

source: http://en.wikinews.org/wiki....servers

[echo1 0]

Quote[/b] ]Its a sad fact of life that when there are serious socioeconomic problems in a country, or when a country has bad leadership, people become supportive of extremist politics... But that doesn't suddenly means that the old ways or extremist ways are automatically right, it just means that the government isn't doing its job. If, for example, a majority of Germans who lived during the 1930s and 1940s said that they thought everything was much better under the fascist system, would you support fascism?

Who says socialism is extreme?

We arent talking about Socialism here... we're talking about the USSR and GDR which were communist countries. The USSR didn't do much for the average person, and the economy as a whole, and what the hell was the deal with the Berlin wall?

Quote[/b] ]And who cares if a country has "democratically" elected leaders? Some of us remember the Georgian elections, and besides a capitalist system can never be democratic.

Who cares if 70% of Russians "democratically" prefered the USSR? Russia isnt exactly the paradigm of free and fair democracy... I think youre just shooting yourself in the foot here. And why exactly can a capatilist system never be democratic? I think most Western nations are more democratic than whatever tiny little number of communist states are left.

[Commando84 0]

I dunno what spokesperson is smoking or drinking but whats socialism or communism got to do at all with the whole gerogia vs russia incident???

Imo georgia brought the whole war on itself by shooting down them peacekeepers, but the russian tactic of sending hundreds of tanks and troops seem a bit overkill, couldn't they just send 3-4 kamovs and hinds to mop up the georgian forces? Just hit tab key and fire heat seeking anti tank missiles? And having a few migs or something guard south ossetian airspace against 'em georgian aircrafts?

But hey russian commanders maybe like their tanks alot more

[Spokesperson 0]

Quote[/b] ]So, based on this view Austria, China, Canada and Finland should have attacked Israel when they bombed a UN observation station two years ago?

Come on! You can't seriously believe that this would justify a full scale assault on Georgia?

An invasion justifies reinforcements for the peace-keeping side. If the violence goes on and the aggressor shoots from his side of the border it's correct to move in and take him out.

It's not just some bombing, it was a fullscale georgian assault.

Quote[/b] ]We arent talking about Socialism here... we're talking about the USSR and GDR which were communist countries. The USSR didn't do much for the average person, and the economy as a whole, and what the hell was the deal with the Berlin wall?

You have no clue what you're talking about. There have never been any communist countries and no country has ever called itself that. GDR and USSR were socialist countries. The USSR did a lot for the international working class. Thanks to the revolution western powers had to introduce universal suffrage in fear of revolutions at home. Same goes for many social reforms which were first introduced in the USSR. People had a better life in the USSR, compared to modern free-market Russia.

Quote[/b] ]Who cares if 70% of Russians "democratically" prefered the USSR? Russia isnt exactly the paradigm of free and fair democracy... I think youre just shooting yourself in the foot here. And why exactly can a capatilist system never be democratic? I think most Western nations are more democratic than whatever tiny little number of communist states are left.

Russia had a western-style neo-liberal government and economy during Jeltsin, but it collapsed in 1998. There are no free eand fair democracies anywhere. Capitalism isn't compatible with democracy because democracy requires both economic and political democracy. You can't have economic democracy if you have a few who own the means of production. Plutocracy reflects itself in the political life. In the US for instance the candidate that has put most money into his campaign is the one who wins, no exceptions. And where to get this money from? Who has money, and why do they give? The corporations and major share-holders only support the candidates that protect their interests. Anti-capitalist candidates stand no chance in a plutocratical society like the US.

There is no democracy anywhere, on a state level. Cuba is the most democratic country though as it has advanced elements of political end economical democracy. If one part doesn't exist it will counteract the other.

The georgian minister of interior said that they will have a truce now, but that they will be back. They are just re-grouping. Maybe they are waiting for their mobilized soldiers? I mean a few 100k people could easily stop the Russian advance and blow it back to Russia.

Our pal Raul Castro wrote this:

Quote[/b] ]Cuba, threatened by U.S. forces, cannot, as a matter of principle, agree with a cease-fire without the withdrawal of the invaders. If Cuba were attacked by foreign forces, it would never accept such a cease-fire.

[echo1 0]

I dunno what spokesperson is smoking or drinking but whats socialism or communism got to do at all with the whole gerogia vs russia incident???  

For Spokesperson, everything in life is an epic battle between the evil, exploitive capatilists and the all-loving fluffy communists...

[MK1 0]

Quote[/b] ]So, based on this view Austria, China, Canada and Finland should have attacked Israel when they bombed a UN observation station two years ago?

Come on! You can't seriously believe that this would justify a full scale assault on Georgia?

An invasion justifies reinforcements for the peace-keeping side. If the violence goes on and the aggressor shoots from his side of the border it's correct to move in and take him out.

It's not just some bombing, it was a fullscale georgian assault.

And how many times in the history of the UN has any country started a full scale war with the one of the conflicting sides because of similar actions let me ask you?

How about "negotiating a peaceful resolution"? Anyone ever heard of that?

And it was not an assault on the russian peacekeepers, but they died in a shelling of the area which was then followed by the assault if I remember correctly.

source: http://uk.reuters.com/article/burningIssues/idUKL818726020080808

Tell me this, had Russia attacked SO if the peacekeepers died of SO shelling?

I'm not trying to defend either side here, and who ever started this should be held reponsible, but clearly the russian intervention has been overkill.

[Spokesperson 0]

Quote[/b] ]For Spokesperson, everything in life is an epic battle between the evil, exploitive capatilists and the all-loving fluffy communists...

No, nobody is evil or good. It's just a clash of rational interests. I'm no capitalist, therefore I'm against capitalism. If I was a capitalist I would be for it. And I would exploit people like you legally, who at the same time are happy about it. Couldn't get better slaves.

Quote[/b] ]And how many times in the history of the UN has any country started a full scale war with the one of the conflicting sides because of similar actions let me ask you?

Many times, just check the Korean war. But people are generally not that stupid as the puppet Sakashvili is.

It's no full scale war. Maybe it is for Georgia. Russians were just removing Georgian troops from a territory where no such should be.

Quote[/b] ]And it was not an assault on the russian peacekeepers, but they died in a shelling of the area which was then followed by the assault if I remember correctly.

What kind of people do you think peacekeepers are? If you attack an area peacekeepers are set to defend you will get fired at.

Georgia blasted the whole city, full of women and children. Their goal was to eliminate them and make the ossetians suffer for their disobedience. Peacekeepers are supposed to defend civilians.

Quote[/b] ]I'm not trying to defend either side here, and who ever started this should be held reponsible, but clearly the russian intervention has been overkill.

That's bull. 1) Russians fought back Georgians from territories they were supposed to defend in line with international treaties.

2) In war there is no such thing as overkill. Nothing is supposed to be fair. On the contrary, having an edge is very important.

If Romania decides to launch an invasion of the US you can't expect the US to combat the romanians with the same amount of men.

[scubaman3D 0]

USA invaded...

Or, Israel invaded...

Anymore? Iraq - a sovereign country. USA invaded...

These are apples and oranges. You are comparing two unlike things.

Besides, we are not talking about the USA or Israel, we are talking about Russia. Don't change the subject.

And given Russia's history of war since WWII, I would say "Doing the job like we want" includes war atrocities and shameless propaganda as part of the repertoire. And indeed, they are quite skilled at this.

[Baff1 0]

Serbia was a little more clear-cut in terms of who was committing atrocities on who, and Kosovo isn't being annexed by a rival superpower, they're becoming independent.

Kosovo is being annexed by the EU.

[Baff1 0]

Had NATO membership been granted, it would have prevented the Russian retaliation, but it could have lead to Russia switching off the energy supply lines that feed so much of Europe.

Alternatively had NATO membership been granted half the world could have died 3 days ago.

[MK1 0]

Quote[/b] ]And how many times in the history of the UN has any country started a full scale war with the one of the conflicting sides because of similar actions let me ask you?

Many times, just check the Korean war. But people are generally not that stupid as the puppet Sakashvili is.

Many times? I'm not aware of that many. Could you please show me? And Korean war was over 50 years ago! This is the 21st century and we don't deal with things like this in the civilized world, especially under the mandate of the UN.

Besides, this hadly was a peacekeeping mission after the hostilities started. The russian assault was not even approved by the UN, unlike the Korean war.

Quote[/b] ]It's no full scale war. Maybe it is for Georgia. Russians were just removing Georgian troops from a territory where no such should be.

And bombing civilian targets like houses, airfields and even the gas and oil lines.. sounds like a pure-hearted peacekeeping mission to me.

Quote[/b] ]What kind of people do you think peacekeepers are? If you attack an area peacekeepers are set to defend you will get fired at.

Depends on the mission. The peacekeepers have rules of engagement and generally the idea is ".. not to go after and kill militia,'' but rather to ''establish and maintain peace and security.'' [http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0WDQ/is_2000_Sept_11/ai_65731076]

Quote[/b] ]Their goal was to eliminate them and make the ossetians suffer for their disobedience.

This is purely your view of the events. There is nothing which would state this as a fact.

Quote[/b] ]That's bull. 1) Russians fought back Georgians from territories they were supposed to defend in line with international treaties.

Not defend, but to observe a ceasefire. And on the complete contrary, even your ex-president Putin "..said that Russia would be compelled to retaliate." [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_South_Ossetia_war#cite_note-putinvows-65]

That's hardly a part of the peacekeeping operations by the UN. Russia made it personal for Georgia and that's where they went wrong.

Quote[/b] ]2) In war there is no such thing as overkill. Nothing is supposed to be fair. On the contrary, having an edge is very important.

But you just said this was not war for the russians..

Oh and you sill didn't answer my question wether you find it justified for russians to attack SO had they shelled the russian peacekeepers..