Russian Federation <> Georgia

edijs

edijs

Programmer
Okay, so it's been like three full days since the outbreak of a all-out war between the Russian Federation and the Republic of Georgia. I realise that most of the HWF members are quite far away, but I feel like it's happening right next to me (a few thousand kms approx.); Thus, I want to start off a opinion thread on this thing, and also for following the timeline of the war itself.

So, I'll start it off. First of all - both sides are a bit of aholes here. The Georgians - they wanted to stop the independence-wanting South Ossetia from getting loose by brutal military force, which sucks big time. But, the russians penetrated Georgian sovereign territory to "save" the south ossetians. Now, when the russians themselves were kicking some Chechnyan ass, they said that it's a russian internal thing and no countries are to judge them. but, when the georgians have the same internal thing, the russians go in with their military. C'mon, wtf? Thus, despide the fact that the Georgians were quite aggressive to their own people, there is no reason why russia should be attacking georgia at such a scale while calling it a Peace keeping op. Well, obviously not, as continuing the bombardement when the georgians have stopped and advancig beyond the borders of south ossetia doesn't freakin look to me like Peace keeping at all. So, as much as I hate to take sides, as a citizen of a NATO member state and also because of the official opinion on this thing of my government, I do think that the RF is pursuing somewhat different objectives here... One other thing that makes me take this position is the fact that the RF ambassador was openly threatening the latvian government on posting anti-russian opinions - you know, don't do that or else there's gonna be sad stuff ... damn, this all makes me quite nervous.
 
Hypocrisy is rife in this world. It's everywhere you look and there's bound to be less than noble intentions in the governments of the most powerful countries. Russia has always been a threatening black sheep of Europe and continues to be today. They're not as bad as the Chinese but it's obvious there are underhand practices being used.

As far as the conflict goes, I don't know that much about it. From what you've said, it's not Russia's business to go interfering. But it's not like it's the first time a country has become involved in a conflict under the guise of peace keeping.
 
Russia said it had pulled it's forces from Georgia yesterday but today on the BBC they filmed some Russian tanks still in south ossetia. who knows this might be the start of a 3rd world war they always seem to start in small skirmishes :x: Russia tested the UK's defenses nearly a year ago buy sending a bomber near UK territory (but not in it) and that alerted the UK to respond by sending its fighters, the Russians said that the UK fighters were professionals in their quick response.

I wonder who will win if there is a world war 3 and who will be on what side hmmmm

my guess is

Russia, China, North Korea, Cuba, Iran, Vietnam VS America, Europe, Canada, Australia, Japan, South Korea
 
Pimp said:
I wonder who will win if there is a world war 3
Click to expand...
nobody actually "wins" a war, the so called winner of a war is usually the government who spins the best propaganda to rally their people into taking up the fight for their country, which is "technically" lying but what do i know[ot]nothing, in the big scale of things[/ot]
 
I cannot come to a third world war. This would be the stupidest thing ever. I mean - in world war 2, all the aggressive countries were led by people who were absolutely politically sure that their regime is the best. Hitler - wanted to purge the world off jews, jipsees and so on, but Stalin wanted comunism everywhere. Today - it's all about money and resources. I think that the world leaders understand that fighting for money is stupid beucause, if governements collapse, money looses value (industries collapse and there's nothing you can buy for money anymore). Also fighing for resources is stupid because: 1. the war itself will take A LOT of resources and thus is not worth it. 2. all the valuable resources that we need are mostly un-renewable, so they'll eventually run out. So, a WW3 is DUMB in its essence.

But anyway, if not a WW3, something serious might be coming our way. I hope that the responsible people will be responsible enough to make the risk of a escalation as low as possible, but still keep in mind that aggression - from whatever side it comes, is stupid and cowardly.
 
edijs said:
I cannot come to a third world war. This would be the stupidest thing ever. I mean - in world war 2, all the aggressive countries were led by people who were absolutely politically sure that their regime is the best. Hitler - wanted to purge the world off jews, jipsees and so on, but Stalin wanted comunism everywhere. Today - it's all about money and resources. I think that the world leaders understand that fighting for money is stupid beucause, if governements collapse, money looses value (industries collapse and there's nothing you can buy for money anymore). Also fighing for resources is stupid because: 1. the war itself will take A LOT of resources and thus is not worth it. 2. all the valuable resources that we need are mostly un-renewable, so they'll eventually run out. So, a WW3 is DUMB in its essence.

But anyway, if not a WW3, something serious might be coming our way. I hope that the responsible people will be responsible enough to make the risk of a escalation as low as possible, but still keep in mind that aggression - from whatever side it comes, is stupid and cowardly.
Click to expand...


Your point is logical but you seem to have forgotten one factor and that is politicians are not responsible even when it comes to the economy of their own country.

Take for instance America and UK going after Iraq for oil (we all know its for oil and not for WMD) but yet the American government has spent billions upon billions of dollars to fund this war and they still haven't seen a single drop of oil.

So my friend wars will always occur no matter the cost.

But the question is, If WW III occurs will we use nuclear weapons and wipe each other out?????

A lot of people will say yes that's what will happen

but i see nuclear weapons in a different way and that is they are for defensive purposes and not for offensive. No country will dare launch a nuke because the second one nuke goes in the air hundred of other nukes will be launched on the aggressor.

So atm no one can launch a war on America or Russia or of any of the nuclear powered countries that is why America, UK and Isreal are worried about Iran achieving nuclear capabilities because then Iran will have the freedom to do anything it wants in the middle east and not America or Israel can do anything about it because Iran will have a nuke.
 
donkey42 said:
nobody actually "wins" a war, the so called winner of a war is usually the government who spins the best propaganda to rally their people into taking up the fight for their country, which is "technically" lying but what do i know[ot]nothing, in the big scale of things[/ot]
Click to expand...

We will all be losers
 
The Iraq war didn't take enough resources and the US Governmnet knew that it'll pay itself back. But world war 3 in no way will ever pay itself back because that would throw the world in a very,very bad economical crysis.
 
No, Edijs is right, all any country cares about is money, thats it. In war, its very difficult to make money, your economy basically come to a halt, there is no way a world war will break out, if there was to be a war, it would be like the cold war, and it would be done with long range weapons, not with infantry. Lastly, china could care less about the rest of the world, they are rich as all get out right now, their people are ignorant, ect ect, if war breaks loose, they loose all the control they have gained, as well as their profit.
Ok, back on topic, so, what is Russia getting at then? like, what is their ultimate goal if they are not fighting for "peace" ?? I thought i caught wind of something going on in Russia, but i didn't do any follow up, so i'm curious now.
 
What i basically was trying to say that the US did not start the Iraq war because of oil or money, because wars are very costly and you end up losing a lot out of it.
 
Pimp said:
What i basically was trying to say that the US did not start the Iraq war because of oil or money, because wars are very costly and you end up losing a lot out of it.
Click to expand...
From what I've seen, and based on the money that's changed hands, I would say that the US invaded Iraq because certain elements of our government wanted to make OPEC happy by dramatically reducing the amount of oil that Iraq produces. Exactly the opposite of what our very corporate and very biased media is reporting on this end ("war for oil", etc.), but from what I've seen, that's the theory which the facts support the most heavily.

As for Georgia, the whole situation sucks. It seems that the US government has been supporting the Georgian dictator, and are even offering NATO membership to Georgia. In fact, that they encouraged the invasion of Ossetia, promising US backing in the face of Russian retaliation. This of course, is not in the best interest of the US, Russia, or Georgia, but only a few individuals at the top of all parties involved. The US should have absolutely nothing to do with Georgia, let alone pushing for NATO induction. That would be like Russia offering Cuba membership in the Russian Federation, on the condition that they would invade the Florida Keys. The whole thing is nuts.
 
Letting Georgia into NATO is dumb. If the Russians make a move (and Georgia would be a member state), NATO has to attack Russia and that's insane. But then again, if NATO wouldn't attack, it would put the cause of NATO under a very big question mark of doubt.

As I stated already, attacking South Ossetia was a stupid thing the Georgians did and I don't know how far of a dictator Saakashvilli is, what I know is that it looks like blind violence is something of normal over there. See, the Georgians don't try to calm down their seperatic parts and don't try to come to an agreement, they just level them. Then, the Russians go in and kill a few thousand more. That's completely insane and dumb. Do they think that they're isolated or something? No military violence is justifyable on any of both sides. I think that Saakashvilli and Medvedev should be put into a dark jail cell, so that they can fight it out for a week or so. This all is really nuts.
 
Agreed, wholeheartedly. I expect "normal" people like us worldwide who happen to have some sense of what's going on are opposed to most things going on in the world today. Average folks just want to get by, live a good life, and do the best they can. Not die on some foreign battlefield so an aristocrat can buy another Yacht. It seems these people want nothing more than to bring about the end of the world, as speedily and messily as possible. Do they hand out LSD at country clubs, or what?
 
The U.S was the catalyst for making Russia behave in this manner, because the U.S set up a missile defense network in Poland, and they said to Russia and to the whole world that this is in response to Iran's Nuclear/missile program which the U.S sees as a threat and will therefore protect the U.S from Iran's missiles. I, like a lot of people laughed at this remark by the U.S to Russia because Iran doesn't even have the capabilities to launch a missile at Poland let alone the U.S, this all seemed a bit obvious to me and to the Russian people that the U.S put these missile to CONTAIN the Russian Federation. Russia is now surrounded from all sides. To make things worse for Russia, Georgia wanted to join NATO, which is why Russia reacted with such brutality. Russia was wrong to do what it has done to Georgia but from a military point of view they where correct, but they were also wrong from a political point of view. The U.S want to contain Russia and control the Middle East.
 
It gives me a sliver of hope to see that some people have a clue what's going on, and aren't happy with it. This whole thing reminds me of an old Clash song:


Guns on the Roof by The Clash said:
I swear by Almighty God
To tell the whole truth
And nothing but the truth

Guns guns
They torture all the women and children
Then they've put the men to the gun
'Cos across the human frontier
Freedom's always on the run

Guns guns a-shaking in terror
Guns guns killing in error
Guns guns guilty hands
Guns guns shatter the lands

A system built by the sweat of the many
Creates assassins to kill off the few
Take any place and call it a court house
This is a place where no judge can stand

Sue the lawyers and burn all the papers
Unlock the key of the legal papers
A jury of a billion faces
Shouted out condemned out of hand

Guns guns, and nobody's kidding
Guns guns, or foolin' around
Guns guns, the violence is singing
Guns guns, a silence the sound

'N I Iike to be in Aferica
A-beatin' on the final drum
'N I like to be in U. S. S. R
Makin' sure these things will come
'N I like to be in U. S. A
Pretending that the wars are done
'N I like to be in Europa
Saying goodbye to everyone

Guns guns there's guns on the roof
Guns guns they're made to shoot
Click to expand...
 
One complication people haven't mentioned is that many South Ossetians have Russian passports. So, Russia's argument is that it's basically protecting its citizens and that this is exactly what the US, for example, would do. When Iran took all those people hostage in Iran, obviously the US didn't just abandon them, same with POW's during wars ... etc.

But what are the real Russian motives? I think it's that basically Russia wishes it were back to the USSR pretty much and had control of those former republics. If not going back to real unity, Russia wishes to retain those surrounding countries in its "sphere of influence". And since Ossetians want to be pretty much a part of Russia, or at least in Russia's sphere of influence, Russia definitely wants to keep it that way rather than lose them to Georgia. In general, the more that Russia can stick its foot into the surrounding nations, the happier Russia's government will be. Thus, it also makes them happy to stick its tanks into Georgia. Finally, as Pimp pointed out, the prospects of Georgia becoming part of NATO may be a huge factor. I can never really tell how much the whole NATO thing matters to Russia. That might be the biggest thing, really. My dad mentioned, but I don't know myself, that NATO wanted Georgia to stabilize its issues with Ossetia/Abkhazia before Georgia can join. So, regaining control of them (forcefully) and stabilizing them that way could be Georgia's ticket into NATO. Realizing this, Russia did all that to prevent them from getting that ticket.

This is what I understand ... but I really didn't follow the whole episode much at all, too busy with school. Mainly just wanted to point out the fact of the passports.
 
about the passports, well, it's not that south ossetians got those passports after extensive training and exams (knowing russian good enough, knowing russian history, and all that stuff one usually has to know before becoming a citizen of, say, russia) - from the reports, the government was just giving those passports away - just like that. Sure, protecting your citizens is cool, but in this way it sucks. I don't wanna defent the US, because, although they are one of our strongest allies and we're in NATO as well, the "syndrom of big countries" hasn't walked past it too - all the unecessary power demonstrations have been just to show off and get something from it. Power, influence and stuff. And anyway, I guess, if Latvia were a big country, we'd be invading other countries as well.... all this is shit (sorry). I mean, globalization is inevitable and why should we fight instead of living together and thinking about problems that are of much more danger than some "Russian aggression" or interests in any region or anything political at all? I mean, sure, I'm young and to many still a kid, but what are those "adults" politicans doing anyway? Crap, I tell you.

So, there - I had to say 2 bad words, at least. This whole thing is just insane.
 
DaRuSsIaMaN said:
One complication people haven't mentioned is that many South Ossetians have Russian passports. So, Russia's argument is that it's basically protecting its citizens and that this is exactly what the US, for example, would do. When Iran took all those people hostage in Iran, obviously the US didn't just abandon them, same with POW's during wars ... etc.

But what are the real Russian motives? I think it's that basically Russia wishes it were back to the USSR pretty much and had control of those former republics. If not going back to real unity, Russia wishes to retain those surrounding countries in its "sphere of influence". And since Ossetians want to be pretty much a part of Russia, or at least in Russia's sphere of influence, Russia definitely wants to keep it that way rather than lose them to Georgia. In general, the more that Russia can stick its foot into the surrounding nations, the happier Russia's government will be. Thus, it also makes them happy to stick its tanks into Georgia. Finally, as Pimp pointed out, the prospects of Georgia becoming part of NATO may be a huge factor. I can never really tell how much the whole NATO thing matters to Russia. That might be the biggest thing, really. My dad mentioned, but I don't know myself, that NATO wanted Georgia to stabilize its issues with Ossetia/Abkhazia before Georgia can join. So, regaining control of them (forcefully) and stabilizing them that way could be Georgia's ticket into NATO. Realizing this, Russia did all that to prevent them from getting that ticket.

This is what I understand ... but I really didn't follow the whole episode much at all, too busy with school. Mainly just wanted to point out the fact of the passports.
Click to expand...

You Russians always come up with a way to start a fight always :doh: lol
 
Anti-Trend said:
...Said the imperialist neo-Roman. :chk: Not that the US is in any way excluded from that crass generalization.
Click to expand...

lol i no but i ain't going to saying anything about Great Britain or our one and only ally the Americans, we are the bullies well America is the big bad bully and UK is the wannabee bully who has no power only when it's sucking up to America. There you gone and made me say the truth, but you got to admit Russia is still a power and uses it's weight to bully other countries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top