# Georgia & Russia



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

Georgia & Russia, and nobody has started a thread here about this important issue.

My thoughts of Russia is that it is going to take back all of the countries it controled as the ussr because nobody is going to stop them and they know that. It is also a sign that Bush is weak by his continueing to do nothing, since hot air is nothing. If Russia was doing its words it couldn't be in Georgia.

What are the thoughts of others here about why Russia is really in Georgia?

Karl, do you still believe Russia is responsible and should have a big military?


----------



## radix023 (May 3, 2007)

WA said:


> Georgia & Russia, and nobody has started a thread here about this important issue.
> 
> My thoughts of Russia is that it is going to take back all of the countries it controled as the ussr because nobody is going to stop them and they know that. It is also a sign that Bush is weak by his continueing to do nothing, since hot air is nothing. If Russia was doing its words it couldn't be in Georgia.
> 
> ...


It's oil. The BTC pipeline is a challenge to Russia's lock on central Asian oil. That's what to watch. As has been amply demonstrated, the governments of the West will not risk much just for the sake of the Georgian people.

I'll bet the Ukrainians are wondering if they should have given up their nukes post-breakup.

The other narratives are that the EU fomented this with the Kosovo precedent. Also that NATO expansion was the threat. There may be some validity to those, but it's really a zero-sum-game of global power.

You have to remember what Putin said when Bush made some comments about Putin shutting down a newspaper or maybe jailing a tv reporter. He said that Bush had had Dan Rather taken off the air, this is the same thing. Putin really believed that. This is a man without the mental infrastructure to conceive of a free society. As McCain said, "When I look into his eyes, I see K. G. B."


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

radix023 said:


> It's oil. The BTC pipeline is a challenge to Russia's lock on central Asian oil. That's what to watch. As has been amply demonstrated, the governments of the West will not risk much just for the sake of the Georgian people.
> 
> I'll bet the Ukrainians are wondering if they should have given up their nukes post-breakup.
> 
> ...


As McCain said, "When I look into his eyes, I see K. G. B." McCain should have added greed in his eyes, too. I think it is Putin and his greed, and greed would include oil. His wacky rational about Bush and Rather is a poor lie. I don't think Putin is a very good liar. At least he can't use "US is in Iraq stealing oil".

Anyway, however you look at this mess he is making the world is going down hill. History repeats itself and the 'better powers that be' are doing nothing and Putin knows that, which is a green light to him from them to do more evil. Look at Hitler and what 'better powers that be' did. The reward was millions dead in war that should have been stopped at the beginning. It is better to confront this at the beginning than much larger tragedy later. I think without a doubt that if Western Europen nations and other careing nations pulled into Georgia with tanks and war jet and started fighting for Georgia that Putin would pull out and that would be the end of Putins plans to take more and more and more. Putins plans are more than Georgia and oil is only part of the excuse for being there. If there is a time for Western Europe to pull together powerfully it is now instead of being a bunch of pansies.


----------



## Spence (Feb 28, 2006)

It looks like the president of Georgia started this whole mess by going after pro-Russian territory, and the Russians used the excuse to lay the smack down. There's a lot of blame to go around...

Russia wants control of the pipeline, the EU needs Russian natural gas...is NATO even applicable in this situation considering it now has some two dozen+ members?

-spence


----------



## Country Irish (Nov 10, 2005)

Spence has nailed it exactly. The only think I might add is that western nations may have put the Georgians up to this stunt. With oil and natural gas involved it is highly likely Bush had a few words of support for Georgia's posturing.


----------



## Helvetia (Apr 8, 2008)

Besides, what we were going to do? All of our troops are busy at the moment in the Middle East.


----------



## Asterix (Jun 7, 2005)

.............and besides, who are we to talk, when we invaded a sovereign country under the flimsiest of excuses.


----------



## Relayer (Nov 9, 2005)

A couple of things to keep in mind...

1. The area of South Ossetia, pro-Russian feelings notwithstanding, is officially part of the Republic of Georgia and is entirely within the internationally recognized border of Georgia. The "stunt" is actually a Georgian "invasion" of their own territory. 

2. The BTC oil pipeline (and a parallel gas pipeline) runs fairly near to the undefined 'border' of the breakaway South Ossetia region. Russia definitely is still pi**ed about losing Georgia, et al, and would love to get South Ossetia back (if not all of Georgia) and possibly extend that to the area through which the BTC runs. The US and Europe certainly have a vested interest in keeping any part of this pipeline out of Russian control. The very reason it was built was to bypass Russia for oil transport of out of the Caspian Sea region. The Clinton administration pushed very hard for the BTC as a critical part of their energy/security strategy.

3. Even if the US was not currently involved in any war we still would not now (or anytime in the near future) be sending troops to the Republic of Georgia.


----------



## Spence (Feb 28, 2006)

Country Irish said:


> With oil and natural gas involved it is highly likely Bush had a few words of support for Georgia's posturing.


I believe we've been supporing Georgia with military training etc... as they've been a supporter of our actions in Iraq. That's not to say that we endorsed this event.

The NYTimes had some good bits on this today. Clearly the media has been anti-Russia, although they certainly have played this to their advantage.

-spence


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

I have to admit that I'm a little perplexed at the pro-Russian attitude so many on the left here in America are taking. Is it just an anti-Bush thing, or do you guys secretly hope that once the old Russian empire is back together it'll go commie again?


----------



## vwguy (Jul 23, 2004)

Yeah, I had a dream about the Russian/Georgian conflict last night. This whole situation w/ Russia is very weird, don't they think there will be any reprucutions? Who's really in control if they're signing ceasefires and not following them? Strange, strange, strange...

Brian


----------



## Country Irish (Nov 10, 2005)

Let's have an intermission for a moment so I can feed the paranoia. This could be played into a major war so Bush could declare us to be in extreme peril, suspend the constitution, remain in power for life or until the emergency is over and we all live in a police state for perpetuity. On the other hand I have always wondered what a vacation on the Black Sea would be like.
Is this something that gives you comfort PT?

OK now back to rational discourse.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

Spence said:


> It looks like the president of Georgia started this whole mess by going after pro-Russian territory, and the Russians used the excuse to lay the smack down. There's a lot of blame to go around...
> 
> Russia wants control of the pipeline, the EU needs Russian natural gas...is NATO even applicable in this situation considering it now has some two dozen+ members?
> 
> -spence


So, the pro-Russian territory of Georgia wants to depart Georgia like the Confederates wanted to leave the US- still gives Russia no right to be in Georgia.

I think the greed of Putin will still give the EU natural gas, though he will throw a fit. The EU needs to stand up and be counted.


----------



## Zot! (Feb 18, 2008)

Much of the old USSR's expansion and repression was based on a deep-seated paranoia of invasion. The situation has reversed today- what you basically have is a resurgent superpower experiencing levels of prosperity it hasn't had in years and feeling its oats. I think both Putin and a large number of Russians look at the US and think "who needs 'em?"

Unlike a lot of people, the prospect of a McCain presidency does not make me feel at ease. Strident rhetoric may make for good sound bites, but everybody seems to have forgotten that both our countries have literally _thousands_ of nuclear weapons pointed at one another. That's really enough to end all life as we know it on this planet. Reagan stood firm against Russia, but the man also had a healthy fear of Armageddon. Somehow, McCain just doesn't inspire the same level of confidence in me. This is a situation that calls for both resolve and tact.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

vwguy said:


> Yeah, I had a dream about the Russian/Georgian conflict last night. This whole situation w/ Russia is very weird, don't they think there will be any reprucutions? Who's really in control if they're signing ceasefires and not following them? Strange, strange, strange...
> 
> Brian


Not so strange really...I'm having flashbacks to the mid to late 1970s; sitting in a subterranean bunker, waiting for the go to war order to be broadcast over the primary alerting system...and praying it would never come. Back then we called the strategy MAD...strangely appropriate, I think!


----------



## Concordia (Sep 30, 2004)

https://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/20/opinion/20friedman.html?_r=1&em&oref=slogin

Today's column from Tom Friedman.


----------



## Asterix (Jun 7, 2005)

Gentlemen, what is good for the goose is good for the gander. 

My guess is that Putin is trying to create a power balance (after all, the economy of Russia is flourishing well thanks to the oil prices) so instead of the solitary super power that we've been since the end of the cold war, why not have 2 or more (since the EU is a sort of aspiring "super power" consortium to check America)? :icon_smile:


----------



## Asterix (Jun 7, 2005)

Concordia said:


> https://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/20/opinion/20friedman.html?_r=1&em&oref=slogin
> 
> Today's column from Tom Friedman.


Excellent article and wise words.


----------



## radix023 (May 3, 2007)

A very respectable effort by Mr. Freidman. Exceeding my expectations in point of fact. Speaking of which:

Saakashvili has been tactically stupid. I think that has to be conceded in an honest accounting. From the reports, the damage to civilian facilities from the Georgian suppression of the Russian-sponsored provocations by pet militias was excessive and offensive to norms of civilized conduct (if there is such a thing in war). However, their strategic and moral position remains unassailable. Georgia is a sovereign nation. Within undisputedly recognized international borders both South Ossetia and Abkhazia are part of Georgia. Which makes Russia's actions against the UN Charter.

I hope I understand correctly: which is that the sincere desire of the OECD nations and the US is to preserve the right of self-determination for all peoples. However, such principles positions may fall prey to realpolitick considerations of energy policy. In my humble opinion, that would be a moral travesty and a shame on Western civilization.


----------



## Spence (Feb 28, 2006)

WA said:


> So, the pro-Russian territory of Georgia wants to depart Georgia like the Confederates wanted to leave the US- still gives Russia no right to be in Georgia.


I don't believe I said that.

-spence


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

I haven't really had a chance to read up on this one much yet, so would someone please tell me what, if anything, Russia has gained by this (aside from ill-will from their neighbors)?


----------



## radix023 (May 3, 2007)

PedanticTurkey said:


> I haven't really had a chance to read up on this one much yet, so would someone please tell me what, if anything, Russia has gained by this (aside from ill-will from their neighbors)?


The ability to pinch closed (BP already closed the BTC pipeline) the only way oil can leave central asia other than through Russian hands.


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

I'm pretty sure they had that already.


----------



## Pentheos (Jun 30, 2008)

My wife, who grew up in Bulgaria under Communism and is fluent in Russian, tells me that the Russian media currently claims two reasons for war:

1. The Georgians were mistreating the Russians in South Ossetia.

2. The Georgians were preparing to attack Russia.

The first claim is probably likely; the second absurd.

The real reason(s)? My wife thinks two things: oil and respect.

Note also that the Russians waited until the Olympics to attack. I'd guess they did this in part so that people's attention would be focused elsewhere.

The bear is awake again. Good thing our military, if needed, could neutralize Russia fairly quickly.


----------



## Laxplayer (Apr 26, 2006)

Pentheos said:


> My wife, who grew up in Bulgaria under Communism and is fluent in Russian, tells me that the Russian media currently claims two reasons for war:
> 
> 1. The Georgians were mistreating the Russians in South Ossetia.
> 
> ...


Oh really? And what if China sides with Russia?

_China and Russia were bitter rivals during the Cold War, but their ties have warmed considerably in recent years, partly from a mutual desire to counter U.S. influence in world affairs._

https://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/07/20/international/i213339D41.DTL


----------



## M6Classic (Feb 15, 2008)

PedanticTurkey said:


> I haven't really had a chance to read up on this one much yet, so would someone please tell me what, if anything, Russia has gained by this (aside from ill-will from their neighbors)?


Now that is most interesting because in another thread you stated...



PedanticTurkey said:


> The last thing I want is to have dim-witted journalists trying to "educate" me and tell me what the "real" issues behind the news are. We get enough of that as it is.


So, exactly what...if anything...are you planning to read to learn about the Georgia versus Russia conflict?

Buzz


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

Yes, Buzz, it's very hard to distinguish between a situation where one is looking for facts and where one is looking for analysis.

Well, hard for you, anyway.


----------



## M6Classic (Feb 15, 2008)

PedanticTurkey said:


> Yes, Buzz, it's very hard to distinguish between a situation where one is looking for facts and where one is looking for analysis.
> 
> Well, hard for you, anyway.


Hey, I am just curious. What is it you are planning to read to get up-to-speed on this conflict? Facts and analysis both. Seems simple enough to me.

Buzz


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

How about--"If I want your opinion, I'll ask for it."


----------



## M6Classic (Feb 15, 2008)

PedanticTurkey said:


> How about--"If I want your opinion, I'll ask for it."


I am not expressing an opinion, I am merely asking a question. If you decline to answer, you are well within your prerogatives. Certainly you have declined to answer many direct questions.

Buzz


----------



## Stringfellow (Jun 19, 2008)

PedanticTurkey said:


> I have to admit that I'm a little perplexed at the pro-Russian attitude so many on the left here in America are taking. Is it just an anti-Bush thing, or do you guys secretly hope that once the old Russian empire is back together it'll go commie again?


What are you talking about? I don't think I have seen any report that tries to justify Russia's actions. I have seen a lot where people are upset that America is helpless in this matter - our military is stretched thin and we can't exactly condemn another country for invading a sovereign and be taken seriously - but a slew of pro-Russia articles? Maybe in obscure media outlets but not the main stream.

It just makes sense in light of the Bush doctrine that more countries are going to be invaded - by us and by others. If "we can fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here" is good for the goose it is also good for the gander. Russia can fight separatists in Georgia so they don't have to fight them in Moscow. While this is obviously wrong how can we condemn it and be taken seriously when it is what we do? Thank you President Numb Nuts.


----------



## tabasco (Jul 17, 2006)

*a new Heisenberg*



PedanticTurkey said:


> Yes, Buzz, it's very hard to distinguish between a situation where one is looking for facts and where one is looking for analysis.
> 
> Well, hard for you, anyway.


Actually pretty hard for a lot of people. But maybe not you....good luck with that.

-Chad


----------



## JLWhittington (Aug 20, 2008)

*Have the Russians (Soviets) ever left Georgia?*

I spent a month in Georgia in 2003, as part of a Humanitarian Assistance exercise that included around 16 countries. Most of the younger generation (20s-30s) either would not or could not speak Russian.
Whenever we travelled in the country, an armed escort accompanied us, as corruption and organized crime was rampant. In Tblisi, I saw armed Russian soldiers keeping watch in the streets. The most surprising thing that I recall was the attitude of some Georgians; that life under the USSR was better than their current lot. These were, of course, the middle class, whose parents were established in the Soviet heirarchy and have since had to find other means of making a living. Despite the fact that most of the Georgians that I spoke with reported extraordinarily small salaries, no one appeared to be starving to death. In a totalitarian state, the people learn how to barter and exchange, skills that would see them through the "democratization" of their homeland. Corruption has hurt Georgia's ability to collect the tariff on the oil transported through the country, which is unfortunate. It's a beautiful country with a fascinating history, and truly remarkable people (even if they are proud of the fact that Mori is the birthplace of Stalin). I'd love to go back, when the water is safe. I'll also buy Geogian wine; the Russians won't!


----------



## Relayer (Nov 9, 2005)

Stringfellow said:


> What are you talking about? I don't think I have seen any report that tries to justify Russia's actions. I have seen a lot where people are upset that America is helpless in this matter - our military is stretched thin and we can't exactly condemn another country for invading a sovereign and be taken seriously - but a slew of pro-Russia articles? Maybe in obscure media outlets but not the main stream.
> 
> It just makes sense in light of the Bush doctrine that more countries are going to be invaded - by us and by others. If "we can fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here" is good for the goose it is also good for the gander. Russia can fight separatists in Georgia so they don't have to fight them in Moscow. While this is obviously wrong how can we condemn it and be taken seriously when it is what we do? Thank you President Numb Nuts.


People who are upset over American "helplessness" wrt Georgia because our troops are stretched thin need to come to their senses. War in Iraq/Afghanistan or no, we would not be sending troops to the Republic of Georgia, period.

Regarding Russia feeling free to invade Georgia because we can't condemn it due to Iraq... Does Russia really needed such a justification? Hardly. Of course, Russia is glad to toss that claim out there because they know many on the American left will slurp it up and regurgitate it, readily. They are the only ones who this claim will have any real affect on. Now, maybe the Russians did hold out some faint hope that those who promote this idea in the US might have some affect on the US government response. I doubt they really expected many to buy into it, though.


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

The "nutshell" take from military historian Robert Kagan:

"The immediate goal is to prop up high oil prices, without which Russia's faltering economy might implode. A major oil pipeline (featured in a 1999 James Bond film) runs from the oilfields around the Caspian sea through Georgia to the Turkish port of Ceyhan. A major interruption of supplies (about one percent of the world's oil flows through the BTC pipeline) could reverse the recent decline in oil prices. Russia tried to bomb the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan pipeline, and an adjacent natural gas pipeline, but missed.

The intermediate goal is to force from office Georgia's democratically elected, pro-Western president, Mikheil Saakashvili, and replace him with a Soviet stooge. This would put the kibosh on the efforts of Georgia and other former Soviet republics to join NATO.

The long term goal of Russian strong man Vladimir Putin, who described the collapse of the Soviet Union as "the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the (20th) century," is to force Georgia and the other former Soviet satellites back into the Russian orbit, and thus to give Russia powerful leverage over the economies of Western Europe. The BTC oil pipeline and the BTE natural gas pipeline are the only pipelines to Western Europe not under Russian control."

Stringfellow et al,
And yes, there really are lots of comments from left-wing apologists for the Russian invasion all over the blogdom. Quite astonishing really. One does not have to agree with the prudence of our invasion of Iraq to appreciate that it presents absolutely zero moral or political parallel to the Russian invasion of Georgia. While it is to be expected that Russia would articulate such an absurd analogy, the fact that some American leftists find merit in it speaks volumes.


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

Wasn't there an attemp to put a major pipeline through that mideast region in a different country farther away from Russia? If so, then maybe these companies and Europe will be more considerate about not endangering their investments in the next pipeline (and shut the one off through Georgia) by placing the next pipeline farther away from powerful greed (Russia).

Years ago I was watching a Canadian program on TV about a Canadian who invested half a billion Canadian dollars in Russia after the Soviet breakup. Laws without the rule of law means there really is no law. According to the program Russia did not stop this mans money from being stolen but helped in the robbery showing Russia has no interest in the rule of law. Just look at the last election. What Tom Friedman says isn't quite right, because in order to move up in the world standings you have to have the rule of law, and with good laws, and Putin and croonies refuses to follow the method into good world standings by haveing the rule of law.


----------



## tranquill (Aug 29, 2008)

Russia-Georgia conflict created a big headache for Israel which armed and trained Georgians for years - and now suddenly Russians threaten retaliation by supplying S-300 SAM batteries to Syria. Here is what a prominent Israeli analyst says: https://samsonblinded.org/blog/on-russia-georgia-and-israel.htm


----------



## 16412 (Apr 1, 2005)

The difference between the US and Russia is we intend to leave Iraq, whereas, Russia doesn't intend to leave Georgia.

Another difference is we have the rule of law, whereas, Russian leaders intend to have no rule of law.


----------



## saraht (Aug 26, 2008)

I truly belive that Russia is using the Georgia war as a cover for higher purposes. History repeats itself and we haven't became yet such a superior race to be able to avoid mondial confilicts. I belive that the entire Europe is in danger now that Russia showed it is still armed and ready to fight for influence.


----------



## meister (Oct 29, 2005)

radix023 said:


> As McCain said, "When I look into his eyes, I see K. G. B." McCain should have added greed in his eyes, too. I think it is Putin and his greed, and greed would include oil.


Yeah... but even your above average nomenklatura KGB type was not worth USD40 billion stolen from oil and gas sources (Guardian is the source I believe)


----------



## mandatory (Jun 2, 2008)

Funny how our neo-con government supported Albanian terrorists ripping out the heart of Serbia (and going so far as to bomb the Serbs while they attempted to heavy-handedly regain control of a historic piece of their homeland) while they vehemently oppose independence to a region that is only part of Georgia because it was forced into it after the fall of the Soviet Union.

The absolute hypocrisy is amazing.



tranquill said:


> Russia-Georgia conflict created a big headache for Israel which armed and trained Georgians for years - and now suddenly Russians threaten retaliation by supplying S-300 SAM batteries to Syria. Here is what a prominent Israeli analyst says: https://samsonblinded.org/blog/on-russia-georgia-and-israel.htm


No wonder the U.S is giving such hellbent support for Georgia. The U.S foreign policy is almost entirely dictated by American Jews and groups such as AIPAC (Americans who loyalties basically are Israel first). And that's not a lie.


----------



## PedanticTurkey (Jan 26, 2008)

That's a very odd thing to say. Aren't the Ossetians fairly recent immigrants into Georgia, just like the Albanians in Kosovo?


----------

