Russia is at it again!

[Ronnie]

Hi Ronnie, if Saakashvili's response to a recent upsurge in Russian inspired "games" in the disputed sovereign terruitory of Georgia came as a result of US "support" - then the US admin has blood on it's hands as much as the combatants.  

The SENSIBLE approach was a negotiated settlement - as the West didn't REALLY want to be embroiled in a Caucas territory dispute.
NOW we have a Ukrainian govt talking up a "hard line", too...

This will end in tears and moe innocent people will suffer or die.

1/ Russia has to recognise that it agreed to national boundaries... yet it meddles and threatens former Soviet satellites

2/ Russia has to respect democratic votes of other nations - I will never forget Putins blatent meddling in Ukraine - when he stood alongside Yankovich and actively asked Ukrainians to vote for him :-o

3/ The USA doesn't ned to "interfere", either .. if nations wish to join the EU, or even NATO .. they have to prove stability first, and I was a little concerned by the "Soviet-style" clamp down on Media when there were anti-govt protests on the streets of Tblisi.


If you think "Russians" will understand your "tough love" concept, you must have ben walking around with your eyes closed when you were in the FSU.

The concept of Ukraine spliting in two appears to be a Russian agenda.

Russia can be "strong" without destablising other nations.. The USA keeps misreading Russia's sensitivities and instead of quelling them - inflames them..


Example - this missile shield - even if it is purely defensive - it is perceived as possible to re-point the missiles at Russia.

Russia offered their siting in Azeri territory.. was it SO difficult to consider this, before?  How did the USA fel when the soviets sited missiles in Cuba... ( which btw, many US folk forget, ended when the Soviets also got a US concession for the US to remove missiles from Turkey !)

Siting the infrastucture for these defense missiles in former Soviet satellites is BOUND to upset Russians .. it is time the USA "cared" a little as Poland was only too keen to cock a snoop at Russia - in return for some hard cash.

Previously, the UK might have allowed the siting of this infrastructure, but the US KNEW this would be political suicide for any govt.

If the US is so worried about missile from North Korea or Iran - it might have been better to work with a friendly Russia to ensure a united front ?!

The last eight years have sen the US and Russia move apart - and this is bad for us all

As I said, Saakashvili is young and brash.  He may have made some mistakes and I know he was told so as well by western leaders.  His "problem" if you can call it that, is he is passionate about what he feels is Georgia's future.  Passion can cause some to make bad decisions at times.

Now, I'm glad you brought up the missile defense system in Czech and Poland.  Putin knows full well that system is no threat to him and he knows precisely why we want it where we want it.  First off they are interceptor missiles and there are only ten of them.  They are not only not nuclear tipped, they are completely with a warhead of any kind.   Oh, they'll destroy another missile with both moving at supersonic speeds at impact.  Any explosive material would be unnecessary and only slow it down.  As such each of those ten missiles could do no more damage to Russia than to destroy a single dacha.

Further, they are useless against any Russian ICBMs because they are not situated anywhere near the flight path between Northern Russia where their silos are located and the United States.  Those missiles would take a northerly route, not westerly.  Putin knows this.

The proof than they are there to protect the US from any future ICBMs from Iran can be found in their small numbers and in their location.  A missile traveling from Iran to New York would take a northwesterly route..directly over eastern Europe.  The small number of missiles, ten, confirms that they are there to protect against an attack by a rogue nation with few, maybe one or two ICBMs.  An attack by Russia would involve the launching of hundreds or thousands of ICBMs.  What good would ten do against thousands?

So what the heck is Putin and his generals blustering about?  Some possible explanations might be that he is doing the bidding of his clients in Tehran.  In addition, he's looking for leverage wherever he can get it.  False pretense, false charges, and false objections can be enough to get the west to say, "Oh gee, what can we do for you since we're apparently upsetting you?"

Still further, Putin's apparent dream of restoring the old Soviet empire in Eastern Europe will be that much more difficult for him to achieve when he sees greater and greater ties there with the west. 

If you think "Russians" will understand your "tough love" concept, you must have ben walking around with your eyes closed when you were in the FSU.

This comment strikes me odd, Mark.  The more we learn about Russian culture, the more we realize that toughness is what the Russians understand best.  How many times has it been said by the OMBs on RWD and its predecessor RWG,  "the men need to be decisive and strong, don't show weakness. Stand up to her, RMs know this," yada, yada.

I will tell you this with no hesitation.  Many cultures, Russia being just one of them - but Asia is particularly noteworthy - do not believe in win-win arrangements.  It's "I win, you lose" or "you win, I lose."  And he who wins is the one "sly" enough to trick, deceive and obfuscate the most and take advantage of the opponents weaknesses.   

We simply don't understand this concept of bald deceit and gamesmanship...if it became the next olympic sport the west would get crushed playing that game.  Look how Clinton negotiated with N. Korea to get them to stop building the nuclear bomb and look what N. Korea did..built the damned thing anyway.

On a personal level, I've come to accept it when my wife's car smashes in the garage door and she sticks to her story that she's not responsible.  Even when I tell her the insurance will pay, she persists in denial.

I also accept it when my stepson tells me he will take care of repairing some damage he did too (only admitted because I saw him do it), then purposefully says he will do it but won't commit to any time to have it done by.  We've been through this before; he makes perpetual  promises without following through until I come to the realization he has no intention of doing it and finally must do it myself.  Instead of feeling shame, he feels he's more clever because he's beaten me!

It's hard to call these things flaws of character in these members of my family, though one could certainly see it that way, correctly.  Buit what they are are the manifestations of cultural quirks that have been much discussed here and often denied by the RW on board - surprise, surprise!

Look, the Frenchman denies to his wife that he has a mistress, though he knows his wife knows he's lying..she may even have photos and he'll ask her seriously.."who will you believe then, me or your lying eyes?"

The only way to deal with this behavior is through actions, not words.  Something like, "Dima, are looking for your car keys?  I think I saw them somewhere but I can't quite remember where."  "I might remember soon, though, don't worry."  These are the "negotiations" that they understand.  Putin is no exception.  Hide his keys and watch him change his behavior.

[msmoby_ru]

Welcome back Mark - I wondered where you'd been hiding! So finally you got out of jail and can see your wife, that's great !

How did you know I was in jail ?

If Georgia and Ukraine join NATO, please tell me what is the purpose of NATO? To have all of Europe except Russia in a military alliance against Russia? And Russia should not oppose this, by force, if necessary?

Well, there WAS a time, if Russia had asked - the European members would have been pleased to have it as a member ...

I'm not EXACTLY sure what NATO is now, either .. but I do  know that it has members with a spectrum of viewpoints and this actually helps when the US wishes to be the world's policeman - according to it's agenda.

May be Russia wishes to bankrupt the US in the same way it managed to bankrupt the Soviet Union.. if so, it's plan is working out rather well..

[msmoby_ru]

msmoby you might want to read back the topic, to avoid having to repeat all information.

Hey Shadow..

As I did say I'd read all the topic, and I was responding to Olga's specific response WHY are you taking me to task for "repeating" ? !!  You should be addressing her   ...  autonomy does not equal independence ... But. I'll repeat - in case you missed it... *I* think Georgia should let 'em go and join NATO minus these regions.

Besides that why would Georgia bomb their own citizens ? .

Why indeed.. and WHY was the "peace -keeping" force arming the pro-secessionist, shooting down drones , stopping Georgian ships and issuing passports to third party nationals - THEN claiming Georgia attacked Russian Citizens ?!

Something less discussed is that Georgia has until December 2008 to fix the problems with South Ossetia and Abkhazia in order to gain their membership of NATO. A quick flash action destroying the local autonomous governments would of course have played in to the hands of Georgia.

Well, most of us agree, if this was Georgia's plan it back-fired .... NATO membership might come but it will be minus the secessionist regions.

[Ronnie]

How did you know I was in jail ?

Well, there WAS a time, if Russia had asked - the European members would have been pleased to have it as a member ...

I'm not EXACTLY sure what NATO is now, either .. but I do  know that it has members with a spectrum of viewpoints and this actually helps when the US wishes to be the world's policeman - according to it's agenda.

May be Russia wishes to bankrupt the US in the same way it managed to bankrupt the Soviet Union.. if so, it's plan is working out rather well..

Statements about being the world's policeman, irritate me.  As if there is something to be gained by whoever does it beyond the obvious desire to have some semblance law and order in the world.  Let also point out that the United does not do the job without many "deputies" from around the world.  Where I come from, the police are called public safety officers and their cars are emblazened with the motto; "to protect and serve".  And that is exactly what they do.  Wasn't it a female bobbie who was shot and killed from within the Iranian embassy while she was trying to keep the protesters away?

It seems once each generation in Europe, the United States goes into a stay-at-home mode and Europe erupts into a free for all brawl until the Americans have to spend money and blood to break up the fight.  Maybe we should just walk into Brussels throw down the stinking badge and tell the Euros to take this job and shove it [the pay and benfits are nonexistent anyway].   

Let Putin have his USSR back and why not let him exert his "influence" over the rest of Europe as well, succeeding where his role model, Napolean failed and reversing the "greatest catastrophe of the 20th century."

Stevie would love that, wouldn't you Stevie?  And there are times when I think I would too.  Especially when I see how well Europeans appreciate our past and present sacrifices on their behalf.

[Lit_1nce]

Siting the infrastucture for these defense missiles in former Soviet satellites is BOUND to upset Russians .. it is time the USA "cared" a little as Poland was only too keen to cock a snoop at Russia - in return for some hard cash.

Previously, the UK might have allowed the siting of this infrastructure, but the US KNEW this would be political suicide for any govt.

Well seeing as there were nukes in some existing western NATO countries, I don't see how it would have been political suicide for say Germany to install it.. It might cause some internal strife among the German citizens, but be more acceptable to Russia.

Lets' face it, the last approx 8 years the word "diplomacy" just hasn't been in the US vocabulary... actually considering what another country might think ?.. umm well the policy is "who cares ?" ... I've previously ranted about the horrible choice that we have had for Secretary of State, who seems to take the "secretary" part literally as all she does is take dictation and read it off.

I've also read an interesting connection about professional lobbyists who act in behalf of foreign governments with US congressmen.. which to me is just wrong, and shows that our State department is not doing their job... here's a link.. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080813/ap_on_el_pr/mccain_lobbyist

[msmoby_ru]

As I said, Saakashvili is young and brash.  He may have made some mistakes and I know he was told so as well by western leaders.  His "problem" if you can call it that, is he is passionate about what he feels is Georgia's future.  Passion can cause some to make bad decisions at times.

And WHAT is THAT all about, Ronnie ... I felt passionately that N.Ireland had the right to remain part of the UK - but I didn't think it was worth one life being taken... it the end the "Irish problem" was solved by "jaw jaw" and if the majority of people in NI ultimately want to be part of the Republic, my "tribe" must respect that.

Nationalism and passion frighten the HELL out of me .. I see it in Cyprus and Ireland and I see divided communities.  

Give me a passion to resolve differences ANY DAY... This is not what I see from Moscow or Tiblisi

Now, I'm glad you brought up the missile defense system in Czech and Poland.  Putin knows full well that system is no threat to him and he knows precisely why we want it where we want it.  First off they are interceptor missiles and there are only ten of them.  They are not only not nuclear tipped, they are completely with a warhead of any kind.   Oh, they'll destroy another missile with both moving at supersonic speeds at impact.  Any explosive material would be unnecessary and only slow it down.  As such each of those ten missiles could do no more damage to Russia than to destroy a single dacha.

Further, they are useless against any Russian ICBMs because they are not situated anywhere near the flight path between Northern Russia where their silos are located and the United States.  Those missiles would take a northerly route, not westerly.  Putin knows this.

The proof than they are there to protect the US from any future ICBMs from Iran can be found in their small numbers and in their location.  A missile traveling from Iran to New York would take a northwesterly route..directly only eastern Europe.  The small number of missiles, ten, confirm that they are there to protect against an attack by a rogue nation with few, maybe one or two ICBMs.  An attack by Russia would involve the launching of hundreds or thousands of ICBMs.  What good would ten do against thousands?

So what the heck is Putin and his generals blustering about?  Some possible explanations might be that he is doing the bidding of his clients in Tehran.  In addition, he's looking for leverage wherever he can get it.  False pretense, false charges, and false objections can be enough to get the west to say, "Oh gee, what can we do for you since we're apparently upsetting you?"  

Ronnie, there are many countries on this NW route the missiles from rogue states would take.. WHY chose two former Soviet satellites?.. and WHY, if what you say is true don't other NATO / US allies want this system on their territories ?

The Radar systems can be re-targetted / re programmed, right ?

I note you didn't actually deal with my point that "rogue" nations were weaker when the west and Russia were on a more friendly footing...

Still further, Putin's apparent dream of restoring the old Soviet empire in Eastern Europe will be that much more difficult for him to achieve when he sees greater and greater ties there with the west. 

Can't you see that if this is Mr Putin's agenda - the end result might be Russia's buffer will only be Abkhazia and Ossetia to the south - and Eastern Ukraine to the west...  The people's of Ukraine and Georgia will decide - and any "pressure"from Moscow may have the opposite effect... UNLESS the current US regime "interferes"

This comment strikes me odd, Mark.  The more we learn about Russian culture, the more we realize that toughness is what the Russians understand best.  How many times has it been said by the OMBs on RWD and its predecessor RWG,  "the men need to be decisive and strong, don't show weakness. Stand up to her, RMs know this," yada, yada.

I will tell you this with no hesitation.  Many cultures, Russia being just one of them - but Asia is particularly noteworthy - do not believe in win-win arrangements.  It's "I win, you lose" or "you win, I lose."  And he who wins is the one "sly" enough to trick, deceive and obfuscate the most and take advantage of the opponents weaknesses.   

We simply don't understand this concept of bald deceit and gamesmanship...if it became the next olympic sport the west would get crushed playing that game.  Look how Clinton negotiated with N. Korea to get them to stop building the nuclear bomb and look what N. Korea did..built the damned thing anyway.

On a personal level, I've come to accept it when my wife's car smashes in the garage door and she sticks to her story that she's not responsible.  Even when I tell her the insurance will pay, she persists in denial.

I also accept it when my stepson tells me he will take care of repairing some damage he did too (only admitted because I saw him do it), then purposefully says he will do it but won't commit to any time to have it done by.  We've been through this before; he makes perpetual  promises without following through until I come to the realization he has no intention of doing it and finally must do it myself.  Instead of feeling shame, he feels he's more clever because he's beaten me!

It's hard to call these things flaws of character in these members of my family, though one could certainly see it that way, correctly.  Buit what they are are the manifestations of cultural quirks that have been much discussed here and often denied by the RW on board - surprise, surprise!

Look, the Frenchman denies to his wife that he has a mistress, though he knows his wife knows he's lying..she may even have photos and he'll ask her seriously.."who will you believe then, me or your lying eyes?"

The only way to deal with this behavior is through actions, not words.  Something like, "Dima, are looking for your car keys?  I think I saw them somewhere but I can't quite remember where."  "I might remember soon, though, don't worry."  These are the "negotiations" that they understand.  Putin is no exception.  Hide his keys and watch him change his behavior.

Well, Ronnie, I make it a point never to discuss anyone's family  - mine or yours...   you have chosen yours and I chose mine...   What I will say is *I* don't think Russians are inherent "fibbers"  - my family and friends take responsibility for their actions....

You just made a very sweeping and ill-advised analogy, IMHO

[msmoby_ru]

Well seeing as there were nukes in some existing western NATO countries, I don't see how it would have been political suicide for say Germany to install it.. It might cause some internal strife among the German citizens, but be more acceptable to Russia.

Germans don't want to be perceived as aggressors - surely you could understand that ! ?

The US has some nukes in Germany  - but these are "unpopular" and perceived by Russia and within Germany to be in breach of the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty

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

[Ronnie]

Lets' face it, the last approx 8 years the word "diplomacy" just hasn't been in the US vocabulary... actually considering what another country might think ?.. umm well the policy is "who cares ?" ... I've previously ranted about the horrible choice that we have had for Secretary of State, who seems to take the "secretary" part literally as all she does is take dictation and read it off.

Untrue!
Secretary Rice was chosen, I think, because she is an expert on Russia and sharp as a tack with no politcal ambitions other than to serve her country. A true Washington outsider.   Bush really wanted to be the one to get Putin to respond to the soft approach, Crawford Ranch, horseback riding, watching the sunset together, just the two of them..Yeech, seems stupid now, but he tried.  He also tried for months to get the UN to do something about Sadam Hussein beyond issuing countless meaningless resolutions. 

Why did certain members of the security council balk?  Hmm, we now know that Hussein had Chirac in his pocket, Schroeder was elected on a plaform of anti-americanism, besides Germans along with the French were trading with Sadam illegally.  Then there was the oil-for-food scam that even the Secretary general's son was involved in.   Oh, and let's not forget the sweet weapons deals Russia had going on with Saddam...all in violation of sanctions they voted for but didn't really expect to uphold.  Apparently no one remembered to send the U.S. the memo.

[Ronnie]

Germans don't want to be perceived as aggressors - surely you could understand that ! ?

The US has some nukes in Germany  - but these are "unpopular" and perceived by Russia and within Germany to be in breach of the Nuclear non-Proliferation Treaty

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

I think public opinion in Germany is changing of late.  We'll see very soon.

[Ronnie]

Fibbers?  Isn't that a little harsh?  Let's go with something more politcally correct like Truth-Challenged. 

[Lit_1nce]

Untrue!
Secretary Rice was chosen, I think, because she is an expert on Russia and sharp as a tack with no politcal ambitions other than to serve her country. A true Washington outsider.   

She was chosen because she proved her parrot abilities as National Security Advisor... Bush or Rumsfeld  would come on TV and state something and then later Rice would use the exact same words.. and she still does it.

[Ronnie]

She was chosen because she proved her parrot abilities as National Security Advisor... Bush or Rumsfeld  would come on TV and state something and then later Rice would use the exact same words.. and she still does it.

You would expect something else?  I would think it was the others reciting from a script she wrote.  She was clearly the smartest person in the room!

[Shadow]

Statements about being the world's policeman, irritate me.  As if there is something to be gained by whoever does it beyond the obvious desire to have some semblance law and order in the world.  Let also point out that the United does not do the job without many "deputies" from around the world.  Where I come from, the police are called public safety officers and their cars are emblazened with the motto; "to protect and serve".  And that is exactly what they do.  Wasn't it a female bobbie who was shot and killed from within the Iranian embassy while she was trying to keep the protesters away?

It seems once each generation in Europe, the United States goes into a stay-at-home mode and Europe erupts into a free for all brawl until the Americans have to spend money and blood to break up the fight.  Maybe we should just walk into Brussels throw down the stinking badge and tell the Euros to take this job and shove it [the pay and benfits are nonexistent anyway].   

Let Putin have his USSR back and why not let him exert his "influence" over the rest of Europe as well, succeeding where his role model, Napolean failed and reversing the "greatest catastrophe of the 20th century."

Stevie would love that, wouldn't you Stevie?  And there are times when I think I would too.  Especially when I see how well Europeans appreciate our past and present sacrifices on their behalf.

I fully agree. Europe does not appreciate that America was divided between many European countries and fought for independence.
The Americans should have respected the borders of the European countries in their territory, and not separated.
Had there been a NATO and world police in those times, it would still be Britain vs France vs Spain.

I know the above text by me is incoherent rambling.

[Misha]

Man, does history repeat itself or what? This is indeed a serious question. Let's imagine, just for fun, that Russia plans to attempt to reannex all the predominantly ethnic Russian territorities it lost at the dissolution of the Soviet Union, by force if necessary. Let's assume they use all the standard tricks: the ethnic Russians hold a plebicite, and declare at about the 90+ % level that they want to rejoin Russia (which they probably would), then Russia goes in to "rescue" them. Would you, as President of the US, Ronnie, start WWIII over this? Would you put the US in the center of a sure-fire global blood bath on a scale that might even make WWII seem tame? You know you would immediately have to reinstate the draft and send 10s and 100s of thousands of US young men and women to their deaths ?? Does the falacy of WWI and WWII reasoning and policy not ring any bells for you? The choice between letting Russia re-take some of their chosen territories or start WWIII is clear: Russia can take what she wants. Anyone caught in between Russia and the rest of Eastern Europe can make a choice: fight, join Russia, or join Germany, or something like that. At any rate, Europe is certainly capable of destroying themselves again without any help or the flesh and blood of America's young to do it.

Steve, you have an exaggerated view on the capabilities of the Russian army. When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, it has a much larger and better trained army. The United States helped its then allies in Afghanistan bring the Soviet Union to its knees not by sending soldiers, but through providing weapons. Imagine the outcome of this war between Russia and Georgia, if Georgia had been equipped with the latest technology in stinger missiles bringing down Russian planes and if Georgian soldiers had had the best anti-tank missiles. They could easily have crippled the Russian military. As one analyst points out, when you have a column of tanks going through a narrow passage (and you have lots of these in mountainous regions), all you have to do is destroy the first tank and create a bottleneck. If the United States had provided Georgia with better military hardware before the war, Russia would have had to slog its way to Georgia with its planes being blown out of the sky, and its tanks being ground to a halt every few miles. The advantage of joining NATO is not only the protection that is provides, but having access to the world's best military technology. In spite of all the rhetoric, the Russian Army is falling behind in terms of technology: it is still, for all practical purposes, using the same technology that the Soviet Union had developed in the late eighties, though claim otherwise.

[BC]

BC has issues with the U.S.  That's clear and I understand how it can happen.  My own father served two tours in the Pacific then got a general discharge (as opposed to honorable) because of his deteriorated attitude to the military.  He was angry because he felt he was tricked into signing up for a second tour.  He re-upped in July of 1945, was given the promised 30-day leave to go home but then had to return for his second tour while those who didn't re-up were discharged.  Bad luck, bad timing, but no deception..few could have known the war with Japan would end so abruptly.

Timothy McVey was obviously upset with the USA despite being a veteran.  Who knows what sets people off.  BC's story doesn't interest me but when one has a vendetta against something or somebody, it usually poisons them.  These are the things you learn over a lifetime of interacting with people.

Ronnie,

You really should concentrate on the subject at hand rather than chasing mysterious skeletons in everyone's closets if they disagree with you.  "Well, Putin is KGB..", "Well, BC has 'issues'", or is "poisoned" or has a "vendetta against something or somebody.." or whatever.. anything BUT addressing the topic with something substantive.  For something you don't care about (IIRC this is the third time 'round you keep mentioning some hidden agenda I have), it obviously irks you a bit.. maybe a lot.  That is clearly your issue and not mine. Maybe it's just a crime to say something that makes sense?

[BC]

Steve, you have an exaggerated view on the capabilities of the Russian army. When the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, it has a much larger and better trained army. The United States helped its then allies in Afghanistan bring the Soviet Union to its knees not by sending soldiers, but through providing weapons. Imagine the outcome of this war between Russia and Georgia, if Georgia had been equipped with the latest technology in stinger missiles bringing down Russian planes and if the Georgians had had the best anti-tank missiles. They could easily have crippled the Russian military. As one analyst points out, when you have a column of tanks going through a narrow passage (and you have lots of these in mountainous regions), all you have to do is destroy the first tank and create a bottleneck. If the United States had provided Georgia with better military hardware before the war, Russia would have had to slog its way to Georgia with its planes being blown out of the sky, and its tanks being ground to a halt every few miles. The advantage of joining NATO is not only the protection that is provides, but having access to the world's best military technology. In spite of all the rhetoric, the Russian Army is falling behind in terms of technology: it is still, for all practical purposes, using the same technology that the Soviet Union had developed in the late eighties, though claim otherwise.

There is enough evidence up-thread to support that the US, and at least Israel cut back on selling/giving arms to Georgia because they knew Saakashvili is a loose cannon.  In the end, he did go against advice he was receiving from Condoleezza Rice and others when he sent his troops into SO.

Regarding Afghanistan, IIRC the Afghan government at the time requested assistance from the SU.  Operation Cyclone ensued..

Carter's national security advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, has stated that the U.S. effort to aid the mujahideen was preceded by an effort to draw the Soviets into a costly and presumably distracting Vietnam War-like conflict. In a 1998 interview with the French news magazine Le Nouvel Observateur, Brzezinski recalled: "We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would... That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Soviets into the Afghan trap... The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter, "We now have the opportunity of giving to the Soviet Union its Vietnam War."[4][5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone

Is history repeating itself in Georgia?

[Misha]

There is enough evidence up-thread to support that the US, and at least Israel cut back on selling/giving arms to Georgia because they knew Saakashvili is a loose cannon.  In the end, he did go against advice he was receiving from Condoleezza Rice and others when he sent his troops into SO.

Regarding Afghanistan, IIRC the Afghan government at the time requested assistance from the SU.  Operation Cyclone ensued..

Carter's national security advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, has stated that the U.S. effort to aid the mujahideen was preceded by an effort to draw the Soviets into a costly and presumably distracting Vietnam War-like conflict. In a 1998 interview with the French news magazine Le Nouvel Observateur, Brzezinski recalled: "We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would... That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Soviets into the Afghan trap... The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter, "We now have the opportunity of giving to the Soviet Union its Vietnam War."[4][5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone

Is history repeating itself in Georgia?

If it is, the Americans did not do a very good job of arming a Georgian resistance. However, wars are good for other countries to gauge the military potential of their competitors. One commentator noted that the Russian army in many ways showed it weaknesses. The Georgian army managed to shoot down Russian planes, in spite of the fact that they did not have the best technology, and the Russian pilots were not very good at hitting their targets (the bombs that hit apartment buildings were not necessarily out to hit those buildings, simply missing their real targets. The Soviet Red Army revealed its weaknesses in the Afghan war, and I am sure the Pentagon was ascertaining the real capabilities of the contemporary Russian army.

[Shadow]

If it is, the Americans did not do a very good job of arming a Georgian resistance. However, wars are good for other countries to gauge the military potential of their competitors. One commentator noted that the Russian army in many ways showed it weaknesses. The Georgian army managed to shoot down Russian planes, in spite of the fact that they did not have the best technology, and the Russian pilots were not very good at hitting their targets (the bombs that hit apartment buildings were not necessarily out to hit those buildings, simply missing their real targets. The Soviet Red Army revealed its weaknesses in the Afghan war, and I am sure the Pentagon was ascertaining the real capabilities of the contemporary Russian army.

As the Serbs shot some F117's I doubt that shooting down a plane shows the weakness of an army.

[Misha]

As the Serbs shot some F117's I doubt that shooting down a plane shows the weakness of an army.

Why? How many planes are shot down and how they are shot down is a strong indication of how capable a country's air force is in battle. Tell me, how many American planes were shot down during the Iraq invasion?

[wxman]

Georgia should have followed the example of Israel in developing a military. Israel is a smaller country, but they have such a powerful military, that no one will dare mess with them. Respect through strength. If Georgia would have developed such a force, Russia would never have invaded. Of course if Georgia did have such a military, South Ossetia would long ago have merged into Georgia, or been allowed to leave. Georgia's military weakness led to their inability to stabilize their country, plus previous corrupt governments. The inability to govern effectively led to their demise.

[wxman]

There is enough evidence up-thread to support that the US, and at least Israel cut back on selling/giving arms to Georgia because they knew Saakashvili is a loose cannon.  In the end, he did go against advice he was receiving from Condoleezza Rice and others when he sent his troops into SO.

Regarding Afghanistan, IIRC the Afghan government at the time requested assistance from the SU.  Operation Cyclone ensued..

Carter's national security advisor, Zbigniew Brzezinski, has stated that the U.S. effort to aid the mujahideen was preceded by an effort to draw the Soviets into a costly and presumably distracting Vietnam War-like conflict. In a 1998 interview with the French news magazine Le Nouvel Observateur, Brzezinski recalled: "We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would... That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Soviets into the Afghan trap... The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter, "We now have the opportunity of giving to the Soviet Union its Vietnam War."[4][5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cyclone

Is history repeating itself in Georgia?

Afghanistan is different. The Taliban and mujahadeen convinced the uneducated youth to fight and die for a god.  Hard to defeat a god. Georgians will not fight and die for a leader. No reward if you do. Plus there is opposition in the Georgian government. The real war for political control of Georgia has begun. The people don't want war. Plus it is never good when the Russians place short range SS-21 missiles in South Ossetia that can hit every major city in Georgia.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,405242,00.html

[Blues Fairy]

Of course if Georgia did have such a military, South Ossetia would long ago have merged into Georgia, or been allowed to leave.

Are you kidding?
  I just picture Saakashvili chewing his tie and thinking; to annex S. Ossettia or to let go?  Or to blast the hell out of them?  Tough choice, for a country as strong as Georgia, with all its military power. 

[Ronnie]

In her book, Putin's Russia, murdered journalist Anna Politkovskaya documents the horrendous conditions in the Russian Army.  A Russian mother would rather have her son in a western prison than see him conscripted into the army.

Once in uniform, the soldiers become the property of their officers to use and abuse for their own twisted enjoyment.  Beatings often result in pemanent injury or death.  Mothers have tried to sue the government for compensation or prosecution of reponsible officer but are blocked at every turn.  The army's policy is to ignore the summonses and few judges will do more than postpone hearing dates ad infinitum.

One private's refusal to go to town and steal vodka for his CO resulted in his beating, sodomization and "suicide".  Many young conscripts simply run away.  No officer has ever been prosecuted in Putin's Russia for abusing his soldiers.  The morale among the rank and file soldiers has never been worse than it is today under Putin, a former officer himself and the father of two daughters, who believes the the system of abuse is fine.  Organizations have been formed in Russia by soldiers' mothers but their grievances are ignored by courts. 

It is well know which units are the better ones and which are the worst.  The 58th Army, based in the south, is renowned as the worst.

Russia has anounced a goal of 40% volunteer army.  Good luck.

[BC]

Well.. seems they followed orders long enough to get the job done in Georgia..

[Shadow]

In her book, Putin's Russia, murdered journalist Anna Politkovskaya documents the horrendous conditions in the Russian Army.  A Russian mother would rather have her son in a western prison than see him conscripted into the army.

Once in uniform, the soldiers become the property of their officers to use and abuse for their own twisted enjoyment.  Beatings often result in pemanent injury or death.  Mothers have tried to sue the government for compensation or prosecution of reponsible officer but are blocked at every turn.  The army's policy is to ignore the summonses and few judges will do more than postpone hearing dates ad infinitum.

One private's refusal to go to town and steal vodka for his CO resulted in his beating, sodomization and "suicide".  Many young conscripts simply run away.  No officer has ever been prosecuted in Putin's Russia for abusing his soldiers.  The morale among the rank and file soldiers has never been worse than it is today under Putin, a former officer himself and the father of two daughters, who believes the the system of abuse is fine.  Organizations have been formed in Russia by soldiers' mothers but their grievances are ignored by courts. 

It is well know which units are the better ones and which are the worst.  The 58th Army, based in the south, is renowned as the worst.

Russia has anounced a goal of 40% volunteer army.  Good luck.

Ronnie I will not let MrsShadow read this post, as her current condition needs to avoid stress.
But as she is the daughter of a Russian military doctor let me tell you that the above is a very bad depiction of the truth in the Russian army. Officers and soldiers will be punished for abuse.
Prior to the current conflict we have been watching a movie that was about such situations, and she explained how this was not the reality of these days. Once the current indignation about the bad press Russia gets settles down, I will be happy to discuss the book and the current Russian system with her.
As long as she reads headlines as "Putin: we will nuke Poland" I will not be able to get a well-balanced response. Hope you understand.