Georgian forces attack Russian backed South Ossetia [Archive]

spartan

8th August 2008, 02:25

Heavy fighting was reported early this morning in the capital of the breakaway region of South Ossetia after Georgian forces launched an assault on Russian-backed rebels.

The battles erupted shortly after President Saakashvili, of Georgia, made a dramatic appeal for a ceasefire after a day of heavy clashes that claimed at least 12 lives.

In a televised address, Mr Saakashvili offered “an immediate ceasefire and an immediate beginning of talks” with the separatist region. He repeated an offer of autonomy within Georgia, saying that he was willing to make Russia the guarantor of any agreement.

However, shortly before midnight, the Georgian Government announced that it had begun an “operation to restore constitutional order”. Witnesses said the night sky over Tskhinvali, the rebel region’s capital, was lit up by explosions.

“Georgian troops are storming Tskhinvali. They are bombing the city,” said Eduard Kokoity, South Ossetia’s separatist leader. Hundreds of Russian and Abkhazian volunteers were reported to be heading to the region to help out the rebels. Georgian officials said the “mercenaries” were arriving from Russia with tanks and other heavy military equipment.

Tensions between Georgia and Russia have soared since April when the outgoing President, Vladimir Putin, told officials to strengthen economic ties with South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Georgia’s other breakaway region.

Both regions seceded from Georgia in the early 1990s and most residents have Russian passports. Moscow gave warning this week that it would not remain indifferent if war broke out. That prospect appeared closer than at any time in the past 15 years when separatist leaders and the Georgian Interior Ministry reported the worst fighting in a decade in South Ossetia involving artillery and mortar fire.

Daniel Fried, the US Assistant Secretary of State, said at one point that the United States and Russia had agreed to work to end the fighting. He said that he had spoken to Grigori Karasin, the Russian Deputy Foreign Minister, and “we agreed to work together to get the fighting stopped in South Ossetia and encourage political dialogue”.

Mr Karasin blamed Georgia for the violence and claimed that Tbilisi was preparing for war. He cautioned that the situation had “reached a dangerous point”.

Russia was outraged as Georgia mounted its fresh offensive. “Georgia’s step is absolutely incomprehensible and shows that the Georgian leadership has zero credit of trust,” said Yuri Popov, the Russian envoy sent to the region to mediate peace talks.

Georgia blames Russia for inciting the separatists. “It is all a result of hysterical militarisation, constant military rhetoric and real military propaganda conducted by Russian television stations,” Mr Saakashvili said, urging the two countries to “pool our efforts to end this madness”.

There were reports that a convoy of thirty buses and seven military trucks filled with Georgian soldiers had been spotted near Gori, at the southern edge of South Ossetia, waiting at a checkpoint. Abkhazia said that it had put its forces on combat alert in response to the deepening crisis.

Mr Saakashvili has pledged to reclaim both regions and accuses Moscow of attempting to annex them. The pro-Western Government in Tbilisi is convinced that Moscow is stirring trouble now to wreck Georgia’s bid for membership of Nato when the alliance meets in December. Mr Popov urged Nato last night to review Georgia’s application in the light of recent developments.

Russia admitted last month that it sent fighter jets to circle South Ossetia as Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, was visiting Tbilisi. Mr Saakashvili accused Moscow of an act of aggression and a State Department official gave warning of catastrophe unless Russia halted pressure on its former Soviet satellite.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4481342.ece

An emergency session of the UN security council has been called because of this.

Anyway here's to hoping that the US puppet Saakashvili gets a bloody nose for his troubles.

DancingLarry

8th August 2008, 04:43

Former Soviet "satellite"? That passed muster at the Times of London?

Certainly the last thing there needs to be is a NATO member in the Caucasus. This whole process of pushing NATO ever further eastward is nothing but rank provocation, some sort of twisted adventurism that doesn't even make logical sense from an imperialist point of view.

Red_or_Dead

8th August 2008, 04:53

Certainly the last thing there needs to be is a NATO member in the Caucasus. This whole process of pushing NATO ever further eastward is nothing but rank provocation, some sort of twisted adventurism that doesn't even make logical sense from an imperialist point of view.

Continental siege of Russia? Makes sense to me.

Anyway... Heres hoping that Putin and Sakashvilli die in car accidents, and there is no war.

jake williams

8th August 2008, 16:28

Red_or_Dead

8th August 2008, 17:13

It sort of sounds like Russia's retaliating. Does anyone know what's up with this? Is it just me that all this seems really murky to? All I've really been able to ascertain is that there's northern parts of Georgia who're still aligned with Russia and want to secede.

Well, South Ossetia is a de facto independant region in the north or Georgia, and its government is very pro-Russian.

Now, Georgia claims that S. Ossetia is part of Georgia (claim supported by the west), while Russians push for total independance and international reckognition of S. Ossetia. It may be that there is a plan for S. Ossetia to become a part of Russia, but not that I know of.

A few days ago the Georgian army started to move into the S. Ossetia to reclaim it. It encountered resistance from the S. Ossetian armed forces, and (according to BBC World) there have been some 2 dozen confirmed casualties so far.

Also, this just in (from BBC World as well), the Russian units in the S. Ossetian capital (dont ask me what they are doing there) are engaged in an artilery battle with Georgian troops.

EDIT: Russians are said to be using tanks. Also, the Russian unit is called the 58th army, if that means anything to anyone.

Red_or_Dead

8th August 2008, 17:38

Psy

8th August 2008, 18:07

From BBC World: a S. Ossetian minister claims that as many as 1000 people have been killed so far.

Also, a full scale war between Russia and Georgia seems iminent.

Well, so much for a peacefull resolution.

It could get worse, Fox News has just given the standard rhetoric of how the US army should deploy there to teach the evil Russians a lesson about not being evil. While Fox News doesn't speak for the US goverment, if the US deploys to Georgia to fight Russia it could be the start of World War 3.

Red_or_Dead

8th August 2008, 18:12

It could get worse, Fox News has just given the standard rhetoric of how the US army should deploy there to teach the evil Russians a lesson about not being evil. While Fox News doesn't speak for the US goverment, if the US deploys to Georgia to fight Russia it could be the start of World War 3.

Usual neo-con bollocks. What I think it will come down to is a cold war style proxy war. Russians want to spread their influence by screwing Georgia, and the Americans will try to screw the Russians through Georgia.

Talk about hypocrisy, though. Just a few months ago, Russia was denying Kosovo its right to self determination (actualy it still is), and supporting Serbias territorial integrity. On the other hand, the US supported Kosovos independance, and denied Serbias territiorial integrity. Now with South Ossetia, its exactly the opposite.

EDIT: More news. it seems that the Russian air force bombed terrtiory that is undisputedly Georgian (outside of S. Ossetia).

EDIT, take two: No idea where they got it from, but TV Slovenia reports 1.400 dead, and already a full scale war between Russia and Georgia.

Ironic that it starts on the same day as the Olympics.

Colonello Buendia

8th August 2008, 18:16

both sides are massively in the wrong so I don't care how this goes. I just feel sorry for the people.

Chapaev

8th August 2008, 18:56

This treachorous act of aggression in violation of the ceasefire by the regime in Tblisi against the independent republic of Iuzhnaia Ossetia is a serious crime against the peace. That more than 1000 people including civilians and peacekeepers have been murdered as a result of this unprovoked aggression against independent Iuzhnaia Ossetia is of grave concern. The people of Iuzhnaia Ossetia requested fraternal assistance from the Government of the Russian Federation to take urgent measures to protect the residents of Iuzhnaia Ossetia, some of whom are citizens of the Russian Federation, and to do everything to stop the genocide against the Ossetian people.

RebeldePorLaPAZ

8th August 2008, 20:40

There's a lot of footage and info coming from Russia Today. Here's a link... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1Hy4XC7tO4

Notice the attacks have taken place on the day when the opening ceremony of the Olympics is to take place and the stock market is up 300+ points, yet the news here in the US is focus on John Edwards affair.

"More than 1,000 U.S. Marines and soldiers were at the base last month to teach combat skills to Georgian troops. Georgia has about 2,000 troops in Iraq, making it the third-largest contributor to coalition forces after the U.S. and Britain."

This comes from the Associated Press.
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5hV2N6fVKS5slf10A13Dj_uIdaZ4QD92E9QR01

RebeldePorLaPAZ

8th August 2008, 20:49

Here is some footage from the UN Security Council emergency meeting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ih-molgaowk

Joe Hill's Ghost

8th August 2008, 21:31

piet11111

8th August 2008, 21:32

about 90% of the south ossetian population are russian nationals.
georgia used massive artillery strikes against the capital and smaller city's/villages killing hundreds so of course russia had to intervene to save its citizens.

anyhow i am keeping an eye on http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8072

they are keeping a very close eye on the conflict with the latest news i recommend reading the whole thread there.

A New Era

8th August 2008, 21:57

Notice the attacks have taken place on the day when the opening ceremony of the Olympics is to take place and the stock market is up 300+ points

Why do you bring up the stock market? Interestingly enough, the stock market has gone up and down quite windly the past days anyways. 5 percent down, 5 percent up, etc. It's a bit crazy.

RHIZOMES

9th August 2008, 01:21

Great time to invade with the Olympics and all.

mykittyhasaboner

9th August 2008, 01:40

Great time to invade with the Olympics and all.
tell me about it, the opening ceremony was preaching on about the world uniting in peace and blah blah blah. meanwhile in Georgia theres a full scale war erupting. are all capitalists hypocrites?

also, there are have been "cyber attacks" apparently:

from Wikipedia

South Ossetian officials stated that two Ossetian news media sites were hacked. Dmitry Medoev, the South Ossetian secessionist envoy in Moscow, claimed that Georgia was trying to cover up reports of deaths.[63] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_South_Ossetia_%282008%29#cite_note-62)
Georgian National Bank website was defaced (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defaced) and replaced with a gallery of known dictators of 20th century with Saakashvili added amongst them. Georgian newsportals were under Internet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet) denial-of-service attacks (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial-of-service_attack) and reportedly the site of defense ministry was hacked as well. The attack is similar to 2007 cyberattacks on Estonia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_cyberattacks_on_Estonia) and carried out by same techniques.[64] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_South_Ossetia_%282008%29#cite_note-63)
Georgian Ministry of Foreign Affairs website (http://mfa.gov.ge/) was also defaced and replaced with a collage of Saakashvili and Adolf Hitler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler) photos.

The Author

9th August 2008, 02:00

I'm presenting this article to show the objective, materialist conditions behind this act of aggression:

US has political, economic stake in farflung spat

By ANNE GEARAN, AP Diplomatic Writer2 hours, 50 minutes ago

There's more than meets the eye to the frantic U.S. efforts Friday to talk Russia and U.S. ally Georgia out of war over an obscure mountain tract most Americans have never heard of.
A look at the map and your gas credit card bill shows why.
South Ossetia is claimed by Georgia, the former Soviet republic that cast its lot with the United States and the West to the eternal irritation of Moscow. The breakaway province has been under Russia's sway for years.
Georgia sits in a tough neighborhood, shoulder to shoulder with huge Russia, not far from Iran, and astride one of the most important crossroads for the emerging wealth of the rich Caspian Sea region. A U.S.-backed oil pipeline runs through Georgia, allowing the West to reduce its reliance on Middle Eastern oil while bypassing Russia and Iran.
The dispute makes the Bush administration the middleman between a promising ally it wants to help and the powerful former adversary next door whose help it needs.
Washington praises democratic development in Georgia, delights in its contribution of combat troops for Iraq and acknowledges valuable intelligence and counterterrorism cooperation.
Moscow's cooperation is vital to numerous Washington aims in Iran, North Korea and elsewhere.
"For all those reasons and the fact that Georgia has demonstrated that it is a close ally, we cannot simply sit by and say `so be it, what does South Ossetia mean to us?'" said Janusz Bugajski, director of the new European democracies project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "Georgia as a whole means quite a lot."
The pipeline that crosses Georgia can pump slightly more than 1 million barrels of crude oil per day, or more than 1 percent of the world's daily crude output. The 1,100-mile pipeline carries oil from Azerbaijan's Caspian Sea fields, estimated to hold the world's third-largest reserves. Its potential vulnerability was already in the spotlight after it was sabotaged this week, apparently by Kurdish separatists.
Most of the oil is bound for Western Europe, where gas prices are even higher than the $4 and more a gallon that U.S. consumers are now paying. With only so much oil to go around, what the pipeline carries affects prices elsewhere. The United States also hopes it will be a model for other development projects that could have a more direct effect on the U.S. market.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was on the phone Friday morning, appealing for calm in South Ossetia, a patch of craggy farmland that is home to about 70,000 people — fewer than live in Youngstown, Ohio. In a statement later she reiterated U.S. commitment to Georgia's "territorial integrity."
President Bush discussed the violence with Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, while the presumptive Democratic and Republican candidates to replace Bush issued worried statements. Tanks rolled as Bush spoke.
Hundreds were reported dead in the worst outbreak of hostilities since the province won defacto independence in a war against Georgia that ended in 1992. Witnesses said the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali was devastated.
South Ossetia is one of the few places where ethnic, nationalist or other complications mean that the Cold War went dormant but didn't die. U.S diplomats refer to these neighborhood squabbles as "frozen conflicts," a euphemism that belies the long-recognized threat that seemingly petty disputes can easily provoke a wider war.
The United States, European nations and others raced Friday to keep the conflict from spreading. The State Department appealed for a cease-fire and prepared to send a mediator to the region.
A U.S. official, speaking on condition of anonymity because no official announcement had been made, said the envoy was Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Matthew Bryza, a specialist on the region. The timing of the trip was unclear.
"We are asking our friends, and the United States among them, to somehow to try to mediate and try to persuade Russia to stop this military aggression and invasion of Georgia," Vasil Sikharulidze, Georgia's ambassador to Washington, said in an interview.
At the Pentagon, a senior defense official said Georgian authorities have asked the United States for help getting its approximately 2,000 troops out of Iraq. The request is apparently related to the fighting in South Ossetia.
Georgia has been the third-largest contributor of combat troops after the United States and Britain.
The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because the discussions have been private, said no formal decision has been made on whether to support the departure, but said it is likely the U.S. will do so.
___
Associated Press writers Matthew Lee, Lolita C. Baldor and Desmond Butler contributed to this report.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080808/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_georgia_middleman&printer=1;_ylt=AjRF7Mha.rITgI7gUmIJJWKWwvIE

The Author

9th August 2008, 02:06

Looking at this dialectically, we see the following:

Quantities-
1. Resurgence of Russian political economy
2. Rebuilding of Russian Armed Forces (Bomber Exercises, Naval Exercises over the Mediterranean, putting tanks on Red Square for the first time since 1990 in a military parade).
3. Yankee imperialism's efforts to include Georgia and Ukraine in NATO anger Russian imperialists for encirclement tactics.
4. The secession of Kosovo from Serbia, which Russia criticized as a violation of Serbia's territorial integrity, but could do nothing to oppose it.
5. The so-called "Missile Defense Shield" proposed by the US in Poland and the Czech Republic, officially against Iran and terrorists, but really just another encirclement tactic.
6. Competition between East and West over oil, natural gas pipelines and trade routes in Caucasus and Central Asia.
7. Fights between the Russian and Georgian governments over the Russian minority nationality present in South Ossetia.

Leads to Qualitative Change:

The War between Russia and Georgia over South Ossetia.

KrazyRabidSheep

9th August 2008, 05:04

We've got plenty of news stories already, but this one has a lovely video or two.
It also mentions a Russian claim of a report of "ethnic cleansing".

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44906000/jpg/_44906034_8a76b7de-16a0-43cc-9117-daf37eddc506.jpg

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7550354.stm

Russian forces are locked in fierce clashes with Georgia inside its breakaway South Ossetia region, reports say, amid fears of all-out war.
Moscow sent armoured units across the border after Georgia moved against Russian-backed separatists.
Russia says 12 of its soldiers are dead, and separatists estimate that 1,400 civilians have died.
Georgia accuses Russia of waging war, and says it has suffered heavy losses in bombing raids, which Russia denies.

Russian tanks have reportedly reached the northern suburbs of the regional capital, Tskhinvali, and there were conflicting claims about who was in control of the city.
"Now our peacekeepers are waging a fierce battle with regular forces from the Georgian army in the southern region of Tskhinvali," a Russian military official was quoted as saying by Moscow-based news agency, Interfax.
After days of exchanging heavy fire with the separatists, Georgian forces moved on Thursday night to regain control of the region, which has had de facto independence since a war against Georgia that ended in 1992.

Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili said Russia was at war with his country.
He told the BBC: "Our troops are attacked by thousands of troops coming in from Russia."
Mr Saakashvili said Georgia had shot down several Russian planes and accused Moscow of bombing Georgian air bases and towns, resulting in the death of 30 military personnel and civilians.
Late on Friday, the Georgian national security council said Mr Saakashvili was poised to declare a state of emergency.
Despite denials from Moscow, the Russian air force has been carrying out air raids in South Ossetia and Georgia itself, says the BBC's Richard Galpin, in Gori, eastern Georgia.
'Ethnic cleansing'
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said he had to act to defend South Ossetia's civilians, most of whom have been given Russian citizenship.
He also voiced anger over the reported fatalities of Russian servicemen in the breakaway province.

"We will not allow their deaths to go unpunished," he said. "Those responsible will receive a deserved punishment."
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Moscow had received reports that villages in South Ossetia were being ethnically cleansed.
The BBC's Matthew Collin in Tbilisi says battles continue around Tskhinvali with the sound of explosions, rocket fire and military planes flying overhead.
The regional capital, where inhabitants are said to be sheltering in basements without electricity or phone lines, is reported to be devastated.

Fleeing resident Lyudmila Ostayeva, 50, told AP news agency: "I saw bodies lying on the streets, around ruined buildings, in cars. It's impossible to count them now. There is hardly a single building left undamaged."
International Red Cross spokeswoman Anna Nelson said it had received reports that hospitals in Tskhinvali were "overflowing" with casualties.
In other developments:

The UN Security Council fails to agree a statement on the crisis, despite holding a second session of talks on Friday evening
US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice called on Russia to pull its troops out of Georgia and respect its territorial integrity
Georgia's president said his country was withdrawing half its contingent of 2,000 troops from Iraq to help deal with the crisis
Russia said it would cut all air links with Georgia from midnight on Friday
The European security organisation, the OSCE, warned that the fighting in South Ossetia could escalate into a full-scale war
The US and the EU were reported to be sending a joint delegation to the region to seek a ceasefire and Nato said it was seriously concerned

SOUTH OSSETIA TIMELINE
1991-92 S Ossetia fights war to break away from newly independent Georgia; Russia enforces truce
2004 Mikhail Saakashvili elected Georgian president, promising to recover lost territories
2006 S Ossetians vote for independence in unofficial referendum
April 2008 Russia steps up ties with Abkhazia and South Ossetia
July 2008 Russia admits flying jets over S Ossetia; Russia and Georgia accuse each other of military build-up
7 August 2008 After escalating Georgian-Ossetian clashes, sides agree to ceasefire
8 August 2008 Heavy fighting erupts overnight, Georgian forces close on Tskhinvali

Red_or_Dead

9th August 2008, 15:33

Latest news:

Georgia declares state of war.

Casualties are said to be above 2000 by now (claim made by the S. Ossetian authorities, I think).

Russia mobilises its Black Sea navy and brings it to Georgian coast.

Russian air force strikes Georgian cities, civilian targets are hit.

The other Georgian breakaway republic Abkhazia is said to join in the game, but I dont know how reliable that info is.

Anyway, things are getting uglier really fast. I dont know what the Russian objectives are, but Im sure that Georgia has minimum chances of regaining S. Ossetia now.

Rosa Lichtenstein

9th August 2008, 16:23

Clear analysis here:

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2008/08/new-cold-war-escalates.html

Faction2008

9th August 2008, 16:45

Talk about David Vs Goliath.

KrazyRabidSheep

9th August 2008, 17:00

Russian jets attack Georgian town

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/44907000/jpg/_44907022_goriwomanap226i.jpg
Russian jets have bombed a Georgian town amid a deepening crisis over the breakaway South Ossetia region.
Georgia says 60 people died in Gori when the bombs hit residential buildings as well as military targets.
Russian officials say hundreds of civilians have been killed in South Ossetia. Georgia denies the figure, which cannot be independently verified.
Reports say Russian PM Vladimir Putin has stopped in Russia's North Ossetia region on his return from the Olympics.
He arrived in the capital Vladikavkaz to discuss the influx of refugees from the conflict in South Ossetia, Russian media said.
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said earlier that his country was seeking "to force the Georgian side to peace".

Russia's ambassador to Nato, Dmitry Rogozin, said there could be no "consultations" with Georgia until Georgian forces returned to their positions and re-established "the status quo".
Accounts differ over who controls South Ossetia's capital, with Moscow saying it has "liberated" Tskhinvali.
In another development, separatists in Abkhazia - Georgia's other breakaway region - said they had launched air and artillery strikes on Georgian forces in the Kodori Gorge.
The crisis began spiralling when Georgian forces launched a surprise attack on Thursday night to regain control of South Ossetia, which has had de facto independence since the end of a civil war in 1992.
The move followed days of exchanges of heavy fire with the Russian-backed separatists.

In response to the Georgian crackdown, Moscow sent armoured units across the border into South Ossetia.

The Georgian parliament has approved a presidential decree declaring a state of war for 15 days.
Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili has denounced Russian reports of a high civilian death toll from his forces as an "egregious lie".
Mr Saakashvili said he had decided to declare that Georgia was in a state of war because it was "under a state of total [Russian] military aggression".
Georgia is withdrawing its entire contingent of 2,000 troops from Iraq to help deal with the crisis.
US President George W Bush said the Russian attacks outside South Ossetia marked a "dangerous escalation in the crisis" and said Georgia's territorial integrity had to be respected.
"The attacks are occurring in regions of Georgia far from the zone of conflict in South Ossetia," he said while attending the Olympics.
"The violence is endangering regional peace."
Tskhinvali 'destroyed'
Fighting continued around Tskhinvali overnight and into Saturday morning, although not at the same intensity as on Friday, Russian media reported.

Later, the Russian Army's Ground Forces commander, Gen Vladimir Boldyrev, said his troops had "fully liberated" the city and were pushing Georgian forces back.
But the secretary of the Georgian National Security Council, Khakha Lomaia, insisted that the city remained "under the complete control of our troops".
Russian commanders, who said reinforcements were being sent to the region, confirmed that two Russian jets had been shot down over Georgia.
Speaking to Russian news agency Interfax, Russia's ambassador to Georgia, Vyacheslav Kovalenko, said on Saturday that 2,000 civilians and 13 Russian peacekeepers had been killed in Tskhinvali.
"The city of Tskhinvali no longer exists," he said. "It is gone. The Georgian military has destroyed it."
The International Red Cross (ICRC) said it had received reports that hospitals in the city were "overflowing" with casualties.
In Gori, Russian aircraft bombed mostly military targets, where Georgian troops had been massing to support their forces engaged in South Ossetia.

The BBC's Richard Galpin in Gori heard loud explosions and saw large plumes of smoke rising into the sky; soldiers and civilians were seen running through the streets.
Injured civilians were being pulled from the buildings, which were on fire.
The Georgian foreign ministry said the Black Sea port of Poti, the site of a major oil shipment facility, had been "devastated" by a Russian air raid.
Meanwhile Georgian TV reported that the Georgian-controlled section of the Kodori Gorge in Abkhazia was under fire, blaming the bombardment on Russian forces.
The foreign minister in Abkhazia's self-declared government, Sergei Shamba, said Abkhaz forces had launched an attack aimed at driving Georgian forces out of the gorge.
It was not clear whether planes used in the attack on the gorge belonged to Russia or to the Abkhaz separatists.
Russia has a peacekeeping force in Abkhazia under an agreement made following civil wars in the 1990s, when the region declared independence and formed links with Moscow.
Territorial claims
President Medvedev said Russia's military aim in South Ossetia was to force the Georgians to stop fighting.

"Our peacekeepers and the units attached to them are currently carrying out an operation to force the Georgian side to [agree to] peace," he said.
"They also bear the responsibility for protecting the population."
Speaking to the BBC, the Russian foreign minister insisted his country did not want all-out war with Georgia, but was prepared to do whatever was necessary to restore the situation in South Ossetia and to defend its civilian population, most of whom have been given Russian citizenship.
"Mr Saakashvili keeps saying that we want to chop off a part of Georgian territory," Mr Lavrov said.

"He's also saying that this is not just about Georgia, this is about the future of Europe because he says Russia is also making territorial claims to other [countries], including the Baltic states, which is rubbish."
Mr Lavrov said Georgia had violated a peace deal under which Georgia had agreed not to use force in the South Ossetian dispute.
The BBC's James Rodgers in Moscow says diplomatic initiatives to end the fighting have so far proved fruitless.
On Friday evening, the UN Security Council failed to agree on the wording of a statement calling for a ceasefire.
The UK, the US and France, are pinpointing what they say is Russia's aggression as the key factor in the slide towards war, while Moscow insists Georgia is to blame.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7550804.stm

dirtycommiebastard

9th August 2008, 18:23

I don't know much about whats going on, but it seems to me this is just US imperialism poking at Russia/China.

US backing Georgia, Russian backing S. Ossetia.

Seems like we saw the same thing when Kosovo declared independence, which was backed by US government, while Serbia was backed by Russia. Its definitely the first steps in a much larger struggle for control of resources, notably oil through political puppetry.

Neither the US nor Russia can actually make a move on one another, but they can play off their smaller allies, to in a sense test the waters. This is definitely a result of the crisis in the world economy.

I would no be surprised if this lead to another World War.

Red_or_Dead

9th August 2008, 18:31

I would no be surprised if this lead to another World War.

I think that its very overexagerated to think that this will lead to another world war. Russians and American were having a go at each other troughout the second half of the 20th century, and in many cases it was worse than now. If they didnt start a world war over Korea, Vietnam or Afghanistan, I seriously doubt that a region with a total of 70.000 people, with practicly no natural resources, will be the cause of WW3.

xAtlasx

9th August 2008, 18:35

This whole thing smacks of so much capitalist hypocrisy. The olympics with their "One world, One dream" BS, whilst thousands of people are being slaughtered. If it wasn't real it would almost be comical...

Harrycombs

9th August 2008, 19:20

This is terrible. Hopefully the fighting will stop within the next few days. :(

Psy

9th August 2008, 20:41

I think that its very overexagerated to think that this will lead to another world war. Russians and American were having a go at each other troughout the second half of the 20th century, and in many cases it was worse than now. If they didnt start a world war over Korea, Vietnam or Afghanistan, I seriously doubt that a region with a total of 70.000 people, with practicly no natural resources, will be the cause of WW3.
The difference is S. Ossetia has Russian citizens, N. Ossetia is part of Russia. This is not some remote war on the fringes of the Russian and American empires, but it is on the border of Russia. There are probably Russian military officers sweeting over the idea that American troops are going by operating right next to the Russian border, and worried how the American react if US troops get killed by Russian troops, or if the Americans are using the war as an excuse to position their troops for a massive invasion of Russia through Ossetia.

I'm sure right now Russian generals are debating if they should deploy tactical nuclear missile launchers along the border just in case American troops invades Russia.

Red_or_Dead

9th August 2008, 21:11

The difference is S. Ossetia has Russian citizens,

That much is true,

N. Ossetia is part of Russia.

North Ossetia is, yes, but the fighting is in South Ossetia, which is de jure Georgian territory, as its independance has not been reckognised by any other nation in the world - including Russia.

This is not some remote war on the fringes of the Russian and American empires, but it is on the border of Russia.

It is, at least for now, a war on a relatively small scale, and will remain even if Russia launches an all out invasion of Georgia.

And the war in Afghanistan (the one in the eighties) was fought on the border of the former USSR, as was the Korean war.

There are probably Russian military officers sweeting over the idea that American troops are going by operating right next to the Russian border,

Americans first need to get there, and I dont think it very likely that they would. Even if they do, either side will think twice before engaging the other. That, and of course the US military is streched thin as it is; with Iraq and Afghanistan, they would be hard pressed to find troops and funds to fight Russians in Georgia.

ALSO, Americans have to consider that in an event of US deploying troops in Georgia to fight the Russians (which is by itself pretty far fetched), Russia is within striking distance of several US allies (Im talking about conventional strikes, anyway): Ukraine, Baltics, Norway, Turkey... The Russian navy could attack Great Britain on a very short notice, maybe even bomb central European countries (maybe- I dont know what range do Russian planes have).

or if the Americans are using the war as an excuse to position their troops for a massive invasion of Russia through Ossetia.

Im sorry, but THIS is ridiculous. Even if Americans could invade Russia, they would have to be absolutely crazy to do it through Ossetia. Ossetia is a small, strategicaly unimportant region. Two thirds of it are Russian anyway (N. Ossetia).

And, as I said: the Americans would be hard pressed just finding enough troops and resources to defend Georgia. Invading Russia (which is a nuclear superpower - not to mention it has strong allies like China) is something fit for a Holywood movie, NOT something that could happen in reallity.

I'm sure right now Russian generals are debating if they should deploy tactical nuclear missile launchers along the border just in case American troops invades Russia.

Im pretty sure they have them deployed already, and that they have been deployed since the Cold War.

Psy

9th August 2008, 21:54

North Ossetia is, yes, but the fighting is in South Ossetia, which is de jure Georgian territory, as its independance has not been reckognised by any other nation in the world - including Russia.

Just pointing out that north of South Ossetia is Russia

It is, at least for now, a war on a relatively small scale, and will remain even if Russia launches an all out invasion of Georgia.

And the war in Afghanistan (the one in the eighties) was thought on the border of the former USSR, as was the Korean war.

In Afganistan US forces were not that close to Russian forces as officially the US was not in Afganistan. In Korea it as was China that got worried by US forces so close its borders and attacked US forces.

Americans first need to get there, and I dont think it very likely that they would. Even if they do, either side will think twice before engaging the other. That, and of course the US military is streched thin as it is; with Iraq and Afghanistan, they would be hard pressed to find troops and funds to fight Russians in Georgia.

The US already has military bases in Georgia. Also it wasn't a wise move to occupy both Afganistan and Iraq while threatening Iran.

ALSO, Americans have to consider that in an event of US deploying troops in Georgia to fight the Russians (which is by itself pretty far fetched), Russia is within striking distance of several US allies (Im talking about conventional strikes, anyway): Ukraine, Baltics, Norway, Turkey... The Russian navy could attack Great Britain on a very short notice, maybe even bomb central European countries (maybe- I dont know what range do Russian planes have).

Again the US currently is known for acting logically when it comes to its imperial pursuits.

Im sorry, but THIS is ridiculous. Even if Americans could invade Russia, they would have to be absolutely crazy to do it through Ossetia. Ossetia is a small, strategicaly unimportant region. Two thirds of it are Russian anyway (N. Ossetia).

I mean the threat that US will invade Moscow by pushing through Ossetia and through the mountain roads that lead the industrial base of Russia.

Im pretty sure they have them deployed already, and that they have been deployed since the Cold War.
Tactical nuclear missile launchers are not permanently deployed as they are mobile and attached to armies like any other division, if a general says he needs a nuclear strike on the invading troops they call up the tactical nuclear missile launchers in the region and not the ICBMs that are too inaccurate to be used on the battlefield also the tactical nukes are under the command of generals in the field while the ICBMs have to go through Moscow (that is if Moscow gives generals the permission to fire tactical nuclear missiles on their own, like Russia gave to submarine commanders during the Cuban missile crisis for tactical nuclear torpedoes)

Red_or_Dead

9th August 2008, 22:35

In Afganistan US forces were not that close to Russian forces as officially the US was not in Afganistan. In Korea it as was China that got worried by US forces so close its borders and attacked US forces.

Officialy. CIA was in there heavily, supplying the Talibans with weapons.

And in Korea, the US army was very close to Vladivostok, which is the base of the Russian pacific fleet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladivostok

But those were other wars, so moving on...

The US already has military bases in Georgia.

That raises several questions:
1. How much troops does the US actually have there, and how are they armed? I can hardly imagine that they coul take on the full force of Russian invasion, even if they were supported by Georgian army.

2. If an all out invasion of Georgia takes place, would they fight, or evacuate? I believe the latter to be much more likely. Infact it is the only sane decision to make.

Also it wasn't a wise move to occupy both Afganistan and Iraq while threatening Iran.

I think that by now it is pretty clear that invading anything at all was pretty dumb.

Again the US currently is known for acting logically when it comes to its imperial pursuits.

Didnt get that one...

I mean the threat that US will invade Moscow by pushing through Ossetia and through the mountain roads that lead the industrial base of Russia.

And the Russians will do what? Sip vodka and watch them go by?

At this moment the Russian armed forces have over 3 million members, roughly the same as the US. Only that in an event of a US invasion, the Russians could count on all of them, the US couldnt.

In addition to that, Russia can call upon 21 million men between the ages of 18 and 49, who are fit for military service. All of them are trained, as Russia has compulsory military service.

Not to mention the wast military industrial complex behind the Russian army, that is keeping them supplied with some of the best weapons out there.

I think that the Americans are not so dumb as to go invade Russia. After all, as any German or French historian could tell you, Russia has a reputation of being very hard to capture.

Tactical nuclear missile launchers are not permanently deployed as they are mobile and attached to armies like any other division, if a general says he needs a nuclear strike on the invading troops they call up the tactical nuclear missile launchers in the region and not the ICBMs that are too inaccurate to be used on the battlefield also the tactical nukes are under the command of generals in the field while the ICBMs have to go through Moscow (that is if Moscow gives generals the permission to fire tactical nuclear missiles on their own, like Russia gave to submarine commanders during the Cuban missile crisis for tactical nuclear torpedoes)

Ok. They still have to get that premission, though.

Chapaev

9th August 2008, 22:46

The outbreak of hostilities in Iuzhnaia Osetiia is part of the latest attempt by the United States and other imperialist powers to establish hegemony around the world. With much of the world focused on the Olympics in China, the timing of the outbreak of this conflict is curious.

With American military specialists having trained the armed forces of Gruzia, the Washington regime is complicit in the savage massacre of thousands of Osets. Because many Russian peacekeepers murdered, the regime in Tblisi engaged in what may be an act of war against Russia. Worse still, there is a serious humanitarian crisis in Iuzhnaia Osetiia, as tens of thousands have become displaced as a result of this aggression.

spartan

9th August 2008, 22:50

Armed Cossacks pour into South Ossetia to fight US puppet state of Georgia:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/09/russia.georgia1

Azerbaijan has suspended shipments of oil and oil products to Georgian ports, Georgia declares a "state of war" against Russia whilst Abkhazia, another Georgian breakaway region, has launched attacks against Georgia driving them out of the small part of Abkhazia they still controlled (Georgia accusses Russia of helping them):
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/09/georgia.russia2

A Russian soldier on patrol as an armoured column waits outside Tskhinvali, South Ossetia's capital:
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2008/08/09/russian460.jpg

Rosa Lichtenstein

9th August 2008, 22:57

US helping to move Georgian troops from Iraq back to Georgia:

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2008/08/americas-role.html

Red_or_Dead

9th August 2008, 22:59

The outbreak of hostilities in Iuzhnaia Osetiia is part of the latest attempt by the United States and other imperialist powers to establish hegemony around the world. With much of the world focused on the Olympics in China, the timing of the outbreak of this conflict is curious.

It is a part of Georgian effort to recapture separatist regions - the US remains uninvolved so far.

as tens of thousands have become displaced as a result of this aggression.

Tens of thousands? Georgia currently controls only a small part of Ossetian territory. And the entire south Ossetia only has a population of about 70 thousand. Source?

Psy

9th August 2008, 23:12

That raises several questions:
1. How much troops does the US actually have there, and how are they armed? I can hardly imagine that they could take on the full force of Russian invasion, even if they were supported by Georgian army.

2. If an all out invasion of Georgia takes place, would they fight, or evacuate? I believe the latter to be much more likely. Infact it is the only sane decision to make.

Don't know, the bases were just build to put pressure on Russia to try and get Russia to follow the Washington consensus (that failed).

I think that by now it is pretty clear that invading anything at all was pretty dumb.

I meant that the US ignored voice within the US military that US not having enough man power to invade.

Didnt get that one...

Sorry, that should have been that "the US isn't currently known for acting logically when it comes to its imperial pursuits".

And the Russians will do what? Sip vodka and watch them go by?

At this moment the Russian armed forces have over 3 million members, roughly the same as the US. Only that in an event of a US invasion, the Russians could count on all of them, the US couldnt.

In addition to that, Russia can call upon 21 million men between the ages of 18 and 49, who are fit for military service. All of them are trained, as Russia has compulsory military service.

Not to mention the wast military industrial complex behind the Russian army, that is keeping them supplied with some of the best weapons out there.

I think that the Americans are not so dumb as to go invade Russia. After all, as any German or French historian could tell you, Russia has a reputation of being very hard to capture.

Again the US has since 9/11 has not acted rationally as a imperial power, it has been acting more like Nazi Germany and invading nations with no regard of consequences.

For example Afganistan also has a reputation of being hard to occupy.

Ok. They still have to get that premission, though.
Yes but once Moscow authorizes use it is up to the generals decision and it is the same with the USA.

There was a few cold war films that addressed this issue with US and USSR navies meeting during a build up to war with each other, the US jumps the gun launching a tactical nuke at the Russian fleet, the Russian fleet fires a tactical nuke back before being destroyed causing both sides to lose their fleets.

Chapaev

9th August 2008, 23:22

...and the bullshit is now piling up

Sweden's foreign minister compared Russian policy to that of Adolf Hitler
http://www.thelocal.se/13596/20080809/

It is a part of Georgian effort to recapture separatist regions

With the two sides having side a ceasefire agreement, an effort by Georgia to reconquer Iuzhnaia Osetiia could only be considered a crime against the peace. The Georgian effort has only served to create a humanitarian crisis and threaten international peace. What is most treachorous about the Georgia side is that hours after declaring a ceasefire, they launched a savage attack on the capital of Iuzhnaia Osetiia.

- the US remains uninvolved so far.

The Georgian regime has received hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid. Large numbers of U.S. military specialists have trained Georgia's armed forces. The United States has more or less unleashed a war by proxy against Osetiia.

Red_or_Dead

9th August 2008, 23:33

The Georgian regime has received hundreds of millions of dollars in military aid. Large numbers of U.S. military specialists have trained Georgia's armed forces. The United States has more or less unleashed a war by proxy against Osetiia.

While I do believe that Georgia has recieved funding by the US, I still wonder why exactly is the US so interested in South Ossetia? Whats there to gain? Or maybe the Americans have another reason to fund Georgia? Maybe they want an ally against Russia? They have it. The only problem is that no matter how much they fund them, Georgia is not likely to withsdant a potential Russian invasion.

If this is indeed a proxy war, it is a proxy war on Russia, not Ossetia.

And you still didnt provide any evidence of displacement.

Sorry, that should have been that "the US isn't currently known for acting logically when it comes to its imperial pursuits".

Well, I wont argue with that.

Again the US has since 9/11 has not acted rationally as a imperial power, it has been acting more like Nazi Germany and invading nations with no regard of consequences.

With Russia, Americans will have to have some regard for the consequences. That, and of course, even if they try to invade Russia, that is already destined to be another grand fuckup.

Yes but once Moscow authorizes use it is up to the generals decision and it is the same with the USA.

But will it?

There was a few cold war films that addressed this issue with US and USSR navies meeting during a build up to war with each other, the US jumps the gun launching a tactical nuke at the Russian fleet, the Russian fleet fires a tactical nuke back before being destroyed causing both sides to lose their fleets.

And movies are just that - movies.

spartan

9th August 2008, 23:49

While I do believe that Georgia has recieved funding by the US, I still wonder why exactly is the US so interested in South Ossetia? Whats there to gain? Or maybe the Americans have another reason to fund Georgia? Maybe they want an ally against Russia? They have it. The only problem is that no matter how much they fund them, Georgia is not likely to withsdant a potential Russian invasion.
The US has built oil and gas pipelines through Georgia, which means that the US no longer has to have them going through the territory of traditional rivals like Russia and Iran (which if they were going through these rivals territory would make the US gas and oil supply in this region, and thus the US economy, under threat if Washington ever pushed these countries too far).

Put simpley Georgia is another in a long line of US whores.

The Author

10th August 2008, 00:00

Yes, see my earlier posts in this thread discussing those pipeline routes through South Ossetia.

Chapaev

10th August 2008, 00:20

Tens of thousands? Georgia currently controls only a small part of Ossetian territory. And the entire south Ossetia only has a population of about 70 thousand. Source?It has been reported by Tass that about 20,000 people from Iuzhnaia Osetiia have fled to the Russian Federation.

I would no be surprised if this lead to another World War.
The United States does not have the courage to engage in a conflict with a country of comparable military strength. It can only prey upon poor, defenseless countries such as Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Somalia.

Psy

10th August 2008, 01:04

With Russia, Americans will have to have some regard for the consequences. That, and of course, even if they try to invade Russia, that is already destined to be another grand fuckup.

I think the American bureaucracy itself in crisis as it can't deal with the crises facing the American ruling class. Meaning the American bureaucracy is highely reactionary, this I think does worry the Russian bureaucracy as it means it is hard to predict what the US will do.

Joe Hill's Ghost

10th August 2008, 02:01

Guerrilla22

10th August 2008, 02:12

sigh, yet another pointless ethnic conflict. Georgia no doubt feels bold due due to their preferential status with the US and NATO and Russia under Putin has threatned to attack Georgia for sometime now.

Psy

10th August 2008, 04:24

Um not so much. This is more or less a sign of Russian desperation than anything else. The nation is disintegrating from the population collapse, and rising militarism is a great way to cover up Russia's descent into insanity. The US uses Georgia to encircle Russia, but they really don't care too much about the conflict. Georgia's main use is its pipeline, and the US will intervene to ensure that it remains in Georgian hands.
Actually Russia actions seem perfectly logical (far more logical then the action of the USA) they sent in peace keeper years ago yet the situation deteriorated so Russia escalated their forces with the intended bonus of getting Georgia into their spear of influence.

If anything the US response shows how desperate and weak the US empire it, with the thinking it is even worth even defending Georgia even politically right now, the US empire has enough crises right now without throwing a fit over Georgia.

Guerrilla22

10th August 2008, 04:56

This move by Georgia really makes no sense. They've bitten off more than they can chew and will likely end up having to withdraw, with nothing gained aside from dead soldiers and civillians.

KrazyRabidSheep

10th August 2008, 05:13

Actually Russia actions seem perfectly logical (far more logical then the action of the USA) they sent in peace keeper years ago yet the situation deteriorated so Russia escalated their forces with the intended bonus of getting Georgia into their spear of influence.

If anything the US response shows how desperate and weak the US empire it, with the thinking it is even worth even defending Georgia even politically right now, the US empire has enough crises right now without throwing a fit over Georgia.
I agree that it is more logical from the Russian point of view; they would have an interest in the region, even if the territory in dispute didn't have any people granted Russian citizenship, by mere proximity.

However, I am not going to really form an opinion about whether Russian, U.S., or Georgian actions are justified until more information has been made available (although I doubt the U.S. will directly preform anything major.) Perhaps there were more indicators that such a conflict would occur so imminently and harshly, but they had not been reported in any media that I had read before it happened.

Compared to other international conflicts that I have seen unfold (such as the weeks and months before Iraq), this seems to have sprouted nearly overnight and with great intensity.

I freely admit that I do not know what is going on (politically), I am overwhelmed trying to figure as much of it out as possible, and it will take me a while to get a general idea.

Joe Hill's Ghost

10th August 2008, 05:22

Actually Russia actions seem perfectly logical (far more logical then the action of the USA) they sent in peace keeper years ago yet the situation deteriorated so Russia escalated their forces with the intended bonus of getting Georgia into their spear of influence.

If anything the US response shows how desperate and weak the US empire it, with the thinking it is even worth even defending Georgia even politically right now, the US empire has enough crises right now without throwing a fit over Georgia.

They are perfectly logical. When your nation won't exist in 150 years, mindless expansionism is a good distraction. One of Russia's main pet projects is this silly irredentism. Georgia on the other hand was incredibly foolish to think they could carve up a Russian sphere of influence without repercussions. The US has no major stake in this conflict, they must protect the ceyhan pipeline, and the continuing rule of the western government. Outside of this, there's no point. And that's reflected in the american position. They wish to contain the conflict and preserve their interests, that is all.

The real losers here are the ossetians, and Georgians. South ossettia could have gone on as before and everyone could have been happy. But now blameless civilians must die.

Guerrilla22

10th August 2008, 05:29

While it's true the US has no major stakes in this conflict, they do want Georgia to eventually become integrated into NATO, which is not likely to happen if Georgia randomly launches military offensives over territorial disputes and picks fights with countries like Russia.

Psy

10th August 2008, 05:38

They are perfectly logical. When your nation won't exist in 150 years, mindless expansionism is a good distraction. One of Russia's main pet projects is this silly irredentism.

South Ossettia is of no strategic importance to Russia, it doesn't even have enough population to deal with the shrinking population of Russia. Russia sent peace keepers into South Ossettia to challenge NATO expansion.

Georgia on the other hand was incredibly foolish to think they could carve up a Russian sphere of influence without repercussions. The US has no major stake in this conflict, they must protect the ceyhan pipeline, and the continuing rule of the western government. Outside of this, there's no point. And that's reflected in the american position. They wish to contain the conflict and preserve their interests, that is all.

That is not what the US has done, the US has saber rattled at Russia, threatening US intervention if they don't withdraw from South Ossettia. This move is stupid as what is the US going to do when Russia calls the US's bluff?

Joe Hill's Ghost

10th August 2008, 06:22

South Ossettia is of no strategic importance to Russia, it doesn't even have enough population to deal with the shrinking population of Russia. Russia sent peace keepers into South Ossettia to challenge NATO expansion.

Nor was Grenada strategically important. Its a matter of sending a message, that no matter what, if you have a Russian population and you treat them poorly, Russia will dominate you. Its basic doctrine for all imperialists "If you touch even one spec of my dirt, I will beat you down."

That is not what the US has done, the US has saber rattled at Russia, threatening US intervention if they don't withdraw from South Ossettia. This move is stupid as what is the US going to do when Russia calls the US's bluff?

Even with iraq the US has considerable force projection. People seem to forget that the American military is quite big, and is the only military with global penetration. However, the US has no interest in fighting a war in Georgia, nor does Russia have any interest in sparking conflict with the US, a conflict that Russia would inevitably lose, as they can't afford more deaths, when their population is shrinking so precipitously.

Psy

10th August 2008, 06:55

Nor was Grenada strategically important. Its a matter of sending a message, that no matter what, if you have a Russian population and you treat them poorly, Russia will dominate you. Its basic doctrine for all imperialists "If you touch even one spec of my dirt, I will beat you down."

It is more if you even think of allowing NATO within my spear of influence I will beat you down.

Even with iraq the US has considerable force projection. People seem to forget that the American military is quite big, and is the only military with global penetration.

If the USA did they would have invaded Venezuela a long time that has a much weaker military force.

However, the US has no interest in fighting a war in Georgia, nor does Russia have any interest in sparking conflict with the US, a conflict that Russia would inevitably lose, as they can't afford more deaths, when their population is shrinking so precipitously.
Lose? The US can barely occupy Afganistan and Iraq. While Russia's population is shrinking this is because of poverty, it can easily and be quickly reversed, hell just drafting all able bodies into the Russian military would halt the shrinking Russian population, so I doubt the Russian military is that worried about casualties.

Joe Hill's Ghost

10th August 2008, 08:29

If the USA did they would have invaded Venezuela a long time that has a much weaker military force.

Why? Chavez has a pretty strong military,supplemented by extensive irregular forces, and a government with huge popular support. Venezuela is also quite large. Georgia is a friendly nation that would welcome US soldiers. Its like comparing apples to oranges.

Lose? The US can barely occupy Afganistan and Iraq. While Russia's population is shrinking this is because of poverty, it can easily and be quickly reversed, hell just drafting all able bodies into the Russian military would halt the shrinking Russian population, so I doubt the Russian military is that worried about casualties.

Um no, its not just about poverty. It's a multi vector issue that covers, AIDS, poverty, women's rights, access to contraception, and emigration. And its a problem that Russia can't really address. Russia also suffers from an extremely unhealthy population. The military had to begin paying volunteer soldiers becuase conscripts failed the health exam en masse.

Moreover, this isn't about occupation. Georgia is a friendly country, they would welcome US soldiers. But this isn't happening, because Russia and the US don't want a nuclear war. That would be bad.

John Lenin

10th August 2008, 09:15

Russia should go all the way and topple the regime imo.

Nobody should expect Russia to tolerate a U.S. puppet on their door step.

KrazyRabidSheep

10th August 2008, 14:57

Russia should go all the way and topple the regime imo.

Nobody should expect Russia to tolerate a U.S. puppet on their door step.
Russia is no rose garden, either.
They are capitalist, imperialist, and heavily influenced by former KGB officers and their groupies.

In the long run, I don't see Russia toppling Georgia serving the interests of socialism, anyway. Nor do I see an emerging capitalist state toppling another emerging capitalist state without influencing the new government, if not outright annexing it.

Red_or_Dead

10th August 2008, 15:06

It has been reported by Tass that about 20,000 people from Iuzhnaia Osetiia have fled to the Russian Federation.

My apologies then.

sigh, yet another pointless ethnic conflict. Georgia no doubt feels bold due due to their preferential status with the US and NATO and Russia under Putin has threatned to attack Georgia for sometime now.

Mhm. Its pretty clear by now that Georgia bit off more than they can chew.

This move is stupid as what is the US going to do when Russia calls the US's bluff?

Shit themselves, I guess.

Russia is no rose garden, either.
They are capitalist, imperialist, and heavily influenced by former KGB officers and their groupies.

In the long run, I don't see Russia toppling Georgia serving the interests of socialism, anyway. Nor do I see an emerging capitalist state toppling another emerging capitalist state without influencing the new government, if not outright annexing it.

I agree - I personaly would rather see Saakashvilli to stay in power, instead of having a KGB nutbag turning Georgia into another Chechnya.

But then again, no matter who wins, Georgian people are screwed.

Psy

10th August 2008, 16:39

Why? Chavez has a pretty strong military,supplemented by extensive irregular forces, and a government with huge popular support. Venezuela is also quite large. Georgia is a friendly nation that would welcome US soldiers. Its like comparing apples to oranges.

Russia has a military many times larger then that of Venzeula and also has tactical nukes meaning Russia has the capabilities to vapourize invading armies while Venezuela doesn't.

Um no, its not just about poverty. It's a multi vector issue that covers, AIDS, poverty, women's rights, access to contraception, and emigration. And its a problem that Russia can't really address. Russia also suffers from an extremely unhealthy population. The military had to begin paying volunteer soldiers becuase conscripts failed the health exam en masse.

The issue of population didn't come out till the end of the USSR and living standards of Russia collapsed. Like in the documentary "End of a Nation" it is basically the birthrate of a 1st world nation (the low birthrate wasn't much of a problem for the USSR) with the death rate of a 3rd would country.

So the solution is simple, raise the living standard of Russians back to at lest to what is was under the USSR in the 1980's and the problem would mostly be solved.

Moreover, this isn't about occupation. Georgia is a friendly country, they would welcome US soldiers. But this isn't happening, because Russia and the US don't want a nuclear war. That would be bad.
So? There is also conventional forces. Also the US has army is already in crisis, the moral of US troops in Iraq are approaching mutinous levels, the US army is turning a volunteer troops as cynical about the army bureaucracy as a drafted troops and the effectiveness of US troops against Russian troops is questionable.

Red_or_Dead

10th August 2008, 17:00

GEORGIAN ARMY RETREATS FROM SOUTH OSSETIA

(From BBC World) There has been a cease-fire since this morning, and Georgian units are moving out of S. Ossetia. There are, however, reports that the fighting continues on a smaller scale.

Also, Russian tanks have been seen in Abkhazia, which is apparantley becoming the second front in this conflict.

Psy

10th August 2008, 19:10

Red_or_Dead

10th August 2008, 19:21

Georgian officials call it a tactical withdrawal.

They will be tacticaly retreating to Turkey pretty soon, if they dont achieve a lasting cease fire.

Lamanov

10th August 2008, 19:54

A small digression.

Complicated political and ethnic situation in the Caucasus could always be used for pushing certain imperialist interests:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b0/Caucasus-ethnic_en.svg

spartan

10th August 2008, 22:16

Georgia has asked for a ceasefire, but Russia says it will only agree to a ceasefire if all Georgian forces leave South Ossetia, Saakashvili resigns and the Georgian army is disbanded!

Also the Russian black sea fleet sank a Georgian ship, whilst the Russian airforce has continued bombing targets inside Georgia itself (including the international airport in Tbilisi just a few hours before the French foreign minister was due to arrive on a peace mission).

Well it looks like Georgia has been well and truly beaten and is on the brink of death itself.

The US and it's puppets should learn a valuable lesson from this: dont fuck with Russia:lol:

Led Zeppelin

10th August 2008, 22:24

Georgia has asked for a ceasefire, but Russia says it will only agree to a ceasefire if all Georgian forces leave South Ossetia, Saakashvili resigns and the Georgian army is disbanded!

Source for this?

The US and it's puppets should learn a valuable lesson from this: dont fuck with Russia:lol:

The US wasn't involved in the battle at all, if they were the outcome would have probably been very different (think nuclear holocaust), so I don't see how they would take a lesson from this.

I don't think anyone expected Georgia to actually win.

dirtycommiebastard

10th August 2008, 22:26

Source for this?The US wasn't involved in the battle at all, if they were the outcome would have probably been very different (think nuclear holocaust), so I don't see how they would take a lesson from this.

I'm pretty sure the US is backing Georgia on this.

They obviously can't be directly involved. Think Nuclear Holocaust :D

Led Zeppelin

10th August 2008, 22:29

They are only backing Georgia in words, not deeds.

So they aren't indirectly involved either.

They need Russia for the North-Korea and Iran issues, so Russia would have to go pretty far for them to get even indirectly involved.

dirtycommiebastard

10th August 2008, 22:40

Led Zeppelin

10th August 2008, 22:42

Well, what about involvement through NATO? I'm sure thats not out of the question.

That's doubtful as well because the most powerful NATO countries are reliant on Russia for their gas supplies.

dirtycommiebastard

10th August 2008, 22:46

That's doubtful as well because the most powerful NATO countries are reliant on Russia for their gas supplies.

Well aren't you MR Smartypants :D

spartan

10th August 2008, 22:51

Source for this?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7552908.stm

The rest of the information came from me watching BBC and ITV news on TV.

The US wasn't involved in the battle at all, if they were the outcome would have probably been very different (think nuclear holocaust), so I don't see how they would take a lesson from this.

There are US army instructors inside Georgia training the Georgian army, whilst the Georgian army had just recently started outfitting their army with US made M4 carbines and Israeli Tavor bullpup assault rifles replacing their Soviet era AK-74's.

There is also 2000 Georgian soldiers in Iraq as part of the US led coalition and 1000 of those have been recalled to Georgia because of the recent conflict and were transported with the help of the US.

Georgia invading South Ossetia was obviously at the instigation of the US to gain a more secure foothold to protect the US built and controlled oil/gas pipeline going through Georgia (which is at threat from Russia, which, if they gained it, would put all energy resources going to Europe 100 % under Russian control, which America obviously doesn't want).

Led Zeppelin

10th August 2008, 22:59

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7552908.stm

The rest of the information came from me watching BBC and ITV news on TV.

Erm, that source says something entirely different from what you said:

The US ambassador to the UN, Zalmay Khalilzad, quoted Russia's foreign minister saying Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili "must go".

He asked his Russian counterpart, Vitaly Churkin: "Is the goal of the Russian Federation to change the leadership of Georgia?" Mr Churkin did not directly answer the question, but said there were leaders who had "become an obstacle".

So Russia has not officially demanded him to resign...

There are US army instructors inside Georgia training the Georgian army, whilst the Georgian army had just recently started outfitting their army with US made M4 carbines and Israeli Tavor bullpup assault rifles replacing their Soviet era AK-74's.

There is also 2000 Georgian soldiers in Iraq as part of the US led coalition and 1000 of those have been recalled to Georgia because of the recent conflict and were transported with the help of the US.

Again, do you have a source for this?

Georgia invading South Ossetia was obviously at the instigation of the US to gain a more secure foothold to protect the US built and controlled oil/gas pipeline going through Georgia (which is at threat from Russia, which, if they gained it, would put all energy resources going to Europe 100 % under Russian control, which America obviously doesn't want).

How exactly did the invasion gain them a more secure foothold?

I really doubt the US was behind all this, they already had their pipeline secured before the invasion and they wanted to keep it that way, i.e., they preferred the status quo.

It was the renegade president of Georgia who thought he could get away with the invasion, which didn't happen.

He took a gamble and lost.

Red_or_Dead

10th August 2008, 23:02

spartan

10th August 2008, 23:14

I don't know if this is true or not but a Russian news source is reporting that an American has been captured by Russian forces:
http://www.izvestia.ru/news/news185341

The article is in Russian but i found a rough translation from another forum:

A group of Georgian explosives experts were captured in South Ossetia, among them is an American citizen, an African-American. This is reported by "Radio Ossetia".

The group was detained in the area around the village of Zar, which is located on the "road of life" - the Zarskaya road.

It is assumed that the American citizen is one of the NATO instructors. At the moment, he was transferred to Vladikavkaz to resolve the circumstances around his presence on the territory of the Republic of South Ossetia.

As mentioned by Rosbalt news service (http://www.rosbalt.ru/ (http://www.rosbalt.ru/)), the Plenipotentiary Representitive to the Russian Federation Dmitriy Medoyev already reported that several dark-skinned bodies were found among the corpses in Tskhinvali, having fought on the side of Georgia.

Psy

10th August 2008, 23:20

Ok, so now Russia is in full control of South Ossetia. Ive also heard reports of a general mobilisation in Abkhasia, and a possibility that they will join in the fighting on the Russian side. Infact, it has been reported that Russian tanks have already been seen in Abkhasia.

So what do you guys reckon? Will Russia stop with Ossetia (and potentialy Abkhasia), or will they go all the way and invade the rest of Georgia?
I don't think it would be wise, Russia already has to deal with civilian wounded and refuges that crossed into Russia to escape the fighting. Also while Russian troops have general support from the citizens of S.Ossetia odds are they would have to deal with insurgents if they go into the rest of Georgia.

Red_or_Dead

10th August 2008, 23:27

I don't think it would be wise, Russia already has to deal with civilian wounded and refuges that crossed into Russia to escape the fighting. Also while Russian troops have general support from the citizens of S.Ossetia odds are they would have to deal with insurgents if they go into the rest of Georgia.

Yeah, thats true. Maybe they would just go in and change the Georgian leadership, but then there might be an insurgency against the new puppet-government as well.

In any case, Russians are undisputed victors in this conflict.

Georgia wont be doing that again soon.

Psy

10th August 2008, 23:32

Yeah, thats true. Maybe they would just go in and change the Georgian leadership, but then there might be an insurgency against the new puppet-government as well.

In any case, Russians are undisputed victors in this conflict.

Georgia wont be doing that again soon.
Really the best path would be to push to have Georgia tried for war crimes in the international court, low chance of success but it could allow Russia to get in the news with the fact they were attacked by Georgia and not the other way around.

Guerrilla22

10th August 2008, 23:36

Well, what about involvement through NATO? I'm sure thats not out of the question.

They are both actually part of NATO's dubiously titled partnership for peace program, so the alliance wouldn't favor one over the other. I'm pretty sure no NATO countries want to throw themselves in the middle of this either. georgia bit off more than they can chew and now the best they can hope for is that the Russians won't move to incorporate the area into their country, once the Georgian military withdraws.

politics student

11th August 2008, 00:02

Ok, so now Russia is in full control of South Ossetia. Ive also heard reports of a general mobilisation in Abkhasia, and a possibility that they will join in the fighting on the Russian side. Infact, it has been reported that Russian tanks have already been seen in Abkhasia.

So what do you guys reckon? Will Russia stop with Ossetia (and potentialy Abkhasia), or will they go all the way and invade the rest of Georgia?

I can not say I would blame them if they removed the government who ordered an attack on their citizens.

Georgia started this conflict while Russia is being heavy handed they can stop the risk of future attacks.

I just hope that Russia does not kill to many civilians in the invasion of Georgia if it happens.

War is never a good thing I just want to know why Georgia choose to invade South Ossetia (attacking both Russian peace keepers and Russian civilians a response of force was going to follow from Russia)

Psy

11th August 2008, 02:42

I can not say I would blame them if they removed the government who ordered an attack on their citizens.

Georgia started this conflict while Russia is being heavy handed they can stop the risk of future attacks.

I just hope that Russia does not kill to many civilians in the invasion of Georgia if it happens.

War is never a good thing I just want to know why Georgia choose to invade South Ossetia (attacking both Russian peace keepers and Russian civilians a response of force was going to follow from Russia)
I think Georgia thought the US troops would have been deployed to help by now.

Raj Radical

11th August 2008, 04:11

Russia and Georgia have managed to kill 2000 civilians in 2 days. Remember that Israel's month-long carpet bombing of Lebanon only killed 900. Such a pointless war.

politics student

11th August 2008, 09:42

I think Georgia thought the US troops would have been deployed to help by now.

That makes sense. I can not see the US sending in troops with out creating a larger conflict which would only kill more civilians. :(

Edelweiss

11th August 2008, 10:41

Red_or_Dead

11th August 2008, 13:48

^^^To be completely honest hypocrisy comes from both sides. For Russia the right of national self determination applies for Ossetia, but not for Kosovo. Actualy, NATO and Russia now have completley opposite stances than they had in the Kosovo matter.

Edelweiss

11th August 2008, 14:15

To be completely honest hypocrisy comes from both sides.

Agreed.

Black Dagger

11th August 2008, 14:52

Red_or_Dead

11th August 2008, 14:58

I love how until i read about this conflict on RL i had only seen a bit about it on the TV news and they the lead the story with the headline 'Russia invades Georgia!' :blink:

I guess we know whose side they're on :rolleyes:

Technicaly they are invading Georgia, as S. Ossetia hasnt been reckognised as an independant state by anyone so far. So, de jure they are invading Georgia.

I agree, though, the western media are incredibly biased on this issue.

Hessian Peel

11th August 2008, 15:29

Georgia has a right to defend itself against Russian aggression.

Russian peacekeeping troops my eye.

DancingLarry

11th August 2008, 15:32

The Georgian, Russian and western governments alike once again collectively proving what a miserable folly the existence of state and government in each and every case is.

Anarchoid

11th August 2008, 15:56

Neither side is entirely blameless here. Russia has been toying with Georgia for some time now, but Saakshvili's reaction was totally unnecessary.

As I write this, Russia has confirmed that its troops have now entered Georgia from Abkhazia.

Psy

11th August 2008, 16:12

Technicaly they are invading Georgia, as S. Ossetia hasnt been reckognised as an independant state by anyone so far. So, de jure they are invading Georgia.

I agree, though, the western media are incredibly biased on this issue.

Russian peace keepers have been in S. Ossetia for about a decade now, so the saying Russia invaded S. Ossetia is misleading.

Psy

11th August 2008, 16:21

Georgia has a right to defend itself against Russian aggression.

Russian peacekeeping troops my eye.
Russian aggression? It was Georgia that attacked Russian troops on disputed land (and it is disputed as around 90% of the population of S. Ossetia want to break away from Georgia) Regardless of if Russia was right to be in that disputed land, Georgia went on the offensive and Georgia paid dearly for their stupidity.

Philosophical Materialist

11th August 2008, 16:54

I wonder if a part of Georgia's foolish scheme was to appear to be the "weaker side" against a powerful neighbour, thus appearing to need protection from the NATO alliance.

Led Zeppelin

11th August 2008, 16:57

I think that as communists we should keep in mind that we oppose both sides in this conflict, because, you know, both are capitalist states.

cyu

11th August 2008, 18:13

Georgia has a right to defend itself against Russian aggression.

Russian peacekeeping troops my eye.

Everybody has a right to defend themselves or anybody else against aggression. If Georgians are attacking Ossetians, Russians have the right to defend Ossetians. If Russians are attacking Georgians, Americans have the right to defend Georgians. What really should happen, however, is that everyone should be supporting whoever is being attacked.

PigmerikanMao

11th August 2008, 18:19

I think that as communists we should keep in mind that we oppose both sides in this conflict, because, you know, both are capitalist states.

Albeit that both nations are capitalist, there is a great contradiction between Russia and Georgia. Russia's economy is much better off than that of Georgia, its military much more powerful, and its citizenry far better off in their quality of life. Russia's invasion examples regional imperialism justified by their own nationalist thirst for power. The Georgian people must capitalize on this contradiction the way the Chinese did in WW2. Although there is great antagonism between the proletariat and bourgeois classes within Georgia, the nation altogether faces the much greater danger of Russian Kleptocratic Fascism.

PigmerikanMao

11th August 2008, 18:21

Everybody has a right to defend themselves or anybody else against aggression. If Georgians are attacking Ossetians, Russians have the right to defend Ossetians. If Russians are attacking Georgians, Americans have the right to defend Georgians. What really should happen, however, is that everyone should be supporting whoever is being attacked.

I believe the Georgian military returned fire against the Ossetian rebels after they repeatedly violated a ceasefire and shot artillery rounds into villages in Georgia proper. The Georgians were defending themselves.

Red_or_Dead

11th August 2008, 18:52

Russian peace keepers have been in S. Ossetia for about a decade now, so the saying Russia invaded S. Ossetia is misleading.

I said that they invaded de jure Georgian territory. And that is true, as S. Ossetia is within the internationaly reckognised borders of Georgia.

Anyway, the latest news (from TV Slovenia) are:

-Russians allegedly captured the Georgian city of Gori (though that is still disputed)
-Russians launched an attack on Georgia proper from Abkhazia, and have allegedly captured an important town.
-Georgian regular army is said to be completely defeated, and the defense of Georgia now stands on a handfull of volounteers.

So, I guess this is it. Protecting Ossetians was just an excuse for an all-out invasion on Georgia. I hope that Georgians fucking bleed the Russians, just like the Chechens did.

Labor Shall Rule

11th August 2008, 19:21

I really doubt the US was behind all this, they already had their pipeline secured before the invasion and they wanted to keep it that way, i.e., they preferred the status quo.

It was the renegade president of Georgia who thought he could get away with the invasion, which didn't happen.

He took a gamble and lost.

Yes, the U.S. is transporting Georgian troops there (http://www.eurotrib.com/?op=displaystory;sid=2008/8/9/164938/8032), so it's only clear that Saakashvili had to gain permission from Washington prior to the Georgian intrusion in South Ossetia. Ha'aretz has already reported that Israeli military advisors are very much immersed in the regional conflict, despite of the fact that Tel-Aviv has frozen arms sales just recently.

Saakashvili did this under Western backing in the face of growing Russian military expenditures and the expansion of Russian influence over the Caucaus and Central Asia. It is not coincidence, nor did he go 'renegade' and 'took a gamble'.

Led Zeppelin

11th August 2008, 19:30

Yes, the U.S. is transporting Georgian troops there (http://www.eurotrib.com/?op=displaystory;sid=2008/8/9/164938/8032),

Link doesn't work:

Sorry. I can't seem to find that story.

so it's only clear that Saakashvili had to gain permission from Washington prior to the Georgian intrusion in South Ossetia. Ha'aretz has already reported that Israeli military advisors are very much immersed in the regional conflict, despite of the fact that Tel-Aviv has frozen arms sales just recently.

The one doesn't follow from the other.

If the US transported Georgian troops back to Georgia, that doesn't mean that Saakashvili asked for permission before he ordered the attack which happened before the troops were even ordered back.

Saakashvili did this under Western backing in the face of growing Russian military expenditures and the expansion of Russian influence over the Caucaus and Central Asia. It is not coincidence, nor did he go 'renegade' and 'took a gamble'.

Well unless you can read Saakahsvili's mind, there's no way to know for sure.

Given the evidence though, it seems unlikely that the US knew about this beforehand, if they did they would've probably told him to not do it because as I said, they preferred to keep the status quo.

So yes, as I said, it was probably a gamble by the renegade president Sakaashvili.

Labor Shall Rule

11th August 2008, 20:09

Remove the parenthesis from the from the link

--------

Tbilisi had to ask the White House if they could take troops out of Iraqin the weeks prior to the military action - this means that closed-door diplomacy was in work here, and that certain adjustments had to be made to accommodate for the Georgians.

So no, I can't 'read' Saakahsvili's mind; no one can. But it's clear that Bush had knowledge of the Georgian's ambitions - why would he let them temporarily leave and use American transportation, and moreover, what other purpose would Georgia have for placing their contigent of troops back onto their native soil other than for pursuing a military agenda in the region?

Psy

11th August 2008, 20:12

I said that they invaded de jure Georgian territory. And that is true, as S. Ossetia is within the internationaly reckognised borders of Georgia.

Would you say Georgia invaded Georgia if it was just S. Ossetia fighting against Georgia? When the USA backed South Vietnam (I'm talking before major military operations) would you say the US invaded Vietnam since south and north Vietnam didn't officially exist as nations?

Anyway, the latest news (from TV Slovenia) are:

-Russians allegedly captured the Georgian city of Gori (though that is still disputed)
-Russians launched an attack on Georgia proper from Abkhazia, and have allegedly captured an important town.
-Georgian regular army is said to be completely defeated, and the defense of Georgia now stands on a handfull of volounteers.

So, I guess this is it. Protecting Ossetians was just an excuse for an all-out invasion on Georgia. I hope that Georgians fucking bleed the Russians, just like the Chechens did.
Why should we hope for a US puppet to win? Yes this is a case of Russian imperialism but the alternative for them is American imperialism.

Led Zeppelin

11th August 2008, 20:26

Tbilisi had to ask the White House if they could take troops out of Iraqin the weeks prior to the military action - this means that closed-door diplomacy was in work here, and that certain adjustments had to be made to accommodate for the Georgians.

You shouldn't put so much faith into blog posts from the Daily Koz.

Please provide real evidence for that claim.

So no, I can't 'read' Saakahsvili's mind; no one can. But it's clear that Bush had knowledge of the Georgian's ambitions - why would he let them temporarily leave and use American transportation, and moreover, what other purpose would Georgia have for placing their contigent of troops back onto their native soil other than for pursuing a military agenda in the region?

All of this is based on the claim that they asked the US if they could move half of their troops back home from Iraq weeks before the attack, and there is no real evidence to support that claim (at least I haven't seen any so far), so basically your position is based on pretty much nothing.

However, it seems very unlikely that the US gave the go-ahead for an action that would upset the status-quo, because the status-quo was in their favor.

Faction2008

11th August 2008, 20:36

I don't know much about the history so who is in the wrong in this battle?

Labor Shall Rule

11th August 2008, 20:51

You obviously didn't read the link included within that link (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article4491866.ece), I don't see why you are so persistent on proving your point.

The tide is not in their favor - Russia now has troops stationed in seceding regions that surrounds a land-area that is rich in petroleum. They have expanded territory in this area, which is a 'victory' for Russian expansionism if you ask me. It gives them more of a leverage at the table (we will let you keep this if you import us this), so this is a blunder for the US and their Western allies. The 'status-quo' now is not in their favor in Georgia.

Please, Led Zeppelin, let's not be an ignoramus: Saakahsvili is an American creation, they gambled a lot to put him in there over Eduard Shevardnadze (including $565 million in aid programmes), and any pro-independence movement (such as the ones in South Ossetia and Abkhazia) weakens the Putin-Medvedev encroachment into Central Asia. It's also important to note that Washington has not fallen Israel's lead in freezing defense sales, and to follow the accusations of American agents found in South Ossetia. Georgia just can not 'temporarily' pull-out troops without informing Bush of the cause of doing so - to suggest so is to make a gross miscalculation of the White House's influence over Tbilisi.

Led Zeppelin

11th August 2008, 21:00

You obviously didn't read the link included within that link (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article4491866.ece), I don't see why you are so persistent on proving your point.

There is nothing in that link that proves your claim.

I don't see why you are so persistent in claiming something which you can't back up with real evidence.

The tide is not in their favor - Russia now has troops stationed in seceding regions that surrounds a land-area that is rich in petroleum. They have expanded territory in this area, which is a 'victory' for Russian expansionism if you ask me. It gives them more of a leverage at the table (we will let you keep this if you import us this), so this is a blunder for the US and their Western allies. The 'status-quo' now is not in their favor in Georgia.

I know it is not in their favor now, I was referring to before the initial Georgian attack which started the war, when it was in their favor.

That's my whole point, you are the one who's saying that the US was behind this mess.

Please, Led Zeppelin, let's not be an ignoramus: Saakahsvili is an American creation, they gambled a lot to put him in there over Eduard Shevardnadze (including $565 million in aid programmes), and any pro-independence movement (such as the ones in South Ossetia and Abkhazia) weakens the Putin-Medvedev encroachment into Central Asia. It's also important to note that Washington has not fallen Israel's lead in freezing defense sales, and to follow the accusations of American agents found in South Ossetia. Georgia just can not 'temporarily' pull-out troops without informing Bush of the cause of doing so - to suggest so is to make a gross miscalculation of the White House's influence over Tbilisi.

Please, Mullahs Shall Rule, let's not be morons: You said Georgia had asked the US if they could move troops home from Iraq weeks before the attack without providing any evidence for it, then you go off on a rant about how bad the attack turned out for them, which is exactly one of the points of my argument, which is that the US probably did not give the go-ahead for the initial attack.

So you are trying to mix up and confuse the before the attack and after the attack discussion.

I never said that Georgia did not pull out troops out of Iraq after the attack, I never even disagreed with what you said happened after the attack, in fact I said pretty much the same thing before you did, so I have no idea why you even posted that.

The point is what happened before the attack, and since you can't back up your claim, which was, for the third time, that Georgia asked the US if it could withdraw troops from Iraq "weeks before the attack", thereby letting the US know of the attack, I'm going to assume that you were just lying and thought that you could away with throwing around a link to nothing as "proof".

Basically, either provide evidence for that claim, or just let this go.

Red_or_Dead

11th August 2008, 21:32

Would you say Georgia invaded Georgia if it was just S. Ossetia fighting against Georgia? When the USA backed South Vietnam (I'm talking before major military operations) would you say the US invaded Vietnam since south and north Vietnam didn't officially exist as nations?

I dont know what was the legal situation in Vietnam. I know, though, that S. Ossetia was never officialy reckognised as independant. Therefore, even though it is de facto independant, its formally still Georgian territory. How many times do I have to repeat it?

And in case of Georgia vs. S. Ossetia it was a case of a country trying to regain control of what is formaly its territory. Not that I aprove of it, I think that S. Ossetians have the right to seccede whenever they wish to, but formaly speaking that was that.

Why should we hope for a US puppet to win? Yes this is a case of Russian imperialism but the alternative for them is American imperialism.

Yes, but in this specific case, the Russian imperialism has shown to be much more bloodthirsty and ruthless than American. I dont see any American planes bombing civilian targets in Georgia. The Russians are the agressors in this case (in the case of invading Georgia proper, anyway), and the Georgians are defending - not because they are a puppet state, but because they are under attack.

Harrycombs

11th August 2008, 21:50

There is nothing in that link that proves your claim.

I don't see why you are so persistent in claiming something which you can't back up with real evidence.

I read the same thing in the Washington Post this morning. He was right.

Led Zeppelin

11th August 2008, 21:56

I read the same thing in the Washington Post this morning. He was right.

I read the opposite thing this morning in the New York Times, he was wrong. :rolleyes:

If it was really proven that the US knew about the initial attack beforehand because Georgia asked for troops to be transported back from Iraq weeks before it happened, don't you think Russia would have, you know, made a big deal out of it? Don't you think it would have been mentioned somewhere other than just your Washington Post paper of this morning?

Besides, I don't believe that it was written there, I couldn't find anything about it on the Washington Post website, so you probably just made that up or thought that it was about something else.

Stop joking around and post some real evidence.

Harrycombs

11th August 2008, 22:02

I guess we will see who is right in the end.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,401702,00.html

"A Russian official said at least eight U.S. transport planes delivered between 800-1,000 Georgian servicemen from Iraq."

http://thinkprogress.org/2008/08/10/us-flying-georgian-troops-home-from-iraq/

"The AP reports that a “senior U.S. military official says the Americans have begun flying Georgian troops home from Iraq (http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/08/10/news/Iraq-Georgia.php) after they requested help with transportation”

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4495242.ece

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080810/ap_on_re_eu/iraq_georgia

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Led Zeppelin

11th August 2008, 22:07

I specifically replied to this in my previous post, and you totally missed it and posted something which has nothing to do with the issue at all:

I NEVER SAID GEORGIA DID NOT PULL OUT TROOPS OUT OF IRAQ AFTER THE ATTACK, I never even disagreed with what you said happened after the attack, in fact I said pretty much the same thing before you did, so I have no idea why you even posted that.

THE POINT IS WHAT HAPPENED BEFORE THE ATTACK, and since you can't back up your claim, which was, for the third time, THAT GEORGIA ASKED THE UNITED STATES IF IT COULD WITHDRAW TROOPS FROM IRAQ "WEEKS BEFORE THE ATTACK", THEREBY LETTING THE UNITED STATES KNOW OF THE ATTACK, I'm going to assume that you were just lying and thought that you could away with throwing around a link to nothing as "proof".

Psy

11th August 2008, 22:10

I dont know what was the legal situation in Vietnam. I know, though, that S. Ossetia was never officialy reckognised as independant. Therefore, even though it is de facto independant, its formally still Georgian territory. How many times do I have to repeat it?

And in case of Georgia vs. S. Ossetia it was a case of a country trying to regain control of what is formaly its territory. Not that I aprove of it, I think that S. Ossetians have the right to seccede whenever they wish to, but formaly speaking that was that.

What does it matter if S. Ossetia has not been officially recognized?

Yes, but in this specific case, the Russian imperialism has shown to be much more bloodthirsty and ruthless than American. I dont see any American planes bombing civilian targets in Georgia. The Russians are the agressors in this case (in the case of invading Georgia proper, anyway), and the Georgians are defending - not because they are a puppet state, but because they are under attack.
You missed the reports of the Georgian army shelling the city of Tskhinvali?

Harrycombs

11th August 2008, 22:17

Ah, my mistake. I misread your post. Sorry about that :blushing:. But why would Russia know if Georgia asked to be able to pull troops from Iraq, if the United States supports Georgia, why would the US tell Russia?

Red_or_Dead

11th August 2008, 22:19

What does it matter if S. Ossetia has not been officially recognized?

Actualy, not much. The only thing is that now Georgia can claim that Russians have invaded Georgian territory, when they invaded S. Ossetia.

You missed the reports of the Georgian army shelling the city of Tskhinvali?

No, I havent, though I realise that their credibility is somewhat questioned. But the fact remains that Russia is attacking Georgia on Georgian territory. Not just in the breakaway regions, but in Georgia proper as well. Georgia never attacked Russia on Russian soil.

Oh, and while Im writing this, TV Slovenia reports that according to Saakashvilli, "most of Georgia is now under Russian occupation". I dont know how credible that is, as Russians still deny their presence in Gori.

Led Zeppelin

11th August 2008, 22:24

Ah, my mistake. I misread your post. Sorry about that :blushing:.

Ok, no problem, I'm sorry for my anger outburst at that as well.

I edited my post.

But why would Russia know if Georgia asked to be able to pull troops from Iraq, if the United States supports Georgia, why would the US tell Russia?

Russia has an intelligence service which I assume would know, that is, if some blogger on Daily Koz knows it.

I'm not saying that it isn't possible that it happened, I'm just saying that if it did and it was known (as that member tried to make it out to be), it would've been front-page news and Russia would've made a big deal out of it. This is not something that would just get posted on some blog-site and be forgotten.

So given this and the lack of evidence, to believe that it happened is pure speculation, and you're better off believing that the US was not behind the initial attack, because they had an interest in keeping the status quo which was in their benefit before the Georgians decided to attack.

Pablosdog

12th August 2008, 09:35

South Ossetia is 95 percent Russian seperatist. Georgians have been kicking the bear in the testicles so to speak for a long time, this wasn't even a real surprise here. The problem is the annhilation of SO, pretty much a damn near close genocide by georgia if you ask me. I admit russia continuing to press on through Georgian soil isn't "right" but so isn't the systmatic elimination of civilians, even IF they are seperatists.

lvl100

12th August 2008, 10:23

South Ossetia is 95 percent Russian seperatist.

Wrong, from an ethnic point of view South Ossetia its mostly Ossetians with an important minority of Georgians.

This war is a perfect examle of how imperialism fuck up the innocent little nations.

On one side we have USA`s pawn Georgia.

On the other side we have the usual Russian geopolitical engineering. ( see Moldova and Traznistrya also)

In our case, South Ossetia was strongly supported and encouraged by Russia all those years, becouse of its potential for blackmailing the Georgians.

South Ossetia its nothing but a tool for Russians.

They used the "South Ossetia independency" card many times , last time at the NATO summit, to remember once again to Georgians that joining NATO means loosing the South Ossetia and Abkhazia territories.

Devrim

12th August 2008, 10:30

Russian Anarcho-syndicalists statement on the situation:

NO TO NEW CAUCASIAN WAR!
The eruption of military actions between Georgia and South Ossetia threatens to develop into a large-scale war between Georgia supported by NATO on the one hand, and the Russian state on the other. Thousands of people are already killed and wounded – principally, peaceful inhabitants; whole cities and settlements have been wiped out. The society has beed flooded with muddy streams of a nationalist and chauvinistic hysteria.
As always and everywhere in conflicts between the states, there is not and cannot be the righteous in new Caucasian war - there are only the guilty. The coals which have been fanned for years now have caused a military fire. The Saakashvili regime in Georgia keeps two thirds of population in poverty, and the greater internal discontent in the country this causes, the more it desires to find a way out from the deadlock in the form of a "small victorious war" in the hope, that it can write everything off. The government of Russia is full of determination to keep the hegemony in the Caucasus. Today they pretend to bethe defender of weak, but their hypocrisy is abundantly clear: in fact, Saakashvili only repeats what the Putinist soldiery did in Chechnya 9 years ago. Ruling circles of both Ossetias and Abkhazia aspire to strengthen their role as exclusive allies of Russia in the region, and at the same time to rally the impoverished population around the tested torch of the "national idea" and "rescue the people". Leaders of the USA, the European states and NATO, on the contrary, wish to weaken the influence of their Russian rivals in the Caucasus as much as possible to provide to themselves with control over fuel resources and their transport. Thus, we became witnesses and victims of the next coil of world opposition in struggle for power, oil and gas.
This fight does not bring to working people - Georgians, Ossets, Abkhasians or Russians - anything, except for blood and tears, incalculable disasters and deprivation. We express our deep sympathy to the friends and relatives of the victims, to the people which have beenleft without a roof over their head and means of subsistence as a result of this war.
We shouldn't fall under the influence of nationalist demagogy which demands unity with "our" government, flying the flag of "protecting the homeland". The main enemy of the simple people is not the poor brothers and sisters on the other side of the border or of other nationality. Their enemie are the rulers and bosses of all kinds, presidents and ministers, businessmen and generals, those who generate wars for the sake of multiplying power and riches. We call on the working people in Russia, Ossetias, Abkhazia and Georgia to reject the bait of nationalism and patriotism and to turn the anger on rulers and the rich on both sides of the border.
Russian, Georgian, Ossetic and Abkhazian soldiers! Do not obey the orders of your commanders! Turn your weapon against those who sent you ti war! Do not shoot the soldiers of your "opponent" - fraternize with them: a bayonet in the ground!
Working people in the rear! Sabotage military efforts, leave to go to meetings and demonstrations against the war, organize yourselves and strike against it!
No to the war and to its organizers - rulers and richmen! Yes to solidarity of working people across borders and the front lines!
Federation of Edication, Science and Technical Workers, CRAS-IWA

Devrim

Edelweiss

12th August 2008, 11:11

LZ, it would be highly naive to think that Washington did not approve the Georgian aggression.

Another good article on wsws.org about that: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/aug2008/cauc-a12.shtml

Led Zeppelin

12th August 2008, 11:19

LZ, it would be highly naive to think that Washington did not approve the Georgian aggression.

Why is it naive to think that the US would not want to preserve a status quo which was in their favor, only to throw it all away on a stupid gamble that would harm their relations with Russia, relations which they needed to keep Iran and North-Korea in check, and also risk losing their neo-colony in Georgia?

I think it's more naive to think the opposite.

Another good article on wsws.org about that: http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/aug2008/cauc-a12.shtml

Again, this article is about the US response after the attack, it says nothing about the US knowing of the attack beforehand.

I am not denying that the US is backing up Georgia now with their actions, it would be ridiculous if they didn't. They first started out with just words, and then with certain actions as well (like transporting the Georgian troops back), this is logical since Georgia is a neo-colony of them, and they don't want to lose it, which reinforces my point of them having preferred to keep the status quo before the Georgians decided to go on that absurd military escapade.

Also, it is important to keep in mind that I'm not saying that this happened because I say it did, I'm just going by the existing evidence. If someone comes up with real evidence proving the contrary, I'll be more than happy to accept it, but before that happens, I will not take the word of anyone for it.

Edelweiss

12th August 2008, 11:26

Again, this article is about the US response after the attack, it says nothing about the US knowing of the attack beforehand.

Oh no? I'm not sure you even read that article...it's a quiet profound analysis of Washington's involvement in the conflict, with the clear conclusion that they did knew beforehand:

It is inconceivable that Saakashvili did not review in detail with Rice his plans for a military assault on South Ossetia. Georgia—which is totally dependent on US military, diplomatic and financial support—could not take such a portentous action without informing Washington in advance and securing American sanction.

Preparations for the attack would have been far advanced when Rice met with Saakashvili a month ago. The Georgian military, moreover, is dominated from top to bottom by US military advisers.

The United States has been pouring military aid into Georgia ever since the US-led air war against Serbia in 1999, and the pace and scale of American military aid have accelerated since Washington engineered the so-called “Rose Revolution” that brought Harvard-educated Saakashvili to power in early 2004.

An article in Monday’s New York Times describes “a Pentagon effort to overhaul Georgia’s forces from bottom to top.” The article states: “At senior levels, the United States helped rewrite Georgian military doctrine and train its commanders and staff officers. At the squad level, American marines and soldiers trained Georgian soldiers in the fundamentals of battle.

“Georgia, meanwhile, began re-equipping its forces with Israeli and American firearms, reconnaissance drones, communications and battlefield management equipment, new convoys of vehicles and stockpiles of ammunition.”

As for the principle of national sovereignty and territorial integrity, the US is highly selective when it comes to its application. No one in either political party or in the establishment media has sought to explain why Serbia’s military intervention against Kosovan separatists was a war crime, while Georgia’s attack on South Ossetia was legitimate.

The Bush administration was the prime mover behind Kosovo’s declaration of independence from Serbia last February, on grounds indistinguishable from those claimed by anti-Georgian separatists in South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

Moreover, the US encouraged and financed the forces that sought to effect the secession of Chechnya from Russia in the 1990s.

Since the United States was clearly involved in the Georgian assault on South Ossetia, one must ask what were its intentions. It is difficult to believe that US policy makers believed Russia would take no action in response to such an immense provocation. Why then, would they support a move that would bring Russia into a direct conflict with one of Washington’s principal allies in the Caucasus—a region that constitutes a bridgehead between the resource-rich Caspian Basin and Western Europe and houses critical oil and gas pipelines?

Led Zeppelin

12th August 2008, 11:34

Oh no? I'm not sure you even read that article...it's a quiet profound analysis of Washington's involvement in the conflict, with the clear conclusion that they did knew beforehand:

Oh come on, that isn't real evidence, that's just the guy saying "would have", "could have":

It is inconceivable that Saakashvili did not review in detail with Rice his plans for a military assault on South Ossetia. Georgia—which is totally dependent on US military, diplomatic and financial support—could not take such a portentous action without informing Washington in advance and securing American sanction.

...

Preparations for the attack would have been far advanced when Rice met with Saakashvili a month ago. The Georgian military, moreover, is dominated from top to bottom by US military advisers.

...

Since the United States was clearly involved in the Georgian assault on South Ossetia

There is no solid evidence presented there, it's just him saying that Georgia receives aid and such from the US, which makes sense since it is a neo-colony of the US. That doesn't necessarily mean that the US knew about the attack beforehand, or that it ordered the attack.

Could you please reply to the points going against that theory though?

Why would the US risk a status quo which was in their favor on a military escapade which would only harm their relations with Russia, relations that they need to be good to keep Iran and North-Korea in check, and would risk losing their neo-colony in Georgia?

Those are all real points going against the theory of the US being behind the initial attack just because Georgia is a neo-colony of it. By the way, the definition of a neo-colony is a state that has a certain degree of independence from its master, so not everything a neo-colony does is necessarily sanctioned or ordered by the ruling nation, if it was the nation would be a colony, not a neo-colony.

Edelweiss

12th August 2008, 11:43

There is no solid evidence presented there, it's just him saying that Georgia receives aid and such from the US, which makes sense since it is a neo-colony of the US. That doesn't necessarily mean that the US knew about the attack beforehand, or that it ordered the attack.

No, no clear evidence is in the article, but a lot of indications, and a quiet plausible and convincing analysis with the conclusion you insist to deny for unknown reasons.

Could you please reply to the points going against that theory though?

Once again, read the article:

The only plausible answer is that the United States is deliberately seeking a major escalation of tensions between Russia and the West. Even if the current conflict does not spiral immediately into a wider conflagration, the fate of “little Georgia” will be invoked by the United States to justify a far more aggressive and confrontational stance toward Russia.

The demands being raised by the Bush administration, the European Union, the United Nations and others for a return to the “status quo ante” in Georgia are drenched in hypocrisy. They all know very well that the US is not about to abandon what it has come to see as a critical prop to its position in the Caucasus and its long-term perspective of reducing Russia to a semi-colonial status.

The resumption of something akin to the Cold War underscores the real motives that underlay the decades of confrontation between the US and the Soviet Union. American imperialism considered the Soviet Union—and continues to view Russia—as an obstacle to its geo-strategic aim of securing hegemony over Eurasia.

There is undoubtedly a domestic political component to the US-backed provocation against Russia as well. The Bush administration and the Republican presidential candidate, John McCain, want the November elections to take place under conditions of immense international crisis. They calculate that an environment of fear and insecurity will strengthen McCain’s chances, since a major prop of his campaign is his supposed foreign policy experience and national security expertise.

Obama, predictably and pathetically, is responding by seeking to assert his own militaristic credentials. Within minutes of Bush’s threatening statement against Russia on Monday, Obama issued his own denunciation of Russia in terms almost identical to those of Bush and McCain.

The immensely dangerous implications of the eruption of war in the Caucasus leave no doubt about where the drive of imperialism to carve up the world is leading. US imperialism intends to let nothing stand in the way of its goal of establishing global hegemony. It is dragging the American working class and the world into a catastrophe.

The only force that can stop it is the revolutionary mobilization of the American and international working class.

Led Zeppelin

12th August 2008, 11:53

No, no clear evidence is in the article, but a lot of indications, and a quiet plausible and convincing analysis with the conclusion you insist to deny for unknown reasons.

Unknown reasons? You mean those reasons that I have posted over and over again and you keep ignoring?

I'll repost them:

Why would the US risk a status quo which was in their favor (one of the main three oil pipelines was bombed by Russia today, if I recall correctly) on a military escapade which would only harm their relations with Russia, relations that they need to be good to keep Iran and North-Korea in check, and would risk losing their neo-colony in Georgia?

Those are all reasons, and they're not unknown.

Once again, read the article:

That article is just ridiculous in its assertions and analysis, I have no idea why you put so much faith in it.

For example:

The only plausible answer is that the United States is deliberately seeking a major escalation of tensions between Russia and the West. Even if the current conflict does not spiral immediately into a wider conflagration, the fate of “little Georgia” will be invoked by the United States to justify a far more aggressive and confrontational stance toward Russia.

He says "the only plausible answer is..." on the previous assumption that the US was behind it, and you admitted yourself that there is no hard evidence to prove it, so this guy is basing his analysis on an assumption!

And his analysis is as a result absurd. Why would the US "deliberately seek a major escalation of tensions between Russia and the West"? Is the US bored? Doesn't it have enough on its hands with Iraq and Afghanistan? Doesn't it need Russia to keep Iran and North-Korea in check?

Seriously, why would the US want to "justify a far more aggressive and confrontational stance toward Russia" given all this?

That article is written by a typical "revolutionary leftist" know-it-all who in reality knows nothing.

He even ends that point with the traditional: "The only force that can stop it is the revolutionary mobilization of the American and international working class."

I am sick and tired of people who write from a perspective that blinds them to the reality of the situation, just because their "ideology tells them to". The US is imperialist, sure. It wants to carve up the world, sure. Do you take that as your basis for geopolitical understanding? Everything the US does is to carve up the world, because it is imperialist, yeah that makes perfect sense!

And who cares about the fact that the actions of the US actually harmed their imperialist agenda, when you look at it from a broader view?

How can you even take that stuff seriously?

And again: It is important to keep in mind that I'm not saying that this happened because I say it did, I'm just going by the existing evidence. If someone comes up with real evidence proving the contrary, I'll be more than happy to accept it, but before that happens, I will not take the word of anyone for it.

Edelweiss

12th August 2008, 11:59

That article is written by a typical "revolutionary leftist" know-it-all who in reality knows nothing.

Ironic, that's exactly what I'm thinking when I read your posts in this thread.

Led Zeppelin

12th August 2008, 12:00

So I reply to you in-depth and seriously and all you can do is reply with a stupid one-liner?

I think that says enough.

Now stop wasting my time.

piet11111

12th August 2008, 15:32

when i look at Georgia's actions i can not believe they would have taken this risk without contacting washington and getting their blessing.

i suspect the united states are planning on capitalizing on this later.
probably its to slow down Russia's rise as a very important economic trade partner to Europe.

LuÃs Henrique

12th August 2008, 16:02

If the US emboldened Georgia into this adventure, their behaviour now is one of open treason towards their ally.

It wouldn't be the first time - American diplomacy has in the past encouraged Iraq's invasion of Kuwait and Argentinian occupation of Malvinas, only to turn against them in the next moment. But Georgia seemed to be an important pawn for their policies; I can't see why they would risk it this way.

Luís Henrique

Psy

12th August 2008, 16:54

It looks like it is over, Medvedev orders end to military operation (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0cqscEh1PU).

LuÃs Henrique

12th August 2008, 17:15

What? They aren't going over to Tbilisi to conquer the country and/or topple its valiant democracy?

They don't make evil powers like they used to any more...

Luís Henrique

Jenska

12th August 2008, 20:02

I keep asking myself what Russian Neo-Nazi's with their 'Russia for the Russians rhetoric' would think of their government acts to protect and taking care *cough* of Ossetian citizens..

The Ossetians doesn't really answer to the wished profile of a typical Aryan Russian :D

Leo

12th August 2008, 21:23

To go back to the topic:

This treachorous act of aggression in violation of the ceasefire by the regime in Tblisi against the independent republic of Iuzhnaia Ossetia is a serious crime against the peace. That more than 1000 people including civilians and peacekeepers have been murdered as a result of this unprovoked aggression against independent Iuzhnaia Ossetia is of grave concern. The people of Iuzhnaia Ossetia requested fraternal assistance from the Government of the Russian Federation to take urgent measures to protect the residents of Iuzhnaia Ossetia, some of whom are citizens of the Russian Federation, and to do everything to stop the genocide against the Ossetian people.

about 90% of the south ossetian population are russian nationals.
georgia used massive artillery strikes against the capital and smaller city's/villages killing hundreds so of course russia had to intervene to save its citizens.

Russia should go all the way and topple the regime imo.

Nobody should expect Russia to tolerate a U.S. puppet on their door step.

Georgia has a right to defend itself against Russian aggression.

Albeit that both nations are capitalist, there is a great contradiction between Russia and Georgia. Russia's economy is much better off than that of Georgia, its military much more powerful, and its citizenry far better off in their quality of life. Russia's invasion examples regional imperialism justified by their own nationalist thirst for power. The Georgian people must capitalize on this contradiction the way the Chinese did in WW2. Although there is great antagonism between the proletariat and bourgeois classes within Georgia, the nation altogether faces the much greater danger of Russian Kleptocratic Fascism.

I believe the Georgian military returned fire against the Ossetian rebels after they repeatedly violated a ceasefire and shot artillery rounds into villages in Georgia proper. The Georgians were defending themselves.

Those "highlights" from the discussion are, rather unfortunately, unsurprising. Once again, the so-called "defenders" of the cause of the proletariat jump to the defense of the interests of imperialist states.

The best response to this is given by the revolutionary group in Russia called KRAS:

NO TO NEW CAUCASIAN WAR!

The eruption of military actions between Georgia and South Ossetia threatens to develop into a large-scale war between Georgia supported by NATO on the one hand, and the Russian state on the other. Thousands of people are already killed and wounded – principally, peaceful inhabitants; whole cities and settlements have been wiped out. The society has been flooded with muddy streams of a nationalist and chauvinistic hysteria.

As always and everywhere in conflicts between the states, there is not and cannot be the righteous in new Caucasian war - there are only the guilty. The coals which have been fanned for years now have caused a military fire. The Saakashvili regime in Georgia keeps two thirds of population in poverty, and the greater internal discontent in the country this causes, the more it desires to find a way out from the deadlock in the form of a "small victorious war" in the hope, that it can write everything off. The government of Russia is full of determination to keep the hegemony in the Caucasus. Today they pretend to bethe defender of weak, but their hypocrisy is abundantly clear: in fact, Saakashvili only repeats what the Putinist soldiery did in Chechnya 9 years ago. Ruling circles of both Ossetias and Abkhazia aspire to strengthen their role as exclusive allies of Russia in the region, and at the same time to rally the impoverished population around the tested torch of the "national idea" and "rescue the people". Leaders of the USA, the European states and NATO, on the contrary, wish to weaken the influence of their Russian rivals in the Caucasus as much as possible to provide to themselves with control over fuel resources and their transport. Thus, we became witnesses and victims of the next coil of world opposition in struggle for power, oil and gas.

This fight does not bring to working people - Georgians, Ossets, Abkhasians or Russians - anything, except for blood and tears, incalculable disasters and deprivation. We express our deep sympathy to the friends and relatives of the victims, to the people which have been left without a roof over their head and means of subsistence as a result of this war.

We shouldn't fall under the influence of nationalist demagogy which demands unity with "our" government, flying the flag of "protecting the homeland". The main enemy of the simple people is not the poor brothers and sisters on the other side of the border or of other nationality. Their enemy are the rulers and bosses of all kinds, presidents and ministers, businessmen and generals, those who generate wars for the sake of multiplying power and riches. We call on the working people in Russia, Ossetias, Abkhazia and Georgia to reject the bait of nationalism and patriotism and to turn the anger on rulers and the rich on both sides of the border.

Russian, Georgian, Ossetic and Abkhazian soldiers! Do not obey the orders of your commanders! Turn your weapon against those who sent you to war! Do not shoot the soldiers of your "opponent" - fraternalize with them: a bayonet in the ground!

Working people in the rear! Sabotage military efforts, leave to go to meetings and demonstrations against the war, organize yourselves and strike against it!

No to the war and to its organizers - rulers and richmen! Yes to solidarity of working people across borders and the front lines!

I think we will hear about the events and read more clear analysis from other internationalist groups in Russia as well soon. It's important to note that while leftists from the outside are trying to decide whether to decide the Georgian or the Russian state, there is a different voice, and a voice on the ground, arguing for opposing the bourgeoisie at home.

spartan

12th August 2008, 22:46

Russia calls halt to offensive and dictates humiliating peace terms to the Georgians:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/12/russia.georgia1

The key Russian demands are that the Georgian leader pledges, in an agreement that is signed and legally binding, to abjure all use of force in his country in any attempt to resolve the territorial disputes with the two breakaway pro-Russian provinces of South Ossetia and Abkhazia; and that Georgian forces withdraw entirely from South Ossetia and are no longer part of the joint "peacekeeping" contingent there with Russian and local Ossetian forces.

Medvedev also insisted that the populations of the two breakaway regions had to be allowed to vote on whether they wanted to join Russia, prefiguring a possible annexation by Moscow that would enfeeble and diminish Georgia and leave Saakashvili looking crushed.

According to the news Saakashvili has accepted these terms.
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2008/08/12/bells512.jpg

Red_or_Dead

12th August 2008, 22:53

According to the news Saakashvili has accepted these terms.

Great. The war is over (for now), and Abkhazians and S. Ossetians get to vote on their fate.

I wonder if the Russians will be pleased with that, or will they try to invade again?

Magdalen

12th August 2008, 23:20

I've found a rather interesting article here, take a look if you can.

Tel Aviv to Tblisi: Israel's role in the Russia-Georgia War

http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article9756.shtml

Psy

12th August 2008, 23:41

Great. The war is over (for now), and Abkhazians and S. Ossetians get to vote on their fate.

I wonder if the Russians will be pleased with that, or will they try to invade again?

Uhhh, Georgia invaded S. Ossetians and Russia reacted. In fact if you recall it took Russia a while to react thus proving Russia wasn't planning on this. So if anything it would be if Georgia attacks again.

Red_or_Dead

12th August 2008, 23:43

Uhhh, Georgia invaded S. Ossetians and Russia reacted. In fact if you recall it took Russia a while to react thus proving Russia wasn't planning on this. So if anything it would be if Georgia attacks again.

I strongly doubt that Georgia will try anything like that anytime soon.

Psy

12th August 2008, 23:47

I strongly doubt that Georgia will try anything like that anytime soon.
Well then odds are Russia will just do mop up operations (like they say they are) and try to use this incident to lure Abkhazians and S. Ossetians into the Russian Federation.

Chapaev

13th August 2008, 01:38

Washington, Tel-Aviv, and the ruling circles of other imperialist countries bear responsibility for having initiated, provoked, and escalated the situation in Iuzhnaia Osetiia. It is simply impossible to believe that Saakashvili did not consult his sponsors for a military assault on Iuznaia Osetiia. Saakashvili had been yelling from the rooftops for quite some time his intention to reconquer Abkhazia and Iuzhnaia Osetiia. Statements from the United States President about the "territorial integrity" of Gruzia can only be interpreted as support for the genocidal aggression against Iuzhnaia Osetiia.

That the Tiflis regime launched this brutal aggression against Iuzhania Osetiia demonstrates that is no longer acceptable to return to what the pre-war situation had been. Through its ethnic cleansing of Ossetians, Tiflis has lost any right to de jure rule over Iuzhnaia Osetiia. The people of Iuzhnaia Osetiia must be allowed to choose their own political and social system free from foreign interference or coercion. The history of the Caucasus has established the precendent that the peoples of that region have the inalienable right to self-determination. After all, many of the Caucasian nations including the Ossets had voluntarily joined Russia in the late 18th and 19th centuries in order to escape Turkish and Persian feudal oppression. The people of Osetiia should exercise their right to self-determination the way they did in the late 18th century when they chose to join Russia.

de jure Georgian territory.

Whether or not it is recognized as such, the fact of the matter is that Iuzhnaia Osetiia is an independent republic whose people through their elected government exercise sovereignty. Because of agreements on the cessation of hostilities, Tiflis has no right to take action against an independent republic.

spartan

13th August 2008, 02:21

Psy

13th August 2008, 04:06

I agree.

People seem to forget that the US has military advisors in Georgia who are responsible for forming Georgia's geographical and military policy in this region and training and equipping their armed and special forces.

Small countries cannot act against bigger countries without the approval of the big countries rival.

What is most funny about this situation is that when push came to shove the US didn't help out it's ally Georgia like Georgia has helped the US in Iraq.

This should serve as a lesson for other small countries seeking alliances with the US (i.e. they will take from you but don't expect them to have your back when you're in the shit).
I think this was one big SNAFU for the USA and Georgia. They probably though Russian military was push over and wasn't expecting the Russian military to be able to be so effective.

Psy

13th August 2008, 05:51

Hey I just realized something neither said (even Russian media) is mentioning that South Ossetia was a autonomous oblast (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_oblasts_of_the_Soviet_Union). Doesn't this change everything? What did the USSR constitution say about autonomous oblasts in regards to republics separating? Did autonomous oblasts have any right to stay within the USSR constitution for staying within the USSR when its host republic separated for the USSR?

Rosa Lichtenstein

13th August 2008, 06:07

Stop the War meeting in London on this:

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2008/08/stop-war-meeting-on-georgia-nato-and.html

Die Neue Zeit

13th August 2008, 06:25

According to the news Saakashvili has accepted these terms.
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2008/08/12/bells512.jpg

Bush still looks like a monkey! :laugh:

sanpal

13th August 2008, 08:25

Yesterday i heard the opinion said by one russian political scientist on radio, if to answer the question "Who gave the order to start the War in the Caucasus?" and "Who is in advantage from it?" that it could be needed by "interest stakeholders" from US power elite to win election campaign in favour of Mc Cain as experienced military veteran vs Obama who seems won't be hard to protect American interest all over the World. So they considered to regenerate the "Cold War" or its virtual analog till election campaign will be over. For it something must be done to make Russia as aggressor. Scenario was a bit destroyed by Saacashvilli who razed to the ground the whole city with citizens with "40-pipes' artillery reactive mortar" mounts and bombing with air force, which has lead to numerous victims. Of course, the russian answer (as peacemaking force) was adequate. All it was as provocation to pull Russians into war. The Russian government (recognize S Osetia as Georgia territory) always called to solve this problem peacefully but neither West nor Georgia didn't support Russia.

Red_or_Dead

13th August 2008, 13:44

Whether or not it is recognized as such, the fact of the matter is that Iuzhnaia Osetiia is an independent republic whose people through their elected government exercise sovereignty. Because of agreements on the cessation of hostilities, Tiflis has no right to take action against an independent republic.

Agreed.

Hey I just realized something neither said (even Russian media) is mentioning that South Ossetia was a autonomous oblast (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomous_oblasts_of_the_Soviet_Union). Doesn't this change everything? What did the USSR constitution say about autonomous oblasts in regards to republics separating? Did autonomous oblasts have any right to stay within the USSR constitution for staying within the USSR when its host republic separated for the USSR?

Here:
http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/russian/const/77cons03.html#chap11

The part of the 1977 USSR constitution about the national-state structure.

Ive only took a few glances of it, and I only found this:

Article 72. Each Union Republic shall retain the right freely to secede from the USSR.

But that applies to the SSRs (Soviet Socialist Republics) - not to autonomus oblasts (or regions). I didnt find anything about those. It may just be that the constitution simply doesnt say wheter they can seccede or no.

News: TV Slovenia reports that the Russians have marched into Gori. They dont tell much more. Does anyone know more on this?

Psy

13th August 2008, 15:35

Agreed.

Here:
http://www.departments.bucknell.edu/russian/const/77cons03.html#chap11

The part of the 1977 USSR constitution about the national-state structure.

Ive only took a few glances of it, and I only found this:

But that applies to the SSRs (Soviet Socialist Republics) - not to autonomus oblasts (or regions). I didnt find anything about those. It may just be that the constitution simply doesnt say wheter they can seccede or no.

News: TV Slovenia reports that the Russians have marched into Gori. They dont tell much more. Does anyone know more on this?
Thanks I found this on that page

Article 84. The territory of an Autonomous Republic may not be altered without its consent.

So under the USSR constitution Georgia has to get South Ossetia's permission before annexing it into Georgia (which it already did on paper over a decade ago)? Of course I doubt anyone would still considers the USSR constitution valid in this dispute.

Red_or_Dead

13th August 2008, 17:30

Thanks I found this on that page

Article 84. The territory of an Autonomous Republic may not be altered without its consent.

So under the USSR constitution Georgia has to get South Ossetia's permission before annexing it into Georgia (which it already did on paper over a decade ago)? Of course I doubt anyone would still considers the USSR constitution valid in this dispute.

Actualy no, youre talking about autonomus republics (Abkhasia was one of such), but South Ossetia was an autonomus region.

Article 87. The Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic includes the Adygei, Gorno-Altai, Jewish, Karachai-Circassian, and Khakass Autonomous Regions.
The Georgian Soviet Socialist Republic includes the South Ossetian Autonomous Region. The Azerbaijan Soviet Socialist Republic include the Nagorno-Karabakh Autonomous Region. The Tajik Soviet Socialist Republic includes the Gorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Region.
There is no hint of wheter autonomus regions could seccede. At least not that I noticed, because this shit is complicated beyond imagination.

But basicly, wheter it is the case of autonomus republics (in this case Abkhasia) or autonomus regions (in this case S. Ossetia), I dont think that they can just seccede as they wish (that privilege seems to have been reserved for the SSRs). Maybe there is something in article 84. that could suggest that Autonomus republics could seccede from their SSR, or maybe from the Union itself, but I dont see it. In any case, that would only solve the Abkhasian question.

Anyway, I guess that after all this time no one will take the USSR constitution seriously. I say that S. Ossetians should decide wheter they want to stay in Georgia, join Russia, or become independant. Same for Abkhasians as well. Maybe the modern Georgian constitution forbids that, but... Well, I guess that it will be a loooooong time before a Georgian soldier puts his foot on the territory of the break-away regions. If ever.

Psy

13th August 2008, 17:53

Actualy no, youre talking about autonomus republics (Abkhasia was one of such), but South Ossetia was an autonomus region.

There is no hint of wheter autonomus regions could seccede. At least not that I noticed, because this shit is complicated beyond imagination.

But basicly, wheter it is the case of autonomus republics (in this case Abkhasia) or autonomus regions (in this case S. Ossetia), I dont think that they can just seccede as they wish (that privilege seems to have been reserved for the SSRs). Maybe there is something in article 84. that could suggest that Autonomus republics could seccede from their SSR, or maybe from the Union itself, but I dont see it. In any case, that would only solve the Abkhasian question.

Anyway, I guess that after all this time no one will take the USSR constitution seriously. I say that S. Ossetians should decide wheter they want to stay in Georgia, join Russia, or become independant. Same for Abkhasians as well. Maybe the modern Georgian constitution forbids that, but... Well, I guess that it will be a loooooong time before a Georgian soldier puts his foot on the territory of the break-away regions. If ever.

Yes but by annexing S.Osseita Georgia is changing its territory thus it needs its own consent to do so, the question is what does the constitution mean by consent? Do they mean the people of Georgia (and S.Osseita) have to vote on the matter and if so how much of the population has to go along with it?

Another thing I notice the media is ignoring that this same ethnic problem exited when Georgia was ruled by the Mensheviks which also carried a strong nationalist policy for Georgia.

Red_or_Dead

13th August 2008, 18:02

Yes but by annexing S.Osseita Georgia is changing its territory thus it needs its own consent to do so, the question is what does the constitution mean by consent? Do they mean the people of Georgia (and S.Osseita) have to vote on the matter and if so how much of the population has to go along with it?

Actualy, declaring S. Ossetian independance was "changing", as S. Ossetia was a part of the Georgian SSR, back in the USSR (all Autonomus were obviously under SSRs). But to be quite frank, I find it all very confusing. So, I say that if they want to seccede, they should have the right.

Psy

13th August 2008, 18:25

Actualy, declaring S. Ossetian independance was "changing", as S. Ossetia was a part of the Georgian SSR, back in the USSR (all Autonomus were obviously under SSRs). But to be quite frank, I find it all very confusing. So, I say that if they want to seccede, they should have the right.

But the Bolsheviks made S. Ossetia semi-independent to get around ethnic issues that were biting the Mensheviks in the ass (I notice the media ignores this yet I doubt any commentator knows what a Menshevik is) . It is not like the Bolsheviks just said "Hey there is a nice region with nice people lets give them some more autonomy".

It is like we are in a time warp but the Mensheviks have been replaced with the White Guard, and Bolsheviks no longer exist replaced with the Russians who clearly have imperialist interests in the conflict.

Red_or_Dead

13th August 2008, 18:30

But the Bolsheviks made S. Ossetia semi-independent to get around ethnic issues that were biting the Mensheviks in the ass (I notice the media ignores this yet I doubt any commentator knows what a Menshevik is) . It is not like the Bolsheviks just said "Hey there is a nice region with nice people lets give them some more autonomy".

It is like we are in a time warp but the Mensheviks have been replaced with the White Guard, and Bolsheviks no longer exist replaced with the Russians who clearly have imperialist interests in the conflict.

IDK about semi-independance, but yeah, history is repeating itself again.

I wonder how this will be resolved, though. Russians probably dont give a fuck about Georgian constitution, nobody cares anymore about the USSRs constitution, and nobody listened to Ossetians and Abkhasians until now.

My bet is that S. Ossetia will be anexed into Russia. Or become a puppet state. Dunno about Ablhasians and what they want.

Psy

13th August 2008, 19:01

IDK about semi-independance, but yeah, history is repeating itself again.

I wonder how this will be resolved, though. Russians probably dont give a fuck about Georgian constitution, nobody cares anymore about the USSRs constitution, and nobody listened to Ossetians and Abkhasians until now.

My bet is that S. Ossetia will be anexed into Russia. Or become a puppet state. Dunno about Ablhasians and what they want.

Really I think this pretty much is the last nail in coffin of the gains archived the Bolsheviks, the counter-revolutionaries pretty much have restored everything back to the way it was. Not only is Russia once again a imperialist power (just no longer feudalist) but it seems we are back to a similar power balance we seen leading up to WWI. NATO is still talking about expanding into Georgia and there are already talks by US politicians of rearming Georgia.

In a sick way it is funny that after all these decades of violence the world is pretty much right back at the turn of the last century, just the actors have changed.

Red_or_Dead

13th August 2008, 19:17

Really I think this pretty much is the last nail in coffin of the gains archived the Bolsheviks, the counter-revolutionaries pretty much have restored everything back to the way it was. Not only is Russia once again a imperialist power (just no longer feudalist) but it seems we are back to a similar power balance we seen leading up to WWI. NATO is still talking about expanding into Georgia and there are already talks by US politicians of rearming Georgia.

In a sick way it is funny that after all these decades of violence the world is pretty much right back at the turn of the last century, just the actors have changed.

I disagre - this is more a continuation of the Cold War, than a return to pre-WW1 world. First of all, in the pre-WW1 era Russians were allied with the west, and helped them in the fight against Germany and Austro-Hungary. Then it is the fact that it wasnt until the times of the Soviet Union that the Russians really went imperialist - from spreading their political influence all across the Eastern Europe, attempting to conquer S. Korea through N. Korea and China, repeating the same in Vietnam, to invading Afghanistan... And now, they are spreading their influence through countries like Serbia, Venezuela, Iran... Basicly, anyone who isnt pro - western or pro-American.

If we are talking about the restoration of imperial Russia, I presonaly think that it has been underway ever since Lenin died. From then on, the Soviet Union was an imperialist power, and a country that was alienating itslef from any progresivness whatsoever.

Psy

13th August 2008, 19:23

I disagre - this is more a continuation of the Cold War, than a return to pre-WW1 world. First of all, in the pre-WW1 era Russians were allied with the west, and helped them in the fight against Germany and Austro-Hungary. Then it is the fact that it wasnt until the times of the Soviet Union that the Russians really went imperialist - from spreading their political influence all across the Eastern Europe, attempting to conquer S. Korea through N. Korea and China, repeating the same in Vietnam, to invading Afghanistan... And now, they are spreading their influence through countries like Serbia, Venezuela, Iran... Basicly, anyone who isnt pro - western or pro-American.

If we are talking about the restoration of imperial Russia, I presonaly think that it has been underway ever since Lenin died. From then on, the Soviet Union was an imperialist power, and a country that was alienating itslef from any progresivness whatsoever.
I said that actors have changed, meaning instead of Britain being the leading imperialist power it is now the USA and instead of the German and British empire clashing over strategic regions you have the Russian empire in the shoes of the German empire trying to maintain and gain control of strategic regions.

spartan

13th August 2008, 22:02

According to BBC news even though both sides have agreed to a ceasefire Russian troops are still operating inside Georgia and have been seen moving south going deeper into Georgia.

Also the US has said it will provide "aid" to Georgia.

Now what this "aid" is I don't know, though I will hazard a guess that it includes weapons as well as food for displaced people.

Funny though how they don't say anything about aid for South Ossetians.

Red_or_Dead

13th August 2008, 22:41

I said that actors have changed, meaning instead of Britain being the leading imperialist power it is now the USA and instead of the German and British empire clashing over strategic regions you have the Russian empire in the shoes of the German empire trying to maintain and gain control of strategic regions.

Ah. Ok, I agree with that.

According to BBC news even though both sides have agreed to a ceasefire Russian troops are still operating inside Georgia and have been seen moving south going deeper into Georgia.

I heard that as well, but I dont know how reliable it is. One of our televisions reported that the Russians have captured Gori, but that was denied by the Russians and by the people in Gori. Whatever is going on in there, we will have to wait before any reliable info comes out.

Funny though how they don't say anything about aid for South Ossetians.

Not surprising. Fortunately, the Russians seem to be concerned for them.

Magdalen

13th August 2008, 22:49

Red_or_Dead

13th August 2008, 22:58

According to Al Jazeera English, Russian troops marched 15km out of Gori on the road towards Tblisi in a show of strength, before turning back towards Gori for the night. Al Jazeera were also saying that the port of Poti has been virtually destroyed, preventing the US aid ships from landing.

Judging by the style of their reporting, it appears that Al Jazeera is swallowing the Georgian line as much as anyone else. I'm running out of television news sources.

Yeah, I know, it really pisses me off. Some sources say that Russians are behaving, and are staying in the two break-away regions, some say that they are marching on Tbilisi... Fuck, if this goes on, ill hitch-hike there and see for myself.

ships-cat

13th August 2008, 23:55

Hmm... PaddyFD mentions Al Jazeera discussing 'American aid ships'.

Have I missed something ? WHAT American aid ships ? When where these loaded and despatched, and from where ? How could they even APPROACH the Georgian coast when it is under blockade by the Russian navy ? Or are these 'hypothetical' Aid ships ?

Anyway.... you can forget American aid.. military or otherwise. The USA has no ability to get ANYTHING into Georgia, unless - perhaps - it was overland, and with the active co-operation of the Turkish government. (and lets not forget, the US has pretty much exhausted it's stock of "goodwill" throughout most of Europe, and particularly in a predominantly muslim country like Turkey).

A few people have raised the issue of "Russian Imperialism". Well, that's a very interesting one. It's not just Georgia that's feeling pain; Azherjaiban and Kazahkstanrely rely on the BTP pipeline through Georgia to get their gas and oil to the Western markets (via Turkey to the Mediteranian). The pipeline has been shut down, and both countries are losing revenue.

So perhaps this whole thing is an excercise in sending a message to neighbouring countries: "Watch it... we can invade you militarily, or we can mess up your economies, so don't mess with us, and do what we tell you. "

Meow Purr :)

Psy

14th August 2008, 00:33

Yeah, I know, it really pisses me off. Some sources say that Russians are behaving, and are staying in the two break-away regions, some say that they are marching on Tbilisi... Fuck, if this goes on, ill hitch-hike there and see for myself.

Russia said it was a SNAFU, they were moving men and equipment and someone leading the convoy decided to take a road that went to Tblisi to get to a road that headed north, of course the person leading the convoy didn't think of how moving a convoy toward Tiblisi might look.

spartan

14th August 2008, 00:52

Hmm... PaddyFD mentions Al Jazeera discussing 'American aid ships'.

Have I missed something ? WHAT American aid ships ? When where these loaded and despatched, and from where ? How could they even APPROACH the Georgian coast when it is under blockade by the Russian navy ? Or are these 'hypothetical' Aid ships ?

Anyway.... you can forget American aid.. military or otherwise. The USA has no ability to get ANYTHING into Georgia, unless - perhaps - it was overland, and with the active co-operation of the Turkish government. (and lets not forget, the US has pretty much exhausted it's stock of "goodwill" throughout most of Europe, and particularly in a predominantly muslim country like Turkey).
Apparently Bush has said he will deliver this aid via military air and sea craft by the US military.

But like you I wonder just how they expect to deliver this stuff when the Russian navy has blockaded Georgia, Georgian ports are destroyed and Russian aircraft have complete air supremacy.

Here's the link:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7559252.stm

spartan

14th August 2008, 00:57

Russian forces have sunk several coast guard vessels in Georgia's military port of Poti:
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2008/08/2008813153517926662.html

RedHal

14th August 2008, 01:52

good going Boy George, start WW3 before you leave office

Psy

14th August 2008, 02:21

good going Boy George, start WW3 before you leave office
This goes back to the breakup of the USSR so you can't really lay all the blame on George Bush. This was bound to happen and really I can't believe the US ruling was this stupid, I mean they should just call themselves "Team Retard".

The US encroached into the Russian spear of influence for years while Russia regained its strength. The US allows one of its puppet to attack what Russia sees is its turf. What did the US think was going to happen? Russia flexed its military muscle to show the USA that it is in Russia's turf.

Dean

14th August 2008, 05:39

chebol

14th August 2008, 05:40

Just a point or two for Red_or_Dead, who is very fond of using the term "de jure". Firstly, the term means, basically, "in law", "legally".

Secondly, the presence of Russian troops (as part of a CIS peacekeeping force) since Georgian atrocities against Ossetians in the 1991-2 attempt by the latter to break-away is ALSO legal, after a fashion.

So, Georgia's violent attack upon Russian peace-keepers (and deliberate targeting of Ossetian civilians) is both legal and illegal. That is, act which are not "de jure" in pursuit of reasserting its "de jure" rights.

Law is not this simple magical formula that can be invoked to explain right and wrong (or even just "right"). We have in S. Ossetia a nice example of how limited the fictions of state "sovereignty" and legalism are, in the face of capitalist, and imperialist, interests.

As Marx wrote, "between equal rights, force prevails".

More generally, Stratfor's take is useful:
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/russo_georgian_war_and_balance_power

Dean

14th August 2008, 05:58

I've heard reports that C. Rice will visit Tbilisi in th followign days, that former soviet bloc leaders converged in the city for a rally yesterday, and also that Russian troops have marched to within an hour's drive of the capital. It seems that people are very confused (not to mention the outlandish, desperate claims of the Georgian president), something typical of these fast-changing conflicts.

Also, USAID has arrived in Georgia.

Psy

14th August 2008, 06:00

Now it seems that U.S. forces will be entering Georgia, albeit on a "peaceful, humanitarian" mission to give aid. I haven't found any distinct figures or descriptions of what the aid is, though. And not via warships (solely) but also via air. If the docks are finished, it will probably be all air.

This is shaping up to be a very dark time for the people in the region.

The Russian shuffling equipment and troops around could be related. Maybe the Russians are securing its lines to prepare for the arrival of the US into Georgia.

Dean

14th August 2008, 06:20

The Russian shuffling equipment and troops around could be related. Maybe the Russians are securing its lines to prepare for the arrival of the US into Georgia.

Perhaps, but almost certainly not in the antipation of a conflict. The only difference the U.S. forces will make is that the Russians will not fire on their positions, in order not to provoke a US-Russian war. It's also important to note that there are already 17 U.S. forces in Georgia, who stayed with the shipment of aid.

There are tales of looters putting bags over men's heads and slitting their throats, and of rape. Similar stories are coming from the Russian side, but at this point they are certainly exaggerated.

Also, I've sen conflicting reports that Russia has taken Gori or that it has left there.

Chapaev

14th August 2008, 07:09

There are reactionary elements among the ruling circles of the United States that are even calling for a war against Russia:

Bill Kristol:
[Georgia] has had the third-largest military presence — about 2,000 troops — fighting along with U.S. soldiers and marines in Iraq. For this reason alone, we owe Georgia a serious effort to defend its sovereignty. Surely we cannot simply stand by as an autocratic aggressor gobbles up part of — and perhaps destabilizes all of — a friendly democratic nation.http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/11/opinion/11kristol.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper&oref=slogin

Washington Times:
It is in America’s interest to exert maximum pressure on Russia to withdraw its troops and halt the interference in Georgian territory. This latest act shows the need for greater resolve in establishing a European security system that can be an effective check on Russian power
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/aug/11/russian-aggression/

Robert Kagan goes even further, suggesting that the Georgia-Russia conflict may be the start of World War III:

The mood is reminiscent of Germany after World War I, when Germans complained about the “shameful Versailles diktat” imposed on a prostrate Germany by the victorious powers and about the corrupt politicians who stabbed the nation in the back.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/10/AR2008081001871.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

Red_or_Dead

14th August 2008, 07:44

Just a point or two for Red_or_Dead, who is very fond of using the term "de jure". Firstly, the term means, basically, "in law", "legally".

I know very well what the term means. My point was that since nobody reckognised S. Ossetian independance, it is formaly still Georgian territory. That was it. I support their independance, as I said many times.

Rosa Lichtenstein

14th August 2008, 13:40

Latest analysis:

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2008/08/washington-to-saakashvili-shut-up.html

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2008/08/us-forces-to-be-sent-to-georgia.html

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2008/08/putin-wins-confirmed.html

Psy

14th August 2008, 17:00

Latest Russian press-release

General explains Russian presence in Gori (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NAzxWBF0CTY)

Chapaev

14th August 2008, 18:51

http://www.caglecartoons.com/images/preview/%7B918bb6cd-b61d-42b4-9ff1-c33aa94c173e%7D.gif

Rosa Lichtenstein

14th August 2008, 19:01

Nice cartoon!

Chapaev

14th August 2008, 19:05

The moderate approach of some Western European powers towards the situation in Gruzia and Ossetia stands in contrast to the belligerence of the United States and its puppet regimes in Ukraine and Poland.

http://www.saudigazette.com.sa/index.cfm?method=home.regcon&contentID=2008081214279
Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini on Monday warned against the formation of an “anti-Russian” coalition within the European Union over the conflict in South Ossetia.

“It would be negative for Europe if a sort of coalition against Russia develops, which could happen” if the EU calls an emergency European Council summit on the Ossetia conflict, Frattini said in an interview published by the daily La Stampa.

“We are close to (Russian Prime Minister Vladimir) Putin on that,” Frattini added.

http://mathaba.net/news/?x=601522

German deputy Foreign Minister Gernot Erler accused Georgia of violating international law by triggering a military conflict with Russia in the separatist Caucasus region of South Ossetia, the press reported Saturday.

Chapaev

14th August 2008, 19:40

Statement from the Georgian Peace Committee:
Tbilissi, 11th of August 2008
http://thechristianradical.blogspot.com/2008/08/declaration-of-georgian-peace-committee.html

Once more Georgia was launched into a situation of chaos and bloodshed. A new fratricide war exploded with renewed strength on Georgian soil.

To our great disillusion, the alerts of the Georgian Peace Committee and of progressive personalities of Georgia on the pernicious character of the militarization of the country and on the danger of a pro-fascist and nationalist policy had no effect. (...)

The authorities of Georgia, organized, again, a blood war, feeling the support of some western countries and of regional and international organizations. The shame poured by the current holders of the power over the Georgian people will take decades to be cleansed.

The Georgian army armed and trained by American instructors and using also American armaments, subjected the city of Tskhinvali to a barbaric destruction. The bombings killed Ossetians civilians, our brothers and sisters, children, women and elderly people. Over two thousand inhabitants of Tskhinvali and of its surroundings died.

There also died hundreds of civilians of Georgian nationality, both in the conflict zone as well as on the entire territory of Georgia.

The Georgian Peace Committee expresses its deep condolences to the relatives and friends of those who have perished.

The entire responsibility for this fratricidal war, for thousands of children, women and elderly dead people, for the inhabitants of South Ossetia and of Georgia falls exclusively to the current President, to the Parliament and to the Government of Georgia. The irresponsibility and the adventure ship of the Saakachvili regime have no limits. The President of Georgia and his team, undoubtedly, are criminals and must be held responsible.

The Georgian Peace Committee, together with all the progressive parties and social movements of Georgia, is going to struggle so that the organizers of this monstrous genocide have a severe and legitimate punishment.

The Georgian Peace Committee declares and asks the broad public opinion not to identify the current Georgian leadership with the people of Georgia, with the Georgian nation, and appeals to all to support the Georgian people in the struggle against the criminal regime of Saakachvili.

We appeal to all the political forces of Georgia, the social movements and the people of Georgia to unit in order to free the country of the anti popular regime, russianfobic and pro-fascist of Saakachvili!

Gorbachev, Zyuganov weigh in:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/11/AR2008081101372.html

The roots of this tragedy lie in the decision of Georgia's separatist leaders in 1991 to abolish South Ossetian autonomy. Successive Georgian leaders tried to impose their will by force -- both in South Ossetia and in Abkhazia, where the issues of autonomy are similar -- it only made the situation worse. New wounds aggravated old injuries.

What happened on the night of Aug. 7 is beyond comprehension. The Georgian military attacked the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali with multiple rocket launchers designed to devastate large areas. Russia had to respond. To accuse it of aggression against "small, defenseless Georgia" is not just hypocritical but shows a lack of humanity.

Georgian armed forces were trained by hundreds of U.S. instructors, and its sophisticated military equipment was bought in a number of countries. This, coupled with the promise of NATO membership, emboldened Georgian leaders into thinking that they could get away with a "blitzkrieg" in South Ossetia.

By declaring the Caucasus, a region that is thousands of miles from the American continent, a sphere of its "national interest," the United States made a serious blunder. Of course, peace in the Caucasus is in everyone's interest. But it is simply common sense to recognize that Russia is rooted there by common geography and centuries of history. Russia is not seeking territorial expansion, but it has legitimate interests in this region.

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=33983

Head of the opposition Communist Party, Guennady Zyuganov, said that the U.S. and its pawns who armed and trained Georgia’s army should be held responsible for war crimes in South Ossetia.

Zyuganov also rejected the U.S. demand for a return to the status quo of last Wednesday – before Georgian or Russian forces moved into South Ossetia. “Restoration of the earlier status quo would amount to encouragement of the criminal clique” of Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili, the communist leader said.

Russia should not stop halfway, he said, but should “defeat the aggressor” and recognize the independence of South Ossetia and another separatist region of Georgia where Russia has now deployed additional troops Abkhazia.
,

Chapaev

14th August 2008, 21:30

Ukrainian regime's provocation against Russia:

Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko’ s decree seeking to unilaterally regulate the Russian Black Sea Fleet’s stay in Ukraine “runs counter to the spirit and letter of the Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between Russia and Ukraine of 1997”, the Russian Foreign Ministry said on Wednesday.
http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=12960742&PageNum=0

spartan

14th August 2008, 22:14

One of the consequences of this conflict could see the EU assert itself as it's own power instead of being constant supporters of the US position on things.

Like one of Velior's links show, the EU doesn't want to be anti-Russian (as it loses Russia's gas and oil) and somewhere along the line the US is going to demand this of them if things don't dramatically improve.

Also there are reports saying that the recently bombarded Georgian port of Poti is now under Russian control.

Chapaev

14th August 2008, 22:18

The Russian Government has denied allegations of a Russian military presence in Poti
http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=12949726&PageNum=0

Neither Russian peacekeepers nor attached to them units have entered the Georgian port city of Poti, a representative of the Russian Defence Ministry said on Tuesday.

“Such a task has never been assigned,” the military said. According to him, “a reconnaissance group was briefly outside Poti, and has already left the area”. He specified that the group went as far as a bridge near Poti, but never entered the city as such a task had not been assigned to it.

The Defence Ministry representative drew attention to the fact that throughout Monday the Georgian authorities repeatedly circulated rumours that Russian units had allegedly seized this or that Georgian city.

Chapaev

14th August 2008, 23:12

http://www.granma.cu/INGLES/2008/agosto/lun11/declaracion.html

Official statement from the government of Cuba

When the USSR disintegrated, South Ossetia, annexed by force by Georgia, with which it shared neither nationality nor culture, retained its status as an autonomous republic with its local authorities and its capital, Tskhinvali. At dawn on August 8, Georgia, in complicity with the U.S. government, launched its forces on South Ossetia in an attempt to occupy the capital, which it publicly announced on the same day that the Olympic Games were inaugurated in Beijing.

It is a false claim that Georgia is defending its national sovereignty.

The Russian troops were in South Ossetia legally, as a force for guaranteeing the peace, as is known by the international community; they have not committed any illegality.

The request for the invaders to withdraw is just, and our government supports it.

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.

http://en.rian.ru/world/20080814/116039560.html
Libya says Russia emerging as counterbalance to U.S. dominance

"What happened in Georgia is a good sign, which means America is no longer the sole world power setting the rules of the game," the Libyan president's eldest son Seif al Islam Qaddafi said in an interview with Kommersant.

"There is a balance in the world now. Russia is resurging, which is good for us, for the entire Middle East," said Seif al Islam, who runs the Qaddafi Foundation, a non-governmental body, told the paper.

He said the Arab world has welcomed the withdrawal from Iraq by Georgian troops, describing the Caucasus state, which enjoys strong backing from the U.S., as "an occupier."

spartan

14th August 2008, 23:29

America and Poland have agreed a deal on the controversial US missile defence shield in eastern Europe:
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2008/08/2008814181417872788.html

I am sure the timing is just a complete coicidence.:rolleyes:

Psy

14th August 2008, 23:51

Saorsa

15th August 2008, 02:20

Can the US get more reactionary?

I don't think that's a question you want to see answered...

Psy

15th August 2008, 02:37

I don't think that's a question you want to see answered...
Come on Russia counter-attacks a invasion in a region it is had peace keeping operations and all of sudden the USA is highly reactionary toward Russia like we are back in the 1950's.

spartan

15th August 2008, 02:58

Come on Russia counter-attacks a invasion in a region it is had peace keeping operations and all of sudden the USA is highly reactionary toward Russia like we are back in the 1950's.
I know what you mean.

I watch the news listening to all these high and mighty US officials talking about Russia respecting Georgia's territorial integrity and other bullshit and I find myself just so fucking mad at all this shit.

I mean what about South Ossetian territorial integrity which Georgia didn't respect? What about the fact that Georgia started all this shit by launching an assault into South Ossetia which mostly killed and displaced civilians, which was an obvious attempt at ethnic cleansing on the part of the Georgians?

The US are hypocrites and even though we all know that deep down they don't give a shit about any countries territorial integrity (just their economic intrests in the area), the least they could do is be consistent in their criticism instead of coming out like a bunch of idiotic twats who's words can't be taken seriously.

All of a sudden the western media seems to have forgotten who the aggressor is here; Georgia!

The Author

15th August 2008, 03:31

This is true. Saakashvili is constantly being broadcast on television as an "innocent victim" being persecuted for bringing supposed democracy to Georgia. We keep hearing about him, we keep hearing supposed claims that Russians are on the outskirts of Tbilisi, and yet this is wrong.

This whole incident is just another example of the hypocrisy in nationalist tensions between countries, with Kosovo and Tibet from earlier this year being prime examples. Now South Ossetia and Abkhazia are added to the list.

America and Poland have agreed a deal on the controversial US missile defence shield in eastern EuropeIt was this "missile defense shield" which started this whole mess to begin with last year. Had the American government not pushed for this, you wouldn't have seen Russian bomber missions or Russian naval training exercises in the West as a result. Remember, it is the United States that is to blame for starting this crisis, just like it was responsible for starting the Cold War.

Chapaev

15th August 2008, 03:47

Talk of Georgia's "territorial integrity" is inherently aggressive, for Abkhazia and Osetiia have been out of Tblisi's control for well over a decade. The fact is that the Tblisi regime has not had effective control over nominally Georgian territory for quite some time. The Saakashvili regime and it sponsors have interpreted "territorial integrity" as the right to use military force against what is a de facto independent state, which is unacceptable. To talk of Georgia's "territorial integrity" as if the boundaries of the complicated Caucasus region are set in stone is unrealistic. The boundaries of the region have changed countless times over the centuries, and there is no reason why they cannot change in the future.

Psy

15th August 2008, 04:51

I know what you mean.

I watch the news listening to all these high and mighty US officials talking about Russia respecting Georgia's territorial integrity and other bullshit and I find myself just so fucking mad at all this shit.

I mean what about South Ossetian territorial integrity which Georgia didn't respect? What about the fact that Georgia started all this shit by launching an assault into South Ossetia which mostly killed and displaced civilians, which was an obvious attempt at ethnic cleansing on the part of the Georgians?

The US are hypocrites and even though we all know that deep down they don't give a shit about any countries territorial integrity (just their economic intrests in the area), the least they could do is be consistent in their criticism instead of coming out like a bunch of idiotic twats who's words can't be taken seriously.

All of a sudden the western media seems to have forgotten who the aggressor is here; Georgia!
The problem is talking to people that say like Russian news is bias, which is a given but come on the US media is carrying the US party line again. They believe any shit that comes out of CNN about the conflict but you show them press reports form Russian Today and they say its nothing but Russian propaganda.

Truth be told, I can't take this bi-polar media. I know Russia Today is massaging reality so when are we going to get some reliable info from the region?

Psy

15th August 2008, 06:37

Russian FM explains all in 20 minute interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_9hbLooJYOI)

sanpal

15th August 2008, 13:27

The 12-years girl has told USA about war: she on the air has thanked Russian for their help in South Ossetia

http://ru.youtube.com/watch?v=H8XI2Chc6uQ

DancingLarry

15th August 2008, 14:55

IWA statement on the war, via a-infos: (http://www.ainfos.ca/en/ainfos21246.html)

The eruption of military actions between Georgia and South Ossetia threatens to
develop into a large-scale war between Georgia supported by NATO on the one
hand, and the Russian state on the other. Thousands of people are already killed
and wounded - principally, peaceful inhabitants; whole cities and settlements
have been wiped out. The society has beed flooded with muddy streams of a
nationalist and chauvinistic hysteria. ---- As always and everywhere in
conflicts between the states, there is not and cannot be the righteous in new
Caucasian war - there are only the guilty. The coals which have been fanned for
years now have caused a military fire.

The Saakashvili regime in Georgia keeps two thirds of population in poverty, and
the greater internal discontent in the country this causes, the more it desires
to find a way out from the deadlock in the form of a "small victorious war" in
the hope, that it can write everything off. The government of Russia is full of
determination to keep the hegemony in the Caucasus. Today they pretend to be the
defender of weak, but their hypocrisy is abundantly clear: in fact, Saakashvili
only repeats what the Putinist soldiery did in Chechnya 9 years ago. Ruling
circles of both Ossetias and Abkhazia aspire to strengthen their role as
exclusive allies of Russia in the region, and at the same time to rally the
impoverished population around the tested torch of the "national idea" and
"rescue the people". Leaders of the USA, the European states and NATO, on the
contrary, wish to weaken the influence of their Russian rivals in the Caucasus
as much as possible to provide to themselves with control over fuel resources
and their transport. Thus, we became witnesses and victims of the next coil of
world opposition in struggle for power, oil and gas.

This fight does not bring to working people - Georgians, Ossets, Abkhasians or
Russians - anything, except for blood and tears, incalculable disasters and
deprivation. We express our deep sympathy to the friends and relatives of the
victims, to the people which have been left without a roof over their head and
means of subsistence as a result of this war.

We shouldn't fall under the influence of nationalist demagogy which demands
unity with "our" government, flying the flag of "protecting the homeland". The
main enemy of the simple people is not the poor brothers and sisters on the
other side of the border or of other nationality. Their enemie are the rulers
and bosses of all kinds, presidents and ministers, businessmen and generals,
those who generate wars for the sake of multiplying power and riches. We call on
the working people in Russia, Ossetias, Abkhazia and Georgia to reject the bait
of nationalism and patriotism and to turn the anger on rulers and the rich on
both sides of the border.

Russian, Georgian, Ossetic and Abkhazian soldiers! Do not obey the orders of
your commanders! Turn your weapon against those who sent you to war! Do not
shoot the soldiers of your "opponent" - fraternize with them: a bayonet in the
ground!

Working people in the rear! Sabotage military efforts, leave to go to meetings
and demonstrations against the war, organize yourselves and strike against it!

No to the war and to its organizers - rulers and richmen! Yes to solidarity of
working people across borders and the front lines!

Federation of Education, Science and Technical Workers, CRAS-IWA

Psy

15th August 2008, 17:03

Georgia signs South Ossetia ceasefire agreement (http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/29069). Yet I don't think this is over, I think we just witnessed a turning point of history and I think for the worse. I don't think the USA will take this defeat well.

cyu

15th August 2008, 18:50

IWA statement on the war, via a-infos: (http://www.ainfos.ca/en/ainfos21246.html)

Good article. Thanks for the link!

Chapaev

15th August 2008, 19:05

Party for Socialism and Liberation analyzes the conflict:

http://www.pslweb.org/site/News2?JServSessionIdr011=cojbnyta91.app13a&page=NewsArticle&id=9705&news_iv_ctrl=1261

...What is needed during this crisis is an anti-imperialist perspective that demands "U.S. imperialism out of the Caucasus" and "No NATO intervention!"

Chapaev

15th August 2008, 19:15

Following its transport of Gruzian military forces, the United States regime is continuing with its active interference in the internal affairs of Gruzia by sending military forces under the guise of a "humanitarian mission." Such a move will only aggravate tensions in the country.

Meanwhile, the United States regime represented by Defense Secretary Gates has explicitly threatened Russia. Such belligerent talk is unacceptable.

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2008-08/15/content_9328500.htm
U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert M. Gates warned Thursday that Russia risks hurting its relationship with the United States "for years to come" if it does not scale back its action against Georgia.

F. Castro and Chavez have correctly condemned the United States and its puppet in Gruzia for having preciptated the crisis.

The government of Georgia would never have launched its armed forces against the capital of the Autonomous Republic of South Ossetia in the dawn of August 8th, engaged in what it called the re-establishing of constitutional order, without previous coordination with Bush who, last month in Bucharest, committed to support President Saakashvili for Georgia’s admission to NATO; that is like plunging a sharpened dagger deep into Russia’s heart.

Saakashvili, on his own, would never have jump to the adventure of sending the Georgian army into South Ossetia, where he would be clashing with Russian troops stationed there as a peace force.
http://www.plenglish.com/Article.asp?ID=%7B625D5EEF-3E2D-48C0-BA19-871D4E085B19%7D&language=EN

"The leadership of the U.S., which gives orders to Georgian authorities, is to blame for the Caucasus' burning," began Chavez, as quoted by the Venezuelan radio station.

"The president of the U.S., the imperialist George Bush, I am absolutely certain was the one who gave the order to Georgian forces to burn towns and villages and to kill innocent people," he said.

"Russia's actions were fully justified," Chavez said.

He also said that the U.S. was seeking to surround a Russia which had "risen from its knees thanks to the firm hand of ex-president Putin, and has again become a world power."
http://en.rian.ru/world/20080815/116068166.html

piet11111

15th August 2008, 22:17

http://www.defencetalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=8100&page=8

this link above is from a military themed forum that is keeping very good track of the conflict at the time of writing this post the latest post is #119

news is posted there from all sorts of sources including russian and georgian news and the thread so far is trying to keep neutral on the politics of it.
i highly recommend to keep an eye on the linked thread above if you want to keep up to date as much as possible on this conflict.

spartan

15th August 2008, 23:25

The 12-years girl has told USA about war: she on the air has thanked Russian for their help in South Ossetia

http://ru.youtube.com/watch?v=H8XI2Chc6uQ
Did you see that idiot presenter!

"sorry we are going to have to take a break" as soon as they start saying that Georgia is the aggressor and therefore going against the official US line that Georgia is the victim!

And then again "sorry we are going to have to go to commercials" after they start saying this again even though they have just come back from commercials!

This should be spread everywhere with the title "what the US government... sorry Fox news didn't want you to hear".

I fucking hate this shit world we live in sometimes I really do.

Chapaev

16th August 2008, 00:46

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/13/georgia

Anna Neistat of Human Rights Watch (HRW), who is leading a team investigating the humanitarian damage in South Ossetia, told the Guardian that Russian estimates of 2,000 dead in the conflict were "suspicious".

HRW's purpose in publishing this report simply to cherry-pick a few facts about Tskhinvali's destruction and come up with a number that could be quoted far and wide by Russia-haters. HRW is not a neutral organization but is part of an elite consisting of government departments, foundations, and NGOs. HRW board members include present and past government employees, and overlapping directorates link it to the major foreign policy lobbies in the US.

The irrefutable facts are:

http://www.int.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=24&art_id=nw20080814155156975C726019
authorities had found and identified 200 corpses of South Ossetian civilians and 500 people were missing. Russian investigators said they had identified a total of 60 civilians killed during the fighting.

"We've also collected more than 40 bodies of Georgian soldiers. We'll give them to the Georgians but we have no contact with them. We are doing temporary burials," he said, as two artillery explosions went off in the distance.

In Khetagurovo, which was virtually flattened by shelling, several investigators questioned local residents, took photographs of exploded ordinance, examined corpses and collected Georgian artillery as evidence.

The investigators - all in military uniform - showed off cutlery, food tins and water bottles with US army markings. They also displayed boxes filled with German-made mortars and a grenade-launcher with instructions in English.

"We hid in the cellar for two days...Twelve people died in the village. I buried two of them in the back garden," said local resident Atsarbek Mamiyev, 75, a retired Soviet army colonel

Chapaev

16th August 2008, 00:53

http://www.kommersant.com/photo/512/DAILY/2008/142//KMO_100950_00441_1_t208.jpg
"Saakashvili's policy in South Ossetia is the fascism of the 21st century!"

http://www.kommersant.com/gallery.asp?id=1010790&pics_id=81630

Members of different political parties and movements in Russia joined efforts this week to express their strong disapproval of the military actions of the Georgian government against South Ossetia.

Picket rallies and protests started on August 8, the day that war broke out. The first meetings, far from being numerous, acted as an example for future rallies. Ossetians unveiled posters and placards next to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs building, while members of Evraziysky Soyuz Molodezhi ("Eurasia Youth Union"), youth organizations Nashi ("Ours") and Rossiya Molodaya ("Young Russia") protested at the Ministry of Defense. Despite the fact that these meetings were not sanctioned by the Moscow government, the police was quite liberal and made no attempt to stop the protestors, even allowing them to shout and display their banners. The slogans included "Defend Tskhinvali!" and "Russia, rebuff Georgia!," while words like "Yankees, go home!" were shouted at the U.S. Embassy, where some of the protestors headed after the main meeting.

Members of the Ossetian diaspora found another way to include more people in this fight against the Georgian aggression. They gave out ribbons with the colors of Ossetian flag to all those who wanted to express their solidarity with the people of South Ossetia. 700 ribbons were given out over the weekend, with several thousand ribbons dispersed throughout Moscow during the week.

Monday marked the beginning of the second wave of meetings. This time rallies were better organized and far more numerous. Several thousand people, mostly members of youth organizations, picketed the Georgian Embassy in a protest action that lasted from Monday through Wednesday, when peace in South Ossetia was finally restored. Members of Nashi and Molodaya Guardia ("Young Guards," another youth organization) demanded immediate cease fire in South Ossetia and even handed in a petition to the Georgian government stating that military action must be stopped. Protestors stayed in the grounds of the Georgian Embassy day and night, with placards raised and candles lit to commemorate the victims of the war.

Meanwhile the Communist Party of the Russian Federation sanctioned its representatives to picket at the U.S. Embassy. Members of the party protested against the U.S. government's actions concerning the war in Georgia. The main slogan of the protest action read "No patronage of the murderous regime of Saakashvili." At the same time, other political parties that share the views of the present Russian government gathered in Novopushkinsky Park and outside the Georgian Embassy urging the assembly of an international tribunal and to bring Saakashvili to justice.

Chapaev

16th August 2008, 01:30

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/08/12/EDCD129NI4.DTL

Georgia war is a neocon election ploy
Is it possible that this time the October surprise was tried in August, and that the garbage issue of brave little Georgia struggling for its survival from the grasp of the Russian bear was stoked to influence the U.S. presidential election?

Before you dismiss that possibility, consider the role of one Randy Scheunemann, for four years a paid lobbyist for the Georgian government, ending his official lobbying connection only in March, months after he became Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain's senior foreign policy adviser.

Previously, Scheunemann was best known as one of the neoconservatives who engineered the war in Iraq when he was a director of the Project for a New American Century. It was Scheunemann who, after working on the McCain 2000 presidential campaign, headed the Committee for the Liberation of Iraq, which championed the U.S. Iraq invasion.

There are telltale signs that he played a similar role in the recent Georgia flare-up. How else to explain the folly of his close friend and former employer, Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili, in ordering an invasion of the breakaway region of South Ossetia, which clearly was expected to produce a Russian counter-reaction. It is inconceivable that Saakashvili would have triggered this dangerous escalation without some assurance from influential Americans he trusted, like Scheunemann, that the United States would have his back. Scheunemann long guided McCain in these matters, even before he was officially running foreign policy for McCain's presidential campaign.

In 2005, while registered as a paid lobbyist for Georgia, Scheunemann worked with McCain to draft a congressional resolution pushing for Georgia's membership in NATO. A year later, while still on the Georgian payroll, Scheunemann accompanied McCain on a trip to that country, where they met with Saakashvili and supported his bellicose views toward Russia's Vladimir Putin.

Scheunemann is at the center of the neoconservative cabal that has come to dominate the Republican candidate's foreign policy stance in a replay of the run-up to the war against Iraq. These folks are always looking for a foreign enemy on which to base a new Cold War, and with the collapse of Saddam Hussein's regime, it was Putin's Russia that came increasingly to fit the bill.

Yes, it sounds diabolical, but that may be the most accurate way to assess the designs of the McCain campaign in matters of war and peace. There is every indication that the candidate's demonization of Putin is an even grander plan than the previous use of Hussein to fuel American militarism with the fearsome enemy that it desperately needs.

McCain gets to look tough with a new Cold War to fight while Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama, scrambling to make sense of a more measured foreign policy posture, will seem weak in comparison. Meanwhile, the dire consequences of the Bush legacy McCain has inherited, from the disaster of Iraq to the economic meltdown, conveniently will be ignored. But it will provide the military-industrial complex, which has helped bankroll the neoconservatives, with an excuse for ramping up a military budget that is already bigger than that of the rest of the world combined.

What is at work here is a neoconservative, self-fulfilling prophecy in which Russia is turned into an enemy that ramps up its largely reduced military, and Putin is cast as the new Joseph Stalin bogeyman, evoking images of the old Soviet Union. McCain has condemned a "revanchist Russia" that should once again be contained. Although Putin has been the enormously popular elected leader of post-Communist Russia, it is assumed that imperialism is always lurking, not only in his DNA but in that of the Russian people.

It should also be mentioned that the post-Communist Georgians have imperial designs on South Ossetia and Abkhazia. What a stark contradiction that the United States, which championed Kosovo's independence from Serbia, now is ignoring Georgia's invasion of its ethnically rebellious provinces.

For McCain to so fervently embrace Scheunemann's neoconservative line of demonizing Russia in the interest of appearing tough during an election is a reminder that a senator can be old and yet wildly irresponsible.

spartan

16th August 2008, 01:40

US demands that Russia withdraws all it's troops from Georgian territory after Georgian President signs ceasefire deal:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7564176.stm

spartan

16th August 2008, 01:42

The office of the French President has announced that Russia will sign the ceasefire deal:
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2008/08/2008815152128983871.html

spartan

16th August 2008, 01:43

Russia has threatened Poland with nuclear attack over US missile defence shield deal with the US:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/2566005/Russia-threatens-nuclear-attack-on-Poland-over-US-missile-shield-deal.html

Psy

16th August 2008, 02:20

US demands that Russia withdraws all it's troops from Georgian territory after Georgian President signs ceasefire deal:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7564176.stm

Again the US is totally reactionary right now. Basically it is clear the US is in no position to make any demands on Russia since they already played all their cards with the missile defence shield, and threating to kick Russia out of the G8.

It seems the European powers are playing it far more cool then the USA realizing Russia will withdraw when they are good and ready, it is clear Russia has no intention in staying as they seem to want to implement regime change for Georgia through having Saakashvili tried in international court for war crimes.

Psy

16th August 2008, 04:33

Venezuela backs Russian's defence of Georgian aggression.

Chavez Accuses the US of Direct Intervention in South Ossetia Conflict (http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/news/3723)

Abluegreen7

16th August 2008, 05:25

Psy

16th August 2008, 06:20

South Ossetia is a small country is it not? So why is Russia getting there underwear dirty for this is it somthing more. Are is the Russia planning on taking back whats rightfully theres throwing up the wall again. And coming back left?;) Its a dream of mine. Yet I know that our Russian comrades have gotten awfully spoiled since the end of the Cold War.:laugh:

South Ossetia is basically a city state within Georgia that the Bolsheviks created with limited autonomy to side-step the ethnic question. Russia was peace keeping in South Ossetia and Abkazia.

On August 1 there is a large skirmish with peace keepers and Georgian troop.

On August 7 Saakashvili (Georgia) orders a ceasefire and goes on TV talking about restoring order to South Ossetia and Abkazia.

That night Georgia launched a sneak attack on South Ossetia, Russian peace keepers are killed as are Russian citizens. Russian reacted and a large Russian army convoy rumbled through the Roki Tunnel into South Ossetia and the Georgian army didn't stand a chance.

I highly doubt the Russia bureaucracy until recently started thinking long term since the sneak attack.

KrazyRabidSheep

16th August 2008, 06:32

So why is Russia getting there underwear dirty for this is it somthing more.Ossetia is an excuse for Russia to flex some military muscle, and coerce Georgia to play by Russian rules (and if they obtain some territory in the process, all the better.)

There has been tensions between Georgia and Russia, including a trade embargo. However, there are two pipelines (the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines) that run through Georgia.

Charles Xavier

16th August 2008, 07:44

The Imperialist powers have attempted to probe Russia for its response with the Georgian Attack, if Russia would have done nothing for this incursion especially so close to its backyard, NATO would attempt more probes on Russia. Russia had to strike hard to make sure they don't begin more probes. The Imperialist countries are looking for a weakness to undermine Russia. Look at the missile Shield in eastern Europe as well.

Russia is not a Socialist Country, you cannot expect them to care about the well being of the Georgians.

Similar thing happened to China back in the spring when they tried to bring instability to Tibet. Tibet is a pawn the imperialists like to play.

This is Imperialism working its way towards war. They want a Unipolar world. Russia, China, and bringing more poles. They can't stand hostile competition in their "free market".

Red_or_Dead

16th August 2008, 08:03

Ossetia is an excuse for Russia to flex some military muscle, and coerce Georgia to play by Russian rules (and if they obtain some territory in the process, all the better.)

There has been tensions between Georgia and Russia, including a trade embargo. However, there are two pipelines (the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan and South Caucasus pipelines) that run through Georgia.

This.

I think that its pretty clear by now that Russia used the Georgian invasion into South Ossetia as a pretext for invading Georgia.

I was rooting for the Russians when the conflict was still confined to S. Ossetia, as I think that their independance should be reckognised. But it has grown out of all proportions now. Russian troops are deep in the territory of Georgia proper. There have been reports of Russian soldiers and S. Ossetian paramilitaries harrasing Georgian civilians and foreign journalists. There is even video footage of the latter.

We will see if Russians will have the guts and go all the way to Tbilisi, but I strongly hope that they dont. As much as Saakashivili is an idiot, and even though he is a western puppet, whoever will be put in his place by the Russians will be the same, except that he will listen to orders from Moscow instead of Washington.

Charles Xavier

16th August 2008, 08:08

Red_or_Dead

16th August 2008, 08:15

Red or Dead,

You're seeing things too black and White. Things are not that simple. This is war not a movie. The Imperialists are gearing for a big one.

This is a probe on the Russia Response by Nato, they are sacrificing their boy to see how much they can get away with.

Black and white? No. I do not have the slightest support for NATO or its actions. I refuse to see it black and white, because it is only to obvious that both sides (the Russians and NATO) are hypocritic when it comes to their interest. And example that I have mentioned at least once before in this thread, is their attitude towards Kosovo. Russians refuse to reckognise an independant Kosovo, but they jump to the aid of S. Ossetia right away. Americans go on about the territorial integrity of Georgia, and yet they refuse it to Serbia.

That, and I have yet to hear the evidence that Georgian invasion was directed from Washington, as opposed to being a Georgian attempt to subdue its break-away region within Georgias internationaly reckognised borders.

Yes, things are not simple at all. But one thing is certain; all sides are assholes.

Charles Xavier

16th August 2008, 08:27

Kosovo is a whole other story lets not even get into that.

There has been these types of probes in previous conflicts, the most obvious example is Nazi Germany with the league of nations.

Red_or_Dead

16th August 2008, 08:30

Kosovo is a whole other story lets not even get into that.

The attidute of the superpowers is essentialy the same, only reversed, and thats my point. They are hypocrites. Putin and Bush.

There has been these types of probes in previous conflicts, the most obvious example is Nazi Germany with the league of nations.

And that doesnt have the slightest connection with the ongoing conflict in Georgia.

Charles Xavier

16th August 2008, 08:37

The attidute of the superpowers is essentialy the same, only reversed, and thats my point. They are hypocrites. Putin and Bush.

And that doesn't have the slightest connection with the ongoing conflict in Georgia.
What I mean is with the attacks Germany made on Czechoslovakia, Austria, Poland and found the LoN folded their hands quickly. The Russians can't embolden NATO's Interests thats why it striked hard and you cannot expect a Capitalist Russia to care about Georgia. Capitalists only see dollar signs.

This is the Imperialists powers maneuvering.

Red_or_Dead

16th August 2008, 08:57

What I mean is with the attacks Germany made on Czechoslovakia, Austria, Poland and found the LoN folded their hands quickly. The Russians can't embolden NATO's Interests thats why it striked hard and you cannot expect a Capitalist Russia to care about Georgia. Capitalists only see dollar signs.

This is the Imperialists powers maneuvering.

I agree. Thats why I dont understand the apologetic stand towards Russia and the overestimation of NATOs role in the conflict.

Psy

16th August 2008, 16:25

Recent Russian press-release (http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/29096/video)

Abluegreen7

16th August 2008, 16:55

Im curious if Georgia could put up an all out war against Russia? My bets are no. Thats the equivlant to America attacking Iraq. But Iraq stood a better chance.

Red_or_Dead

16th August 2008, 17:17

Im curious if Georgia could put up an all out war against Russia? My bets are no. Thats the equivlant to America attacking Iraq. But Iraq stood a better chance.

More like equivalent of Iraq attacking America...

Georgia isnt even capable of defending agaisnt Russians. Georgia putting up an all out war against Russia, and succeding, is fantasy.

Rosa Lichtenstein

16th August 2008, 23:35

Film of the Stop the War meeting on Russia and Gerogia, here:

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2008/08/stop-war-meeting-on-georgia-nato-and_16.html

Psy

16th August 2008, 23:37

More like equivalent of Iraq attacking America...

Georgia isnt even capable of defending agaisnt Russians. Georgia putting up an all out war against Russia, and succeding, is fantasy.

There is evidence that the Georgian grant invasion plan for S. Ossetia included to blowing up the Roki Tunnel to stop Russia from moving its army over land into S. Ossetia. Yet this would have only bought Georgia a bit of time, Russia has a huge airlift capability and could have air dropped airborne units into Abkhazia to secure the airport then just airlift men and equipment into Abkhazia and invaded Georgia from Abkhazia.

Rosa Lichtenstein

17th August 2008, 00:06

In the above meeting, particularly worth listening to is film three, the talk by Marc Almond, which is not only well-informed but very funny.

DancingLarry

17th August 2008, 00:24

In the above meeting, particularly worth listening to is film three, the talk by Marc Almond, which is not only well-informed but very funny.

The 70s musician?

Psy

17th August 2008, 04:45

I see the right wing is starting to come up with Russian conspiracy shit about Russia planned this.

The most common common argument that, there is no way Russia could have organized such a large attack force with such little notice, that Russia needed stockpiles of men,equipment and supplies.

They omit that Russian forces came from the military base in Mozdok some 180 KM away (that is not that far away for a military convoy) and that it took about a day for them to enter the war which is about normal. They also ignore the fact that the Russian forces were using very old looking vehicles because they were, logically if the theory of Russian preparation were true Russia would have shipped modern equipment and weapons to Mozdok.

Psy

17th August 2008, 16:20

Uneasy peace.

In this news video Russia will pull out troops on Monday (http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/29102/video) the USA edited the peace treaty which Georgia signed does this make the peace treaty legal, I mean there is no single peace treaty signed by all parties?

Also Bush refuses to even accept the idea that the break away republics can leave Georgia.

Psy

18th August 2008, 15:48

Today's Russian press conference (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABV0SEl4Yhc)

Chapaev

19th August 2008, 01:32

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/0816/breaking347.htm

Former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder blamed has blamed Georgia for sparking hostilities with Moscow and suggested its breakaway regions could not remain part of Georgia following the violent clashes of the past week.

In an interview with German weekly Der Spiegel , Mr Schroeder also criticised the West for failures in its dealings with Russia and urged Europe to strengthen its ties with Moscow.

"I don't believe Russia is pursuing a policy of annexation and I also don't believe that there will be a return to the previous status quo for South Ossetia and Abkhazia," Schroeder said, referring to the separatist Georgian regions. "That is out of the question."

Mr Schroeder's stance appears at odds with that of German Chancellor Angela Merkel and the United States, who have both said the regions must remain part of Georgia.

Berlin, Washington, London and a host of former Soviet satellites in central Europe have condemned Russia's military response in the conflict as disproportionate.

"The starting point of the military confrontation was Georgia's march into South Ossetia. We shouldn't confuse things," Schroeder said, when asked who was responsible for the outbreak of violence between Russian and Georgian troops.

He doubted the United States, a strong ally of Georgia, was not informed about the initial Georgian offensive given that it has military advisers stationed in Tbilisi.

"In my view, we have seen major mistakes by the West in its policy towards Russia," Schroeder said.

He urged the European Union to press ahead with plans to forge a "strategic partnership" pact with Moscow, saying Europe risked losing influence and pushing Russia towards China if it did not work with the Kremlin.

spartan

19th August 2008, 02:05

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/0816/breaking347.htm
If Chirac and Schroeder were still in power, in France and Germany respectively, then we would see a different US response to the situation in Georgia as they wouldn't have the backing of these two states which are the most powerful in Europe (as they had close relations with Putin and Russia and didn't commit to Iraq).

Trouble is these countries are now run by people who actually admire Bush and Blair's imperialist adventures in the middle east, which is why we have that idiot Sarkozy talking like France still has any weight in the world (someone should tell him world war two is over) and Merkel supporting the US line (i.e. poor little Georgia being attacked by "big bad" Russia).

spartan

21st August 2008, 23:05

Russia suspends NATO cooperation with Russia's foreign minister saying "NATO needs Moscow more than Moscow needs NATO":
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/21/russia.nato

spartan

22nd August 2008, 05:09

Looking at how Ukraine could be Russia's next Georgia:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H5yLSHFRlHE&feature=dir

sanpal

23rd August 2008, 07:22

Russia has removed armies from Georgia (limited peacemakers have stayed in delimitation line S.O.-Georgia.).

sanpal

23rd August 2008, 09:39

Sorry, I don't speak English, what does the man talk about?

http://rutube.ru/tracks/917592.html?v=498721b38b5be127254b8bd2309d0758

Rosa Lichtenstein

28th August 2008, 00:14

US weakness exposed (http://leninology.blogspot.com/2008/08/russia-cashes-in-america-blusters.html).

Chapaev

30th August 2008, 22:38

http://www.itar-tass.com/eng/level2.html?NewsID=13022957&PageNum=0

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has supported Russia's decision to recognize Abkhazia's and South Ossetia's independence.

Russia responded to Georgia's aggression, Chavez said during his meeting with Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa, who had arrived in Venezuela on a visit.

"We support Russia". The country is right, Chavez said. He noted that Russia was under attacks. But at present, Russia firmly stands on its own feet. NATO threatens it, but it does not matter, he added.

Chapaev

30th August 2008, 22:46

Under the title "Israel and the Tehran Attack", the American Domestic Intelligence Reporter Brian Harring uncovers an Israeli plan to attack Iran from Georgian territory.

In his paper published at TBR news website, Harring recalls Russian Deputy Chief of General Staff Colonel General Anatoly Nogovitsyn who accused Israel of supplying arms to Georgia and delivering weapons systems to insist that the Israeli presence consisted of "IDF special forces, Israeli Air Force personnel, detachments of the Mossad and other Israeli groups."
http://www.almanar.com.lb/NewsSite/NewsDetails.aspx?id=54573&language=en

PRC-UTE

30th August 2008, 23:31

Quiet clearly the aggressor in this conflict is Georgia, not Russia, who where just reacting to the provocations of Georgia. Georgia is seeking for NATO membership, a hindrance was so far the unsolved situation in South Ossetia. Encouraged by the US, Georgia did now try to "solve" the situation. It is highly likely that the okay for the Geogian aggression did came directly from Washington. Russia's reaction now was logical and predictable.

Once again, all the hypocrisy about the meaningless formula of "national self-determination" becomes apparent in this conflict. Obviously for NATO and EU "national self-determination" applies for Kossovo, who have a pro-western government, but not for South Ossetia. The reaction by US and NATO now, who are condemning Russia, but don't acknowledge that it was Georgia who started this war in the first place, is ridiculous and blatantly hypocritical.

But once again the hypocrisy about "national self-determination" not only applies for western governments, but also for "anti-imperialist" leftists who are not tired to propose this formula in the name of communism. Quiet obviously it's just the other way round here, and the mercy of those who deserve "national self-determination" is picked on the basis of which imperial power those seeking for "national independence" are fighting, or by which imperial power the "independence movement" is backed by.

See also http://www.wsws.org/articles/2008/aug2008/ruge-a11.shtml

The Communist position, from Marx to the Comintern, was based on the understanding that anti-imperialist struggles could at times be beneficial and/or necessary as a step towards socialist revolution. In other words, it was a tactical question. Of course picking as you say which national liberation struggle to support but not others may appear on the surface as being opportunist or hypocritical but is actually the most consistent pursuit of revolution.

To compare to the hypocrisy of imperialist states using the issue of self-determination as a political football to expand their own writ and capital makes no sense. There is no commonality except in surface appearances; the capitalists and socialists operate under different sets of definitions for self-determination and national liberation.