why do leftists defend russia's position?

[jaiden]

why do leftists defend IMPERALIST russia in the conflict with georgia? wouldn't a true communist position be AGAINST imperalism and support an independant south ossetia yes? or am i completely wrong....cuz from what i've read it seems as if russia wants to establish its dominance once again.....explain

[RedHal]

What's the greater threat? Russia or Nato? I don't agree with the postion that one should stay neutral when imperialists war. There is no 3rd socialist position at this current age.

[Random Precision]

The position for most leftists is to support national self-determination. According to the last time they were polled, 95% of South Ossetians want to join with Russia. Anywhere from 50-90% of South Ossetians already hold Russian passports. So therefore we support their right to do that.

[gla22]

The position for most leftists is to support national self-determination. According to the last time they were polled, 95% of South Ossetians want to join with Russia. So therefore we support their right to do that.
couldn't have said it better.

[Chapaev]

While the present leadership in Russia is reactionary when it concerns economic and other domestic issues and must be opposed by Russian progressives, it can be argued that it plays a progressive role with respect to some international issues. A strong Russian foreign policy in some cases can help to deter Western aggression and combat neo-colonialism.

It is interesting to note that foreign policies in Russia are similar among most political factions. The KPRF, going further than the Kremlin, calls for the independence of Abkhazia and Iuzhnaia Osetiia to be recognized. Thus, it is not likely that the essence of Russian foreign policy would change if there was a different government. Communists, liberals, fascists, and others, for example, would recognize that NATO encroachment on Russia's borders poses a serious threat to the country.



why do leftists defend IMPERALIST russia in the conflict with georgia?

I dispute the characterization of Russia as imperialist. Except for its weapons and oil, Russia today is close to being a third world country.

[Psy]

why do leftists defend IMPERALIST russia in the conflict with georgia? wouldn't a true communist position be AGAINST imperalism and support an independant south ossetia yes? or am i completely wrong....cuz from what i've read it seems as if russia wants to establish its dominance once again.....explain
Georgia is the one trying annex S. Ossetia and Abkhazi, Georgia launched a sneak attack on these regions to try and accomplish this. Russia counter attacked, and S. Ossetia and Abkhazi allied with Russia, which is why there are reports of S. Ossetia and Abkhaza militias marching with Russian convoys (the militas are easy to spot as they are the ones carrying SKS semi-automatic rifles and AK47s that the Russian army doesn't use anymore).

[Red Phalanx]

South Ossetia = Sudetenland

[Asoka89]

Wow you really swolled the imperialist propoganda right?

Georgia was the aggressor, they have a history of imperialism and aggression. Russian peacekeepers and ethnic-nationialists are merely responding to this aggression. NATO, the US and the western media is using this event to try to maintain their foothold in Georgia due to its natural resources and to attempt to subvert and discredit Russia.

Notice that the militas in Georgia that are pro-government are freedom fighters but Iraqis and Afghani's all resisting are terrorists.

[Philosophical Materialist]

Georgia broke last week's ceasefire and preceded to forcibly establish military control over South Ossetia and Abkhazia; and not only that, tried to bring in the United States into a military stand-off with Russia.

I don't have much sympathy right now for Georgia. As reactionary and nationalist Russia is, it is not the aggressor against a US-armed, funded and trained imperialist client state of the US State Department. Georgia attempted to forcibly reincorporate the quasi-independent states of Abkhazia and South Ossetia under Tbilisi's control. Russia used its forces to defend these territories.

Georgia is now having its military infrastructure bombarded by Russian forces, but it is of Georgia's own making. It created the crisis, and is reaping the negative pay-off. It's just a shame that thousands of people have died in a war that need not have been fought.


South Ossetia = Sudetenland

I don't see how that is comparable. The Sudetenland did not exist as a quasi-independent state. Czechoslovakia was not a client state of an imperialist power, and Nazi Germany were the undisputed aggressors.

[fmlnleft]

(the militas are easy to spot as they are the ones carrying SKS semi-automatic rifles and AK47s that the Russian army doesn't use anymore).
What do the Russians use now? If you don't mind me asking..

[TheDifferenceEngine]

What do the Russians use now? If you don't mind me asking..

AK-74s, AK-MS, AK-103s.

[gla22]

South Ossetia = Sudetenland
Implying that Russia is about to start another world war and will blitzkrieg through Europe is ridiculous.

[peterpanne]

The position for most leftists is to support national self-determination. According to the last time they were polled, 95% of South Ossetians want to join with Russia. Anywhere from 50-90% of South Ossetians already hold Russian passports. So therefore we support their right to do that.

The position of leftists should be hating national identities. Fuck the nationalists on both sides. It's not about supporting national self determination, it's about supporting the self determination of the single person.

[Asoka89]

It is ridicious in Kautskyite-fashion that people call all national liberation struggles reactionary because they are nationalist. In the 3rd world many movements of oppressed minorities ARE progressive. Look at the Cuban Revolution, that is what that was, was that progressive or reactionary? It was obviously progressive.

[danyboy27]

i am a leftist, but i somehow support russia beccause i am a russian fanboy.
that pretty much it. red army kick ass.

[Mindtoaster]

Its pointless to support either side in such a nationalistic war.

I worry sometimes that comrades are just automatically going with the side the US does not support, just for the fact that they don't support the US.

Why such support for South Ossentia's right to determination, and not Tibet's?

[Mindtoaster]

It is ridicious in Kautskyite-fashion that people call all national liberation struggles reactionary because they are nationalist. In the 3rd world many movements of oppressed minorities ARE progressive. Look at the Cuban Revolution, that is what that was, was that progressive or reactionary? It was obviously progressive.

Cuba was establishing socialism.

[Asoka89]

Go back and re-read a history of the Cuban Revolution, at first the revolution was strictly nationalist. We are against NATO and the US, because the Empire is the strongest entity of capital-control, Russia is reactionary too, but foreign policy wise having them on the world scene, as opposed to a uni-polar world, is good for our cause. And morally for the cause of the Osetians. And yes, I am for Tibetian self-determination too.

[jaiden]

i dont support either position and instead support an independant state which is not what either wants as far as i'm concered. a leftist position would be against imperalism. it's over a piece of land, but under communism there would be no borders or countries so i'm confused how you can support russia over this??? cuz russia wants to take control of south ossetia to restore the former dominance they had.

[Psy]

i dont support either position and instead support an independant state which is not what either wants as far as i'm concered. a leftist position would be against imperalism. it's over a piece of land, but under communism there would be no borders or countries so i'm confused how you can support russia over this??? cuz russia wants to take control of south ossetia to restore the former dominance they had.
Because like it or not Russia is the peace keeper force there, or was the peace keeping force. They were the only thing defending S. Ossetia and Abkhazia form Georgia.

[Asoka89]

Ossetia wants to JOIN Russia, with autonomy, and regain the status they had during the Soviet Union. A lot of the leftism on RevLeft is ridiculously infantile, protecting ethnic minorities and culture, while still pursuing the mission of working-class emancipation, is not contradictory.

[NerdVincent]

What's the greater threat? Russia or Nato? I don't agree with the postion that one should stay neutral when imperialists war. There is no 3rd socialist position at this current age.
Wrong. Just plain wrong. I'm the very proof of the contrary, and I ain't alone.

[Bud Struggle]

why do leftists defend IMPERALIST russia in the conflict with georgia?


They miss the good old days of Stalinst Expansion. ;) Besides Leninists are Imperalist at heart, anyway.:)

[NerdVincent]

I'm tired of leftists automatically taking the anti-american side, denying China, USSR and North Korea horrors...just because they are anti-american. I'm all for a 3rd party: the party of the people, without any indentification to a state. The people of Russia don't want to invade Georgia, it's the decision of a few bourgeois at the head of the state. Same can be applied everywhere else.

[Plagueround]

They miss the good old days of Stalinst Expansion. ;) Besides Leninists are Imperalist at heart, anyway.:)

When Christ said he would make you a "fisher of men", this is not what he had in mind Tom. :laugh:

[Random Precision]

The position of leftists should be hating national identities. Fuck the nationalists on both sides. It's not about supporting national self determination, it's about supporting the self determination of the single person.

OK, man. Tell me when you've descended to earth and we can discuss how national identity and self-determination represent real mass aims that real revolutionaries who live in the real world have to deal with, however unfortunate that may be.

[Die Neue Zeit]

It is ridicious in Kautskyite-fashion that people call all national liberation struggles reactionary because they are nationalist. In the 3rd world many movements of oppressed minorities ARE progressive. Look at the Cuban Revolution, that is what that was, was that progressive or reactionary? It was obviously progressive.

Huh? I was under the impression that Kautsky had the authoritative position on national liberation vs. Rosa Luxemburg (unless that was a position he made as a renegade). To correct your statement, "it is ridiculous in left-communist fashion..."

[Dean]

They miss the good old days of Stalinst Expansion. ;) Besides Leninists are Imperalist at heart, anyway.:)

I seriously suggest you read up on the conflict. I spent all last night reading article after article about the conflict, the history and analysis. While Russia is not being saintly, the attack was objectively worse than 9/11 (note that 90% of S. Ossetians are Russian citizens, so this wan an attack on Russia itself) and that the response can be said to be disproportionately softer than the U.S. response to 9/11.

Don't get me wrong, some terrible shit is going on there, and Russia has altogether failed to protect the occupied population. But that doesn't excuse Georgia, The U.S., Israel, the E.U., NATO, etc. for the excalation, ethnic cleansing, and ultimately imperial actions of Georgia.

Something about watching a woman tell reporters about how "the pretty women were taken away and the men and teenage boys had their head's bagged and throats slit" really brings home how fucked this is, and how insidious the western meddling in the region is.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

AK-74s, AK-MS, AK-103s.

I want a Dragunov. Although I went to a gun show last month and a brand-new SKS goes for $125. Fuck Yeah!

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

But that doesn't excuse Georgia, The U.S., Israel, the E.U., NATO, etc. for the excalation, ethnic cleansing, and ultimately imperial actions of Georgia.


No, Georgia is responsible for the actions of Georgia.

[Dean]

No, Georgia is responsible for the actions of Georgia.

Yes, so when Israel send weapons to Georgia, the U.S. helps modernize their military, attempts to admit them to NATO, and then backs them when they commit genocide - that's all well and good, after all, the "Georgia in a bubble" is solely responsible, right?

So when people end up commiting egregious human rights abuses, we should ignore the context, especially the political atmosphere, and just focus on the individuals? No wonder you idiots never get anything done, you ignore the context within which acts are commited.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

Yes, so when Israel send weapons to Georgia, the U.S. helps modernize their military, attempts to admit them to NATO, and then backs them when they commit genocide - that's all well and good, after all, the "Georgia in a bubble" is solely responsible, right?

So when people end up commiting egregious human rights abuses, we should ignore the context, especially the political atmosphere, and just focus on the individuals? No wonder you idiots never get anything done, you ignore the context within which acts are commited.

I'm really thinking of buying that SKS.

If I use it to blow your brains out, can I label Russia as an accessory?

[Colonello Buendia]

they're both equally wrong. Georgia is wrong for wanting to retake S.O. and Abkhazia but the russians are wrong for sending 90000 men to the two regions, violate another nations territory and bomb civillian targets. the georgians also bombed so they too are wankers. I just think that both sides are hideously wrong

[Led Zeppelin]

The position for most leftists is to support national self-determination. According to the last time they were polled, 95% of South Ossetians want to join with Russia. Anywhere from 50-90% of South Ossetians already hold Russian passports. So therefore we support their right to do that.

Hmm, no, most leftists support national self-determination when it is progressive, i.e., linked to the struggle for socialism.

If we were to support every national self-determination effort within the context of capitalism we'd be in support of Balkanization of a lot of nations, which doesn't benefit anyone but the imperialists.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

Leftists don't believe in the corporate media. We look at something called facts.

Here are the facts: http://www.rbcnews.com/free/20080815133739.shtml


Most Russians (80 percent) do not see South Ossetia as part of Georgia in the future, a poll conducted by the Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VCIOM) showed. Another 39 percent of respondents will not mind if the republic joined Russia, while 41 percent approve of South Ossetia's complete independence. Among respondents agreeing with South Ossetia's independence are mostly people between the ages of 25 and 44 (42-43 percent), as well as 53 percent of people living in North-West Federal District.
The majority of Russians (90 percent) insist on helping South Ossetia to gain independence, and a mere 3 percent believe that Russia should not help the republic at all. Slightly over a quarter of Russians (27 percent) deems it necessary to use military force against Georgia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Ossetian_independence_referendum,_2006


The unrecognized (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_unrecognized_countries) republic of South Ossetia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Ossetia), a breakaway region of Georgia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_%28country%29) with its capital in Tskhinvali (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tskhinvali), held a referendum on independence on November 12 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/November_12), 2006 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006). The voters answered a question: "should South Ossetia preserve its present status of a de facto (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/De_facto) independent state?" 99% of voters supported independence.

The Georgian side considers this move by de facto authorities in Tskhinvali as a provocative and unconstitutional action, and warns that this decision will further raise the tensions in the Georgian-Ossetian conflict (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgian-Ossetian_conflict) zone. However, on September 12 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_12), 2006 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006), the Chairman of the Russian (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia) State Duma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_Duma), Boris Gryzlov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boris_Gryzlov) welcomed the appointed South Ossetian referendum and announced that Russian parliamentarians will observe the voting process. On September 13 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_13), 2006 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2006), the Georgian State Minister for Conflict Resolution Issues, Merab Antadze, issued a statement, condemning Gryzlov's statement as "destructive." The United States, the European Union, the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and Nato all issued statements before the 12 November vote that branded the referendum meaningless and unhelpful.http://today.az/news/politics/46930.html


80% residents of South Ossetia are Russian citizens and Russian citizenship was issued to them on the basis of Russia's legislation, said Russian ambassador to Azerbaijan Vasili Istratov, speaking on the international legal basis of issuance of the Russian citizenship to South Ossetian residents.

[Qwerty Dvorak]

This is a mistake that many leftists make, in that they support the right side for the wrong reasons. I don't support Georgia, Russia or the US in this conflict - I support the South Ossetian people, who want to be reunited with their brethren up north. Many leftists support Russia because they think Russian imperialism is somehow better than US imperialism, which is a stupid bullshit position and reeks of Soviet apologism. I don't want to see Russia expand its empire any more than the next guy but it's a different story when more than 70% of the population of a region are ethnically and culturally closer to Russia, and want to be considered Russian. I don't care about the east-west politics of the matter, what I want is for the will of the South Ossettian people to be realized.

[Killfacer]

how can anyone "support" either side. The ossetians want to be russian, then let them be russian. Georgia shouldnt of barged in and rolled in the tanks. Russia shouldnt have bombed the shit out of everything and invaded soveriegn georgia. Neither side is justified in their actions.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

This is a mistake that many leftists make, in that they support the right side for the wrong reasons. I don't support Georgia, Russia or the US in this conflict - I support the South Ossetian people, who want to be reunited with their brethren up north. Many leftists support Russia because they think Russian imperialism is somehow better than US imperialism, which is a stupid bullshit position and reeks of Soviet apologism. I don't want to see Russia expand its empire any more than the next guy but it's a different story when more than 70% of the population of a region are ethnically and culturally closer to Russia, and want to be considered Russian. I don't care about the east-west politics of the matter, what I want is for the will of the South Ossettian people to be realized.

Nobody is defending Russian imperialism. We're pointing out the hypocrisy of the American media, and how the Russians aren't the epitome of evil.

If the people want to be Russian, and then we defend Russia trying to help them being Russian (while even criticizing Russian's military tactics), we're wrong, eh?

Wag your finger elsewhere.

[apathy maybe]

The Georgians should support the staging of an independent binding plebiscite on independence in those regions where people have expressed a desire for it. The Russians should fuck off back home and respect the outcome of such a plebiscite. The USA and the EU should shut the fuck up about territorial integrity (it only suites them to talk about it when they want to, i.e. not when the country is Serbia or Germany post WW1) and fuck off too.

Edit:

The position for most leftists is to support national self-determination. According to the last time they were polled, 95% of South Ossetians want to join with Russia. Anywhere from 50-90% of South Ossetians already hold Russian passports. So therefore we support their right to do that.


Hmm, no, most leftists support national self-determination when it is progressive, i.e., linked to the struggle for socialism.

If we were to support every national self-determination effort within the context of capitalism we'd be in support of Balkanization of a lot of nations, which doesn't benefit anyone but the imperialists.
Actually, self determination [iis[/i] a fundamentally leftist position, regardless of if it is "progressive" or not. We don't believe that people should be ruled over by folks that they don't want to be ruled over by. (In the case of anarchists, we don't think anyone should be ruled over by anyone, but hey.)

The "Balkanization" or not of nations doesn't matter shit (indeed, some people, see the anarchist forum for a thread on the matter, support it).

[Psy]

they're both equally wrong. Georgia is wrong for wanting to retake S.O. and Abkhazia but the russians are wrong for sending 90000 men to the two regions, violate another nations territory and bomb civillian targets. the georgians also bombed so they too are wankers. I just think that both sides are hideously wrong
The Georgian army attacked Russian peace keepers which was deceleration of war (meaning Georgia basically declared war on Russia), meaning Russia had the right to occupy as much Georgian land as it wanted to because Georgia technically declared war on Russia. As for forces, Russia and Georgia was at total war, meaning Russia had the right to send in as many men and equipment as it could since it was attacked by Georgia thus under the UN charter Russia could have occupied all of Georgia and just waited for the UN to negotiate peace terms.

Also from a imperialist point of view I don't think the ruling class of Russia had any choice but to show the USA not to fuck with Russia unless the US wants a fight.

As for bombing civilians by Russia, it may be true but with the propaganda coming from Georgia and that denials from Russia so we can't find out till the smoke clear.

That said this is not Bolshevik Russia we are talking about and are only defending the people of S.O. and Abkhazia out its own imperialist interests.

[Random Precision]

Hmm, no, most leftists support national self-determination when it is progressive, i.e., linked to the struggle for socialism.

If we were to support every national self-determination effort within the context of capitalism we'd be in support of Balkanization of a lot of nations, which doesn't benefit anyone but the imperialists.

The position I am familiar with (Lenin's) is to support the self-determination of oppressed nationalities- i.e., we don't support the bourgeois-separatist "independence movements" of Scotland or of the Belgian Flemish for instance. But Ossetians as well as Abkhazians in Georgia are clearly oppressed nationalities, thus Georgia's recent attempt to reestablish its control over those regions, and so we support their goal of joining with Russia as that is what the vast majority want to do.

[Bud Struggle]

I seriously suggest you read up on the conflict. I spent all last night reading article after article about the conflict, the history and analysis. While Russia is not being saintly, the attack was objectively worse than 9/11 (note that 90% of S. Ossetians are Russian citizens, so this wan an attack on Russia itself) and that the response can be said to be disproportionately softer than the U.S. response to 9/11.

Don't get me wrong, some terrible shit is going on there, and Russia has altogether failed to protect the occupied population. But that doesn't excuse Georgia, The U.S., Israel, the E.U., NATO, etc. for the excalation, ethnic cleansing, and ultimately imperial actions of Georgia.


No doubt. The problem with the Caucauses is that in those mountains there are lots of ethnic groups of thousands of years standing--all quite small and fiesty--the South Ossetians and the Abkhazians are just such examples. They view the larger Georgia in the same way the Georgians view Russia--a large neighbor bent on conquest.

The S. Ossetians are maybe 150,000 strong--not quite the stuff of nations so they are choosing the better of the two unfavorable options--unity with Russia over unity with Georgia. Besides for the general brutality of the situation--they should be allowed self determination and if they want to be part of Russia, they should be allowed to go.

[Abluegreen7]

Georgia was the Agressor. They really though they could mess with Russia they are Crazy. However Russia is getting more imperialist. But bush comparing it to the Soviet Invasion of Afganistan is nuts. Even for Bush to say somthing that generally retarded how can this man still be President? Shouldnt there be like an Iq average you must have? One could only hope so.

[Psy]

Georgia was the Agressor. They really though they could mess with Russia they are Crazy. However Russia is getting more imperialist. But bush comparing it to the Soviet Invasion of Afganistan is nuts. Even for Bush to say somthing that generally retarded how can this man still be President? Shouldnt there be like an Iq average you must have? One could only hope so.

They thought they could bomb the Roki Tunnel to seal it off and tried during the early phase of the war but failed.

[YadaRanger]

why do leftists defend IMPERALIST russia in the conflict with georgia? wouldn't a true communist position be AGAINST imperalism and support an independant south ossetia yes? or am i completely wrong....cuz from what i've read it seems as if russia wants to establish its dominance once again.....explain

i dont defend russia now and never did. The CCCP was a Imperial Bourgeois government. The russian government now supports the Bourgeois's interests which are in and out of the government.

DEMOCRACY NOW!

[Mindtoaster]

i dont defend russia now and never did. The CCCP was a Imperial Bourgeois government. The russian government now supports the Bourgeois's interests which are in and out of the government.

DEMOCRACY NOW!

This.

However, it has also been alleged that this conflict is a way for Russia to send a big middle-finger to the USA, to say "Hey look, if you ally with the USA, they cannot help you anymore"; since Georgia has been such a major ally of the USA in its war on the middle-east.

And correct me if I am mistaken, but I believe there are two major oil pipelines that run through Georgia to western Europe. Pipelines that Russia can use to cut-off flow to Europe if there's a major war in the near-future. My economics teacher thinks this is one of many oil wars to come.

[RGacky3]

However, it has also been alleged that this conflict is a way for Russia to send a big middle-finger to the USA, to say "Hey look, if you ally with the USA, they cannot help you anymore"; since Georgia has been such a major ally of the USA in its war on the middle-east.

Thats a good point, it could just be Russia trying to get a place in the Imperialist game, along with the United States and China.

The best thing George Bush could have done was just keep his mouth shut, and try to ignore it, but he did'nt.

[theraven]

Georgia is the one trying annex S. Ossetia and Abkhazi, Georgia launched a sneak attack on these regions to try and accomplish this. Russia counter attacked, and S. Ossetia and Abkhazi allied with Russia, which is why there are reports of S. Ossetia and Abkhaza militias marching with Russian convoys (the militas are easy to spot as they are the ones carrying SKS semi-automatic rifles and AK47s that the Russian army doesn't use anymore).

Except those territories are already part of georgia. How can Georgia Annex them?

[Robespierre2.0]

Obviously, this whole incident was a cynical power-grab by both imperialist powers. U.S. imperialism wants to encircle and strangle its rival, Russia, with puppet regimes, and Russian imperialism wants to regain its sphere of influence.

However, from the standpoint of the South Ossetians and Abkhazians, Russia deserves support in this situation. These regions wanted to join Russia, but Georgia attempted to violently exert its authority over the two regions. Also, even though no imperialism is good imperialism, at least the Russians leave the public sector alone in their client states for the most part (see Belarus), whereas the U.S. usually subjects its satellites to unbridled neoliberalism.

[Frost]

Actually, self determination [iis[/i] a fundamentally leftist position, regardless of if it is "progressive" or not.

Do you subscribe to Riis-Knudsen's belief in National Socialism as a left-wing movement? What about anybody else here?

[Sendo]

the ossetians have a right to join Russia. But this doesn't hide the fact that Russia and Georgia have ulterior motives and both have used cluster bombs on civilians.

[Solzhenitsyn]

why do leftists defend IMPERALIST russia in the conflict with georgia? wouldn't a true communist position be AGAINST imperalism and support an independant south ossetia yes? or am i completely wrong....cuz from what i've read it seems as if russia wants to establish its dominance once again.....explain

There a two points you need to know about this Caucasus War:
1) Georgia started it.
2) Russia finished it.

If you want to blame someone then blame Saakashvili. It was his immense stupidity and rashness that has brought ruin to Georgia.

Saakashvili's strategy was to take S. Ossetia and rely on Georgia's status as a virtual Armerican vassal state to stay Russia's hand. Then, depending on American support for their efforts, reclaim Abkhazia at a later time. He obviously didn't even consider that a Russian military response would be forthcoming especially since his strategy would neccessarily entail killing Russian military personnel. Too bad the 58th Army, fresh from crushing the Chechen rebellion, was sitting on Georgia's borders. To use an old cliche "it was worse than a crime it was a blunder!."

[Dust Bunnies]

If this continues I can see a new Cold War. But what was Georgia thinking? Its like Luxembourg trying to take on Nazi Germany, such a weak country cannot do that.

[redSHARP]

just for the fuck of it, i am going to say this:

"none of this shit would have happened if the Soviet Union was still around"

[theraven]

just for the fuck of it, i am going to say this:

"none of this shit would have happened if the Soviet Union was still around"

Nope, people would have been to busy standing in lines for basic commodities to worry about nationalism.

[Socialist Dave]

I stand in line for basic commodities at Tesco, don't change the subject

[danyboy27]

If this continues I can see a new Cold War. But what was Georgia thinking? Its like Luxembourg trying to take on Nazi Germany, such a weak country cannot do that.

they could have succeded if they would have fought to the last one, and occupy the zone until a cease fire take place.
But this would have lets thousand of georgian soldier killed.

also, i recently seen the order of battle for that conflict, and believe me, the ruskies where prepared for the shitstorm of the centuty, they sent vdv troops,chechen special bataillions(veteran of chechnya conflict), and even the freaking airbornes was there, only the elite of the elite of the russian army.