BS: War in Georgia (2008)

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 07:37 PM

Unless the Tiger is George Bush, the dude who Fu#ked with him you just moved to Pakistan while he spends a trillion dollars making Iraq nearly, nearly as peaceful, safe and stable as he found it.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Peace
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 07:38 PM

I think I'll have a few dozen beer the day Obama is sworn in.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 07:55 PM

Danged.... Usually when I ask bruce a question, go back to restin', I come back and he's tried to answer it with 'bout 5 cut 'n posts but, geeze, seems I was a sllep a long time and come back and bruce hasn't found a source that describes what the Russian peace keepers wear???

Hmmmmm???

Oh, an' yeah... There is relevence to this question and next few, bruce because this ol' hillbilly sniffs a Gulf of Tonkin here so will you please answer the question so we can get to the next one???

I mean, if you expect us to accept your arguments based on your expert witness, in this case the Defense Ministry of Georgia, it is only fair to determind wheteher or not thay are a crdible source, right???

B~

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Peace
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 08:00 PM

They wear blue helmets. With a UN logo on them.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 08:05 PM

I watched BBC newsnight tonight and listened with great understanding and interest to a Russian spokesman as he explained their official perspective.

I reflected on the images I had just seen on the news which showed Georgian civilians and Western press being shot at by Ossetian seperatists under the cool eye of the russian military on the road between Gori and Tblisi.

As the Russian Representative droned on, I stopped listening and yelled at the screen "why won't you withdraw then?".

Sadly my friends it is indeed true that without an immediate withdrawal of the Russian troops, combined with real policing, rounding up and repatriating of the rampaging Ossetians, the russians words distinctly lack any credibility.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 08:23 PM

I'm currently watching RUSSIA TODAY - the English speaking russian news channel.

The official line, repeated again and again is that they are in Georgia on a humanitarian mission.

This conflicts in my view with the information on the BBC

The russian perspective is that America is using this situation to persuade europe that they need an anti missile defence system installed. Poland has apparently been given an anti missile capability.

Apparently they would be reporting from Tshkinvali, but there are Georgian snipers there taking pot shots so it is too dangerous.

They deny that there is any violence in Gori.

On the BBC, I have seen images of Russian soldiers wiping their feet with a Georgian flag.

There is much implied self congratulation for ending the violence in Tshkinvali.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: pdq
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 08:36 PM

"Poland has apparently been given an anti missile capability."

I believe this is a response by NATO to the Russian military invasion of the last few days. They want to show Russia that their actionswill not be wihout consequences. There is nothing built and no actual arms diliverd as this agreement was made today. If this is a wrong impression, I would like to know also.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 09:04 PM

I see my question about where the Chechens should go has not been answered.

If the idea is that they are out of place where they are because they are Muslims, that is not true. Many of the republics surrounding Chechnya also have a majority of Muslims. The fact is that there is no place on earth that has people who are more like the Chechens than the region in which they live.


Poland was already slated to have a missile defense system installed there, long before what just happened in Georgia and South Ossetia. A lot of Russia's behavior has been a response to this. They don't believe that it's purely defensive in nature and that it's not going to be aimed at them. They have good reason to believe this.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Riginslinger
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 09:47 PM

But if the Americans elect a Muslim president, Chechnya's troubles will be over.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 09:52 PM

America can't elect a Muslim president. No such person is running for office.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 14 Aug 08 - 11:56 PM

If McCain thought it would win it for him, he'd convert.

After all, for him its "Country First".

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: robomatic
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 12:46 AM

I've been hearing that the stats indicate that Obama and McCain are in a dead heat right now.

I think the Russian sabre rattling (and not just sabres, and not just rattling) is good for McCain about now.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,Ron Davies
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 05:17 AM

Re:   South Ossetia-Georgia (and probably quite a few other conflicts): A short quote from one of BB's posts tells the whole story:   "We must respond to provocations". As long as all sides seem to feel that way--and it seems they do now-- there will be no end to the problem.

But the fact remains that for the majority of South Ossetians, it's clear that Georgia, not Russia, is seen as the aggressor.   Drivel about the Sudetenland notwithstanding.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,Ron Davies
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 05:46 AM

The current tensions between Russia and Georgia are only good for McCain to the extent he can disassociate himself from GWB---who has proven himself, as I noted earlier, to be the anti-TR.

And we've already discussed the worth of "stats".

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,Jack the Sailor
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 05:57 AM

robomatic,

The poll numbers have not really moved.

It seems to me that the situation in Georgia poses as many problems for McCain as opportunities.

He talked about all his visits there and is joined at the hip with Georgia's chief lobbyist. On the other had he says the conflict was not foreseeable on the third hand he says he warned of it. He talks about banning Russia from the G8, but he doesn't and will never, even if the disaster of his Presidency should occur, have that power. He talks about NATO protection for Georgia but has no cards to play there. He talks about military response when the Iraq war has depleted US forces. It is difficult to see just what benefit we might gain from McCain's experience.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 06:13 AM

pdq

"I believe this is a response by NATO to the Russian military invasion of the last few days."

Exactly what I wrote. My whole sentence began with:

"The russian perspective is that America is using this situation to persuade europe that they need an anti missile defence system installed."

CarolC's post however seems to refute the whole idea.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 06:56 AM

What's this???

McAtheist is convertin' to Islam???

Wow!!! This ain't gonna help his chances of gettin' elected...

Has he changed his name yet??? Jaoni McAli has a nice ring to it... That oughtta get him some votes... Much better than McUgly, or McWar...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: pdq
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 08:30 AM

"CarolC's post however seems to refute the whole idea."

They usually do.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,Volgadon
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 08:55 AM

The conflict is not over oil. Georgia only has the pipeline run through it. The oilfields are in Azerbaijan, which has not been involved one bit in the conflict. Most of the oil is already controlled by BP.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 08:56 AM

Well, seein' as bb has no intention of answering my last question, which BTW was one of a series that was going to detroy the "offical" mythology/story of Gerogia's Misitry of Defense, I think we call all assume that anything we hear from Georgia cannot be taken as fact.

With that said, I do find it interesting that the Bush administration is using language that is clearly intended to inflame the tensions between the United States and Russia...

When I heard him talking about how bad Russia was for invading a sovergn nation all I could think of was Iraq...

But the most serious part of this is that these entire events, down to Operation Brimstone are nothin' but chess moves on Dick Cheney's ***World (oil) Domination Grand Chess Board***...

Makes me sick to see just how the media, just as they did in the mad-dash-to-Iraq, have taken the bait... There is way too much real information out there for them to just be agents of The Bush/Cheney/Rice War Machine!!!

B~

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Peace
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 09:22 AM

Some folks are forgetting that Georgia started this.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: pdq
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 09:33 AM

"It all started when he hit me back!"

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 10:04 AM

I really don't know where CarolC finds the spirit to keep trying to reason with utter morons. Loads of good stuff here from LH too, and a good post from Paul Burke (re the Kosovo precedent etc).

I likedbeardedbruce's reference to the insoucience of Europe towards its oil dependency. He probably thinks the US can survive on its indigenous reserves until alternatives come along. Fat chance of that, even after Alaska's been destroyed.

Best of all was Teribus sneering at Russia's concern to feel safe - just as details were being finalised for America to put missiles in Poland precisely to "feel safe." (JFK nearly started WW3 when the USSR tried that in Cuba, which is much farther from the US than Poland is from Russia.) That's been a long-established plan, as pdq may care to note, since he thinks it was dreamt up the other day. But then pdq knows that Iran is a nuclear power, or seeks to be, despite a report to the contrary from his own country's intelligence services. (OK, those intelligence services have been wrong before, and famously, but does pdq know better?)

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 11:47 AM

From 2005...

Star Wars in Poland

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 12:05 PM

I do agree, however, with the premise that the US is using this situation to persuade the rest of Europe to not stand in the way of the missile sites that the US and Poland have had planned for a long time.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Goose Gander
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 02:01 PM

Georgia invaded South Ossetia, and only then did Russia intervene. If you start a war, you don't get to decide how it ends. Just ask George W. Bush.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 02:52 PM

1. I only post when I get on the computer- Unlike Bobert, I do not assume that a lack of response is anything other than a lack of response.

2. The START of this is years ago- THIS engagement started with the claimed attack by South Ossetians on Georgian by artillary ( in spite of the mixed Ossetian/Georgian/Russian peacekeepers, who should have stopped this.) and the subsequent attack by Georgia on South Ossetia.

3. I note no comment here about the failure of the Russians to either control the South Ossetians, ot to withdraw from Georgian territory.

As for Lebenon, the parallel is that Hezboallah ( like the South Ossetians) attacked Isreal, who( , like Geogia) then invaded to put an end to the acts of warfare.

Russia is most certainly acting in what it considers it's best interests: If that is OK, why can't the US act in its own interests as well? Or do you all still demand that there be two standards, one for the US and allies, and another, looser one for the rest of the world?

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 03:13 PM

I have not seen any evidence that the conflict started with South Ossetians firing on Georgians other than what Wikipeda says the government of Georgia has reported. The Government of Georgia has been preparing for an invasion of South Ossetia for a long time (since long before this summer). The South Ossetians themselves have been bracing for such an invasion for a long time.

This conflict has been ongoing since Georgia started it in 1991, and since then, it has always been Georgia's intention to finish it by invading and reoccupying South Ossetia.

If Georgia wants to end the conflict, it's going to have to stop waging war against South Ossetia and recognise it as an independent nation.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Goose Gander
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 03:17 PM

And why do 'US interests' always seem to lie on the other side of the globe? Georgia borders Russia, so Russian concern is understandable. Regarding who's to blame and whether one side is 'less guilty' than the other, I really don't have a dog in that fight. But US hypocrisy is astounding. What would be the response if San Diego County (for example) attempted to secede from the US and Russia backed the 'breakaway republic of san diego'?

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 03:31 PM

By the way, the locations of the skirmishes that the government of Georgia is alleging happened in July in its timeline are in South Ossetia, not Georgia.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 03:38 PM

"By the way, the locations of the skirmishes that the government of Georgia is alleging happened in July in its timeline are in South Ossetia, not Georgia. "

Not entirely true, CarolC: The attacks that caused the Georgian invasion of South Ossetia DID occur in Georgian territory. I will have to check the earlier ones ( before the ceasefire by Georgia that South Ossetia violated)



"But years of negotiations with separatist leaders in Abkhazia and South Ossetia have proved fruitless. Saakashvili has offered those governments broad autonomy in exchange for allegiance to Georgia, but Abkhaz and South Ossetian leaders have insisted on full-scale independence or absorption into Russia.

Georgia's all-out assault on South Ossetia was preceded by attacks by Ossetian forces against Georgian troops earlier in the week, including a separatist ambush with rocket-propelled grenades on a Georgian armored personnel carrier that killed two soldiers and injured six, Georgian authorities said. On Thursday, a separatist mortar attack on the village of Avnevi killed eight Georgian civilians.

Thursday evening, Saakishvili called for a cease-fire and urged separatist leaders to resume talks on a peaceful settlement. But when separatists began shelling Georgian villages after Saakashvili's cease-fire call, Georgian leaders decided to move ahead with the assault.

"Separatists opened fire in response to yesterday's peaceful initiative of the president of Georgia," said Georgian Prime Minister Lado Gurgenidze in a televised address. "As a result, lives of civilians were under threat."


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-080808-georgia-ossetia-webaug09,0,4176197.story

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 03:44 PM

The South Ossetian Press and Information Committee reported that a South Ossetian militiaman had been killed and another injured in an attack on a police post in the village of Ubia and this was followed by the shelling of Tskhinvali, which resulted in the death of one man. The shelling involved the use of mortars and grenade launchers, they said. Georgia claimed it had opened fire in response to the shelling by South Ossetian militiamen of Georgian-controlled villages.

The Georgian Ministry of Defense said on July 7, 2008 a group of up to ten militiamen were apparently prevented from placing mines on a Georgian-controlled by-pass road linking the Georgian villages in the north of Tskhinvali with the rest of Georgia. The Georgian side opened fire and the group was forced to retreat towards the nearby South Ossetian-controlled village

According to media reports, on July 19, 2008 a Georgian police post was attacked by Abkhaz militias using grenades, one of the militiamen died from a grenade exploding accidentally. Abkhaz officials condemned the reports as false.[99]

On July 29, 2008 South Ossetia said two South Ossetian villages had been fired on by Georgian forces in response to South Ossetia reinforcing its positions on the perimeter of the conflict zone.[104] Georgia said the same day that Georgian posts on the Sarabuki heights were attacked by South Ossetian forces with no injuries reported.[103]

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: pdq
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 03:48 PM

"The Government of Georgia has been preparing for an invasion of South Ossetia for a long time..."

This is getting to be just plain silly. South Ossetia is part of Georgia and has been since 1991 after Russian and Georgian leaders negotiated the current boundries. Not one international body, including the UN, recognizes the South Ossetian claim of independence, and no rational peolple consider it a part of Russia. It belongs to Georgia just as San Diego County belongs to the United States.

Perhaps the unhappier folks in South Ossetia will pick up and got to Russia to live. I'm sure there will be plenty of their relatives will want to stay and the area will be much the better for it.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 04:04 PM

South Ossetia considers itself an independent country. Nobody in the world has a right to tell them otherwise.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 04:09 PM

On July 29, 2008 South Ossetia said two South Ossetian villages had been fired on by Georgian forces in response to South Ossetia reinforcing its positions on the perimeter of the conflict zone

As we can see, Georgia has been firing on South Ossetians even in the absence of any attacks coming from South Ossetians. Georgia's bombing and invasion of South Ossetia had notthing whatever to do with any skirmishes instigated by South Ossetians or anyone else. Georgia bombed and invaded South Ossetia for no other reason than because it wants to force South Ossetia to be reabsorbed back into Georgia. And any and all violence by South Ossetians has been in response to these efforts by Georgia. This makes Georgia the aggressor.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 04:16 PM

1.
"Georgia said the same day that Georgian posts on the Sarabuki heights were attacked by South Ossetian forces with no injuries reported.[103]"


2."Georgia bombed and invaded South Ossetia for no other reason than because it wants to force South Ossetia to be reabsorbed back into Georgia." = A judgement made by you without substantiation. I read that Georgia was tired of being attacked by the South Ossetian sepratists, even afetr various ceasefires, and was trying to show them that they should not blow up Georgians. Just as valid as your claim, and a lot closer to the stated facts by BOTH sides.


3/"And any and all violence by South Ossetians has been in response to these efforts by Georgia."

A false claim, as several of the attacks on Georgia are claimed to be AFTER cease-fires were in place- the South Ossetians DID NOT WANT a peaceful resolution.

I will state that "Any and all violence by Georgians has been in response to these efforts by South Ossetians to violently leave the state of Georgia." This is obviously as true as your claim, perhaps more so.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 04:18 PM

Georgia reports Shootout in S.Ossetia

Civil Georgia, Tbilisi / 29 Jul.'08 / 09:56
   

Georgian posts in the South Ossetian conflict zone came under fire from South Ossetian militias overnight and early on July 29, Rustavi 2 TV and the Georgian Public Broadcaster reported.

According to the reports, posts located on the Sarabuki heights were attacked. No one was injured, the reports said. The South Ossetian side has yet to comment.

A group of officials from the Georgian Ministry of Defense, including Deputy Minister Ramaz Nikolaishvili, visited the conflict zone on July 28. The Georgian MoD reported that the delegation also visited, as it put it, "the strategic height" of Sarabuki and placed the Georgian national flag there.

In a separate incident, the Russian command of the Joint Peacekeeping Forces stationed in the conflict zone said late on July 28 that South Ossetian militiamen had prevented peacekeepers and OSCE observers from monitoring the village of Cholibauri. The Georgian side has claimed that South Ossetian militiamen are setting up military fortifications in an area close to the village.

"They [the South Ossetian militiamen] threatened us at gunpoint and even fired several shots into the air over the observers' heads," Interfax and RIA Novosti news agencies quoted Vladimir Ivanov, a spokesman for the Russian peacekeepers in the conflict zone, as saying late on July 28. "Such actions fuel tensions in the conflict zone."

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 04:26 PM

The BBC showed footage the other night which they filmed a couple of weeks ago that they said was filmed by one of their crews and which they claimed depicted russian backed south ossetian seperatists attacking georgian targets in georgia.

To what extent is the "popular" uprising of the russian backed seperatists comparable to the "popular" uprising of the Contras in Nicaragua.

Is Russia deliberately trying to destabilize Georgia to effect a regime change in Georgia as Sakashvili claims?

Is the whole Contra thing the reason why America has been so quick to deduce the russians motives?

Is it a case of the pot calling the kettle black, or worse, is it a case of the Americans projecting their own guilt onto Russia?

Russian propaganda ... er ... news ... gives such a different picture to the news agencies that I trust that I have to consider that they do indeed have something to hide.

There simply isn't the same honest media scrutiny that we enjoy in the UK.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Bobert
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 04:42 PM

Ummmmmm, what would Russia's motive be here, folks??? I mean, lets get real... Russsia needs another Cheknya like the US needs another Iraq... If anything, Russia has been suckered into this by the US and their CIA puppet in Georgia... Russia has everything to loose... Especially now with Russia enjoying all these oil profits...

Maybe this is why Putin very angerily waged his finger at Bush at the Olympics after getting a call informing him of the attacks...

Russia nas been sucker punched by Cheney and Putin is gonna be one pissed off guy for a long time over it... And I don't blame him... And big moth John McCain, whould he be elected, won't be able to fix nuthin' because he had to use his Georgian lobbiest to turn this into a big ol' fashion circle jerk of a PR campaign...

One more reason to not vote for John McCain unless you want 4 more years of lousy US/Russian relations...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 04:46 PM

Bobert,

You state:
"Ummmmmm, what would Russia's motive be here, folks??? "


Do you ever bother to read anything? There have been a number of posts about what Russia stands to gain by this. If you truely believe what you have stated, you disappoint me greatly. Those NASCAR fans you wanted to disenfranchise have a better grasp of international politics than you have shown.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 04:53 PM

I think I am becoming more entrenched in my suspicion of Putin.

However, now that i look at the Americans a bit more closely, they are coming across as though they are revelling in their righteousness.

They don't seem to be engaging the Russians on the question of Georgia's irresponsibility but are stuck in a groove blaming russia.

Again though, I find myself returning to the pictures of the south ossetian forces currently in Georgia laying waste to those around them whilst under the protection of the russian peacekeepers.

I don't see how allowing that has anything to do with humanitarianism or peacekeeping or russian responses to georgian aggression against ossetians.

Why are the russians giving tacit licence to the south ossetian seperatists to murder and destroy in georgia?

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 04:55 PM

...there should be no doubt that Abkhazia must be regained and that Georgia's territorial integrity must be restored. Georgia will be completely free only when the most beautiful flag in the world, the five-star flag, flies at the (*1) Roki tunnel and on the (*2) Psou.

--Mikheil Saakashvili, November 22, 2004


*1 The Roki tunnel crosses the border between South Ossetia and Russia.

*2 The Psou River is forms the border between Abkhazia and Russia.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 04:59 PM

For the record,

I would trust Obama to be a million times more resourceful, more intelligent, and more competent to deal with this situation than McCain.

I think politics is indeed a game of chess and that is unavoidable as if you aren't playing it you'll be beaten by someone who is.

I believe that Obama would be a subtler and more effective player.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: beardedbruce
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 04:59 PM

Russia's Ominous New Doctrine?

By Strobe Talbott
Friday, August 15, 2008; Page A21

Russia has been justifying its rampage through Georgia as a "peacekeeping" operation to end the Tbilisi government's "genocide" and "ethnic cleansing" of South Ossetia. That terminology deliberately echoes U.S. and NATO language during their 1999 bombing campaign against Serbia, which resulted in the independence of Kosovo. Essentially, it's payback time for a grievance that Russia has borne against the West for nine years. The Russians are relying on the conceit that Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili is today's equivalent of Slobodan Milosevic, and that the South Ossetians are (or were until their rescue by the latter-day Red Army last week) being victimized by Tbilisi the way the Kosovar Albanians suffered under Belgrade.

This analogy turns reality, and history, upside down. Only after exhausting every attempt at diplomacy did NATO go to war over Kosovo. It did so because the formerly "autonomous" province of Serbia was under the heel of Belgrade and the Milosevic regime was running amok there, killing ethnic Albanians and throwing them out of their homes. By contrast, South Ossetia -- even though it is on Georgian territory -- has long been a Russian protectorate, beyond the reach of Saakashvili's government.

An accurate comparison between the Balkan disasters of the 1990s and the one now playing out in the Caucasus underscores what is most ominous about current Russian policy. Seventeen years ago, the Soviet Union came apart at the seams more or less peacefully. That was overwhelmingly because Boris Yeltsin insisted on converting the old inter-republic boundaries into new international ones. In doing so, he kept in check the forces of revanchism among communists and nationalists in the Russian parliament (which went by the appropriately atavistic name "the Supreme Soviet").

Meanwhile, Yugoslavia collapsed into bloody chaos because its leaders engaged in an ethnically and religiously based land-grab. Milosevic, as the best-armed of the lot, tried to carve a "Greater Serbia" out of the flanks of Bosnia and Croatia. If Yeltsin had gone that route, seeking to create a Greater Russia that incorporated Belarus and the parts of Ukraine, northern Kazakhstan and the Baltic states populated by Russian speakers, there could have been conflict across 11 time zones with tens of thousands of nuclear weapons in the mix.

A question that looms large in the wake of the past week is whether Russian policy has changed with regard to the permanence of borders. That seemed to be what Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov was hinting yesterday when he said, "You can forget about any discussion of Georgia's territorial integrity." He ridiculed "the logic of forcing South Ossetia and Abkhazia to return to being part of the Georgian state."

Lavrov is a careful and experienced diplomat, not given to shooting off his mouth. That makes his comments all the more unsettling. If he has given the world a glimpse of the Russian endgame, it's dangerous in its own right and in the precedent it would set. South Ossetia and Abkhazia might be set up as supposedly independent countries ("just like Kosovo," the Russians would say) -- but would in fact be satrapies of Russia. While Russia might see that outcome as proof of its comeback as a major power, the Balkanization of the Caucasus may not end there: Chechnya is just one of several regions on Russian territory that are seething with resentment against the Kremlin and that might hanker after a version of independence far less to Moscow's liking than what may be contemplated for Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

Among Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's important tasks in the days ahead is to get clarity on whether a Lavrov doctrine has replaced the Yeltsin one of 16 years ago. If so, big trouble looms -- including for Russia. Moscow's action and rhetoric of the past week have highlighted yet another, potentially more consequential respect in which this episode could bode ill for all concerned. For the Bush administration -- and those of Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush as well -- the fundamental premise of American policy has been that Russia has put its Soviet past behind it and is committed, eventually, to integrating itself into Europe and the political, economic and ideological (as opposed to the geographical) "West."

Prominent Russians have said as much. In one of my first meetings with Vladimir Putin, before he became president, he spoke of his country's zapadnichestvo, its Western vocation. Yet it now appears that beyond the undisguised animosity that Putin bears toward Saakashvili, he and his government regard Georgia's pro-Western bent and its aspiration to join two Western institutions, NATO and the European Union, as, literally, a casus belli. If that is the case, the next U.S. administration -- the fourth to deal with post-Soviet Russia -- will have to reexamine the underlying basis for the whole idea of partnership with that country and its continuing integration into a rule-based international community.

The writer is president of the Brookings Institution and was deputy secretary of state in the Clinton administration.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: CarolC
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 04:59 PM

My own opinion is that Russia is doing it to show Georgia (and its puppet master, the US) that Georgia is going to have to relinquish any claim on South Ossetia and Abkhazia whether it wants to or not. I think it is doing it to pressure Georgia to sign a non use of force agreement.

If Georgia can throw its weight around and force South Ossetia to do its bidding (killing many civilians in the process), it seems to me that Georgia is not in a position to complain if someone else does the same thing to it.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 05:04 PM

Saakashvili is not speaking like a true conqueror. Shame! No wonder his invasion plans in South Ossetia went awry. He should have said "Georgia will be completely free only when the most beautiful flag in the world, the five-star flag, flies over Moscow, Vienna, Dresden, and Paris!" You can't win total hegemony for the most beautiful flag in the world with feeble half-measures. George "It's all the way to Baghdad!" Bush could have told him that.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: pdq
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 05:07 PM

lox...

There are genuine members of the Russian Army in S. Ossetia (a part of Georgia) right now, but there are also paid mercenaries as well as volunteers from various areas. Those who don't wear a Russian uniform but kill people are probably mercenaries being protected by the Russian Army as the former do the "dirty work". The volunteers seem to be unpaid folks who either have a grudge to settle or just want to be able to kill people.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 05:13 PM

And the russian Media is romanticising the whole campaign and glorifying it with slow moving music on news reports which, as we have seen in Ireland amongst other places, can make ordinary murderers feel and appear like warrior poets.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 05:14 PM

"Essentially, it's payback time for a grievance that Russia has borne against the West for nine years."

Exactly. And a legitimate grievance, in my opinion...but it goes back a lot further than nine years. It goes all the way back to the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1989 and the subsequent dismembering of most of their border regions and the devastation of their domestic economy, indeed the devastation of the fabric of their entire society.

If you were Russian, BB, you would most likely understand that it's a legitimate grievance.

The West has been throwing its weight around in an arrogant manner for decades now, subverting various cultures through economic and political manipulation, bombing invading small countries at its whim, and attempting to control all the oil in the world...confident that no one could stop them.

The Russians are now saying, "Enough. We draw the line here."

You would say exactly the same thing were you in their position.

You have your interests at heart. They have theirs. They are human too.

Subject: RE: BS: War in Georgia
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 15 Aug 08 - 05:21 PM

LH,

Thing is that Russians are doing it in a hamfisted neanderthal way.

The global partnership that the US speaks of is in fact the diplomatic battlefield where the nations of today fight their battles without suffering damage to their people, infrastructure or reputation.

America is right that Russia has taken a step backwards and in the process undermined her standing on the world stage.