Georgia NATO/US Relations

TheGeorgian wrote:Nothing really new or dramatic. It's to raise the combat capabilities of our troops education and training wise. We allready have a similar type of training center running since 2006. The Mountain Warfare school allready trains special troops of NATO member states and allies for years now.

Working towards NATO membership is also not dramatic news. That was allready partialy established or at least considered during Shevardnadze rule in 2001.
Consequently such developments shouldn't really be surprising to anyone. It's not like membership was in any reach for at least a decade or two if at all.

Russia also doesn't give us the slightest chance nor desire, be it forced or not, to consider any form of alternatives.

So tell me, what should we do. Simply dissapear from the map .... ?

I will not pretend to be an expert on this topic but I could not help but notice several interesting things:

You guys may think that you have big problem but in fact, you are experiencing one of the most solvable conflicts in history. Here is why:

1) There is no religious component to this conflict. This fact alone erases 99% of difficulties you would otherwise have when trying to negotiate permanent solution.
I am being dead serious, Balkans for example, would be non issue if religious part could be taken out of equation.

2) That ''war'' you guys fought? (all of you) That only lasted for 6 days and had casualtie number in low four digits.
No disrespect, but over here, that would barely qualify as hunting accident. I am honestly surprised that is still a topic...

What you guys need to do (Georgia, Abkhazia, Ossetia) is to burry the hatchet. You can do this simply by throwing the real culprit-Sakashwilie- under the bus where he belongs because he and his merry gang of NATO fluffers are thes one who brought this misery on all of you. And they made good money for themselves off of your blood.

As for political solution, you should try with confederacy approach, for three of you to form a new country together. It won't be easy, but what is? It will certainly be easier than most conflict solutions out there...

Also, Russia would gladly lubricate any reasonable solution if it means getting NATO morons away from her ballpark.

Georgia got played by NATO. Is sucks but that does not mean you have to live in this status quo permanently. Keep in mind that NATO is an institution that even country like Poland is uncertain of whether if it would help them in serious conflict.
If Poland has doubts then what could small, distant Georgia expect?

Nobody expects you to disappear, they just expect you to start living up to your potential.

That is my 2¢.

PapaDragon wrote:

TheGeorgian wrote:Nothing really new or dramatic. It's to raise the combat capabilities of our troops education and training wise. We allready have a similar type of training center running since 2006. The Mountain Warfare school allready trains special troops of NATO member states and allies for years now.

Working towards NATO membership is also not dramatic news. That was allready partialy established or at least considered during Shevardnadze rule in 2001.
Consequently such developments shouldn't really be surprising to anyone. It's not like membership was in any reach for at least a decade or two if at all.

Russia also doesn't give us the slightest chance nor desire, be it forced or not, to consider any form of alternatives.

So tell me, what should we do. Simply dissapear from the map .... ?

I will not pretend to be an expert on this topic but I could not help but notice several interesting things:

You guys may think that you have big problem but in fact, you are experiencing one of the most solvable conflicts in history. Here is why:

1) There is no religious component to this conflict. This fact alone erases 99% of difficulties you would otherwise have when trying to negotiate permanent solution.
I am being dead serious, Balkans for example, would be non issue if religious part could be taken out of equation.

2) That ''war'' you guys fought? (all of you) That only lasted for 6 days and had casualtie number in low four digits.
No disrespect, but over here, that would barely qualify as hunting accident. I am honestly surprised that is still a topic...

What you guys need to do (Georgia, Abkhazia, Ossetia) is to burry the hatchet. You can do this simply by throwing the real culprit-Sakashwilie- under the bus where he belongs because he and his merry gang of NATO fluffers are thes one who brought this misery on all of you. And they made good money for themselves off of your blood.

As for political solution, you should try with confederacy approach, for three of you to form a new country together. It won't be easy, but what is? It will certainly be easier than most conflict solutions out there...

Nobody expects you to disappear, they just expect you to start living up to your potential.

That is my 2¢.

True delight to see some decent posts once in a while.

You, are absolutly right.

Burrying the hatchet with neither the Abkhazians nor the Ossetians does present any special or very difficult hurdle in that respect if the doors for talks and rehabilitation were open. That is a fact. It has been done before and it has been proven very succesful. Despite what happened and it would work even better despite recent events. But they are kept closed, forcefuly. Nowdays these two regions present nothing but huge isolated ( to us ) Russian military bases with fences stretched along the DMZ in an effort to undermine any sort of rapprochement and convergence. Nobody should have illusions. People are not stupid. No matter how much you try to influence their thinking. They know what is going on, when they are played and what political role or significance they have.

Also, Russia would gladly lubricate any reasonable solution if it means getting NATO morons away from her ballpark.

Maybe because it's today, a different time. Far from 1991 when the wounds were still fresh and one couldn't bear "loosing" so much ? - wishful thinking. Does Russia bear to have "lost" so much, now ? as a matter of fact they don't. The general mentality is still anchored in the past. NATO was not the reason in the 90s and I can assure you, things haven't changed nowdays. Can anyone here disagree on that ? please prove me wrong. I'd be glad to be proven wrong on this. Really.

I mean sure, Saakashvili happened ..... but was it any different before ? was it any different afterwards ? No and no.

What do you think would be a reasonable solution for Russia if NATO wasn't involved anymore ? do you think they'd give up their bases in Abkhazia and "South Ossetia", pull out their troops and allow all 3 parties to sit togheter at a table and find peaceful solutions to deal with all question ? - I don't know, seems like wishful thinking. People tried approaching and talking to eachother increasingly the last couple years, before the fences were constructed. So practicaly every time there is energy put into such efforts, there is a frightened and regressive reaction from Russia.

Georgia got played by NATO. Is sucks but that does not mean you have to live in this status quo permanently. Keep in mind that NATO is an institution that even country like Poland is uncertain of whether if it would help them in serious conflict.
If Poland has doubts then what could small, distant Georgia expect?

When the Russian Federation is your physical enemy threatening your very existence and you're not very keen to be subjugated in the same manner you were for decades and centuries allready, no matter if as whole or merely politicaly and economicaly, you seek to approach the opposing force. It's a natural reaction because you fear for your life and want to survive, in one piece. I don't get why there isn't even some basic logical understanding to such consequences. Everything is like clouded, no room given for reasoning. We tried to approach Russia a million times with peaceful solutions. We literaly tried everything. What does Russia do ? pushes the fence a few kilometers further into uncotensted territory proper. Please people, that is not a solution. If the central highway is reached, it will mean war. Because no matter how weak we are, nobody will just sit idly and watch it's country being literaly split ahalf. We had our big mistake, called Saakashvili .... and no matter what the Russians did to provoke it or not, he started the August War. But this time around, there are not two parties actively provoking eachother. There is only ONE.

Georgia does not present a threat to Russia, not in the next 5 years, not in the next 20 years. There won't ever be NATO bases in Georgia because NATO itself isn't that stupid. Georgia literaly has no prospect of joining NATO and will forever simply remain an allied nation if anything, even if we get the MAP in 2016, which is unlikely to happen anyway.

Noble Partner 2016 kicking off tomorrow.

Nice little contrast here.

US Army to Upgrade Georgia Light Infantry Unit Into Heavy Armored Brigade

Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/201612021048076660-fort-stewart-brigade-armored-infantry/

George1 wrote:US Army to Upgrade Georgia Light Infantry Unit Into Heavy Armored Brigade

Read more: https://sputniknews.com/military/201612021048076660-fort-stewart-brigade-armored-infantry/

a "Georgia-based" as in the state of Georgia my friend....

Javelin anti-tank missile systems are approved for delivery to Georgia

The Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA) on November 20, 2017 reported that on November 17 it sent a notice to the US Congress about the forthcoming sale of portable anti-tank missile systems Javelin from the availability of inter-governmental military sales of Foreign Military Sales (FMS) the US Army. The sale is authorized by the US Department of State. The estimated cost of delivery is $ 75 million.

The delivery will include 72 portable MLU Block 1 launchers (including two for use as a source of spare parts) and 410 Javelin anti-tank guided missiles, as well as ten BST simulators and 70 training shots.

The general contractor for the supply will be Javelin's joint venture between Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, which will pre-manufacture the launchers and missiles from the presence of the army and the US Department of Defense. It is reported that the delivery will require sending one government contractor and two contractor representatives to Georgia.

Τhe bmpd comment. This is the first alleged delivery of Javelin ATGM to the former Soviet Union republic that is not a member of NATO, and the first significant sale of US weapons to Georgia since the Five-Day War in August 2008. Apparently, the delivery will be made at the expense of American financing.

Georgian Defense Minister Levan Izoria, after a meeting with US Defense Secretary James Mattis on November 13, 2017, said that in 2017-2018, US military assistance to Georgia will exceed $ 100 million. According to Izoriya, in the spring of 2018, a US-funded training program should begin The Georgian Defense Readiness Program (GDRP). The central part of this program is the creation by the American side at the Vaziani training ground of the new Joint Training Center of the Georgian Armed Forces worth about $ 70 million.

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/2968136.html

Good !

Everything that boosts Georgia's defence capabilities against any type of intruder and temporarily disrupts continuous aggression is a very welcomed step.

Russia should maybe work towards a less hostile environment for its neighbours instead of constantly antagonizing everyone who isn't willing to be on Kremlin's leash and it won't have to worry about counter measures

Besides, basic demands for basic defense capabilities in the 21st century that are long overdue since mid 2000s

The US hasn't even fullfilled half its promises as far as I'm concerned, which makes them just as unreliable as Russia in regards of weapons delivery to Georgia.

GarryB wrote:
What?

You are working with NATO, a military organisation dedicated to war with Russia... and you think Russia should be nicer to you?

If you want Russia to be nicer to you how about a sincere apology about murdering their peacekeepers in cold blood in South Ossetia in 2008?

Or how about not bothering, because it would be offensive to the VDV peacekeeping force to even consider normal relations with Georgia.

Preferably they will have no relations with Georgia and arm South Ossetia and Abkhazia to the teeth, so they can live in peace with the knowledge they are safe from Georgian aggression.

What "what ?" this is a joke right .... ?

NATO isn't an organisation dedicated to war with Russia for several decades now. You are massively overbloating the issue. Right now all it is a weakly organised mild mannered anti terrorist coalition with some concerns and involvement with Russia. Where is NATO openly at war with Russia or trying to wage one ? the absolte contraray is taking place. Each time Russia openly attacked someone Nato did virtualy everything to avoid open war.

It's a defence cooperation that has been absolutly not what it was originaly created for for ages ago. Only now they slowly realize they've been doing little to nothing to justify its existence.

What stops Russia from forming its own military alliances ?

If you want Russia to be nicer to you how about a sincere apology about murdering their peacekeepers in cold blood in South Ossetia in 2008?

Are we realy doing this ? how about a VERY sincere apology for what mass atrocities and massacres your involvment, support of sessession and actions have caused in 1992-93 - especialy 1993 ? ( and for that matter in 2008 - every single "Georgian" village in Samachablo was burned to the ground just so that noone of the 15-20.000 people who fled could return and so that Russia could build its bases and polygons - and general policy to this date ? things that are virtualy unforgivable. But that's nothing new with Russia. Been backstabbing and annexing us for 2 centuries now. Tell me again how many times you've invaded or annexed us without any provocation whatsoever vs invasions / annexation with political pretext ? exactly, it doesn't matter in the slightest .... that insolence has reached beyond cosmic hilarosity levels at this point.

I am not defending the Georgian military operation in Samachablo, that was a poor decision, but you people sure sleep happy at night without questioning any of the fairy tales told by one of the most infamous propaganda machines on the planet.

Keep living with your fantasies, I prefer more logical reasons.

Maybe someone should have told them to not shoot at the Georgian troops The Georgians literaly warned them beforehand of a possible operation and to keep out of the fighting. They did so again before departing their barracks. Instead one of the Ossetian or Russian officers of the joint MC force went to the roof to coordinate strikes against the Georgian army and in either case it came from the Russian garrison. Naturaly the Georgians returned fire and blasted him to hell. The "peacekeepers" didn't improve their situation by continuous participation in supporting Russo-separatist operations against the Georgian army non-stop during the entire war. Georgian troops to react is expected and of course they would try to seize the barracks as a consequence of now openly declared warfare.

Besides they were involved in a lot of controversies, acts of sabotage and skirmishes years before the war. So absolutly no respect for VDV in any involvment in Georgia whatsoever. They shouldn't even be in Georgia, and Russia still to this very date does not respect anything in the Six-Point-Peace-Plan it has signed along with Georgia and the EU - just a small reminder. Instead of withdrawing its troops as agreed in the signed plan - to their original dislocation, they were reinforced, over 18 bases were constructed, up to 8000 troops enplaced, uncontested territories are being continuesly occupied since 2008, most recently in 2016.

Russia does virtualy everything to further destabilize the situation and grow more hostile towards Georgia. All facts that are being observed and documented by the international community. Nothing has changed. Yet you act all pretentious and surprised. Cut if off plse .... it's embarassing. Think about that for a second. All that and you complain about Georgia purchising some Javelins ( deal isn't even certain at this point ) ? the Americans have a saying for that astronomical level of hypocricy, but I will keep it civil .... it's so bad it isn't even funny anymore.

Or how about not bothering, because it would be offensive to the VDV peacekeeping force to even consider normal relations with Georgia.

The only thing offensive about all this, are such illusions of superiority and grandeur over everyone and anything else and outrageous self-victimization .... and your attitude towards certain people and poor taste of humor.

You should be rather glad we Gerogians and Ukrainians gave you things that make it possible for you to D measure with the USA in the first place, rather than be so full of yourself, full of spite and display such laughable superiority complex. I understand many but I simply have no respect for that kind of weak.

Preferably they will have no relations with Georgia and arm South Ossetia and Abkhazia to the teeth, so they can live in peace with the knowledge they are safe from Georgian aggression.

Good thing, none of that is up to your Georgia-phobic visions and delusions eh comrade ?  

Sorry comments like these just upset me sometimes.

TheGeorgian wrote:
..........

I said it before, Georgia needs to start solving this thing on it's own without expecting USA to do it for them. USA's and Georgia's interests do not converge on this despite the rhetorics.

Georgia should go solo and initiate negotiations​ with those republics, in secret if needed. They can definitely reach a good solution if they try and should they even get close to one Russia will gladly put seal of approval on it, influence the republics to adhere and reconcile and after it's done flood all sides with cash, support and assistance to cement the deal.

This is most solvable conflict on the planet.

GarryB wrote:
So they keep saying, but their actions are clearly directed against potential Russian Aggression... something likely under Stalin, but with the current track record unlikely under Putin or Yeltsen.

It is a military alliance. It does what military alliances do. Boost their defence capabilities against any potential aggressors but not even that is done properly.

Their plans and actions don't reflect the reality however, which makes them an enemy of Russia no matter what their words say.

All action is reactionary and every nation should have the right to at least limit a nuclear threat from whoever possesses such weapons. Especialy understandable from the POV of Poland as it's right in their garden.

If NATO's intentions were to really antagonise Russia it would equip every single member with ballsitic missiles interception capacities to prepare for eventual war. None of that is happening. All are accusations and claims that hold little to no ground. Russia on the other hand is openly hostile and attacks countries in Europe.

It is an anti Russia boys club.... when your country reaches the tipping point of blaming Russia for everything then you join.

The reason why nations have joined NATO is because they were either directly threatened and previously occupied by Russia and would have probably been attacked again if NATO didn't exist at that time and obviously in the case of Georgia because it was attacked by Russia multiple times now and is being occupied as we speak.

.... that is the aggressive nature you accuse Russia of while moving troops and bases ever closer to their border after initially promising not to.

Ehm yes .... because you know .... that's a fact.

If you can't even see the elemential difference between an international intervention against countries ruled by despots and terrorists who invaded or attacked other countries and committed genocides or supported those activities, wheter one of it ( Iraq ) turned out to be under false pretext of supposed bio-nuclear threat .... and Russia just bluntly occupying and annexing, physicaly taking over and absorbing territories internationaly recognized parts of other countries, than I'm wasting my time here. Go figure this guy: Russia went full medieval against Georgia twice now and currently Ukraine is in the process of a similar misery.

NATO countries currently supply weapons and money and training support to the Ukraine

Yes thank god they are at least doing that. Would have been better if it was done much earlier so they were better prepared for subsequent Kremlin prepped and supported couinter offensives of the separatists.

have imposed sanctions against Russia because of imaginary support for a group of ukrainians that have opposed an illegal coup in the Ukraine.

The US and EU imposed sanctions against Russia for the hostile takeover and absorption of Crimea first and foremost and then, because of directly and indirectly supporting separatists in Ukraine with weapons and troops. Let's keep the order right please ....

Yeah, NATO is not interfering with Russias national interests or her economy, NATO just wants to be buddies.

Yes because Russia has never interfered with Europe's economy before the Ukraine and Georgia conflicts ...

It is very simple. You and they are not in the right to blame the West or anyone for that matter for all of Russia's problems. Everything can only be blamed on it's poor political decisions, politicaly ill and twisted mentality and morals and complete lack of diplomacy and reverence.

The US is not the reason why almost all their neighbours fear or hate them. Of course it's all on Russia. Every inteference has caused greater harm and misery and that's historical facts, not mere opinons.

If the opposite was the case, Russia would not be in the position it is right now. Reality doesn't lie.

Besides where did NATO move weapons and troops to Russias borders .... ? all of that is more silly media rhetoric that has nothing to do even remotely with reality.

Every time the US conducts a manouver with other alliance members or allies it's a "provocation at Russia's borders". Give me a damn break. When you claim such nonsense it at least must have some kind of even meaphorical validity. What are the Ukrainians to say ? You have almost the entire army deployed physicaly AT their border in order to eliminate logistical complications for the steady flow of weapons and troops that happen to "get lost" over the border.

It was built to counter Russia, because Russia was the threat. It was wrapped up on a cloak of Soviet republics and Warsaw Pact conquests, but the enemy was Russia, which is why many westerners today think Russia and the Soviet Union are the same thing...

and that's exactly what they are not nowadays. Only now they got reminded of its original purpose and only now they start constructing somewhat that resembles a coordinated NATO force.

Keeping the west safe from nothing for as long as 27 years...

More like keeping Russia in check with basicaly a non-existent military alliance yes.

Russia not wanting to invade europe? Or anyone really.

Or rather insert earlier line.

Nobody realy wants to because most of its neighbours feel threatened by Russia.

Wonder why ....

Georgia attacked VDV peacekeeping forces

or they responded to the attacks of supposed "peacekeeping" forces that were accused of tons of illegal interference since the 90s ....

and South Ossetian civiians

you mean by also using artillery and missiles to shell Tskhinvali and cause even more damage ? seems legit. The sad thing ( from their POV at least ) is, Georgian troops suffered not nearly as much damage as the collateral destruction caused by that because guess what: the Russian artillery used was no more accurate than the Georgian.

Sound to me like the Russians went in and stabilised a bloodbath...

I don't know what the Russians supposedly "stabilised" in your fantasy world, but their invovlement endorsed a near genocide.

Nobody has illusions or denies anything on that topic. Lot of crimes were committed by both sides, and in the case of Georgia ( which is basicaly the only side acknowledging any of that ), the main reason to why was because the government made a difficult and critical decision, namely to release thousands of prisoners to fight in the ranks of an army that was still forming. The situation in Abkhazia became very urgent when an insurgent group lead by Russian financed and supported Arzingba assaulted and took control over Sukhumi. Government forces and their paramilitary allies moved in to quell them, what they did in just a few days and secured most of the rest of Abkhazia because Shevardnadze had already suspected Russian involvment and feared the worst. Georgian forces prime directive was then to reach Gagra and close down the tunnel. The fact Russian GRU operators were already in place for the conflict as the Russians themselves admitted later speaks volumes of why his suspiciouns were completly justified. That entire affair, what was basicaly just an anti-insurgency operation at that point, would have ended if the Russian garrison in Gudauta wasn't ordered by Kremlin to protect their Arzingba and his remaining 200 or so sparsely armed gang from being caught and prosecuted for their crimes of simply causing heavy unrest and armed violence. But Russias interests was always maintaining foothold by causing destabilisation and the anti-Georgian mentality in the ranks of Kremlin in that time period, particularily 1990s-1994 were almost phsychotic.

Now let's fact check how much Russia "stabilied" in that conflict.

Fact 1: Obviously not happy about how bad their Arzingba plan was going, the Kremlin decided to completly open border for mercenaries and Chechen militants to happily swarm the region, and also supply the insurgents with massive amounts of weapon and ammunition, including artillery of high caliber and even tanks. Not only from Gudata but many other Russian bases and sources throughout the country and Russia. To support the operation, airborne troops from the Balkans were dispatched, hundreds of instructors sent over the border as well as naval infantry without unit markings and isnignias disembarked from Transinistria to actively participate in combat when the time came. Sadly for Russia, many of those soldiers kept their passports which were later found on their dead bodies. Mind, you all of this was happening before the actual war even began.

Fact 2: All of that took place while Russia forced itself upon Georgia as mediator for a peaceful resolution of internal issues of a foreign country. What they realy did was holding a knife at Shevardnadze's throat to accept their demand of withdrawing large portions of the Gerogian force and equipment from Abkhazia. Shevardnadze naturaly complied as he had no other choice and also wanted a peaceful resolution himself. Plus the UN did demanded so too. So he did what he tought was reasonable, especialy with all the backslash caused by the paramilitary gangs and warlords ( which later had consequences for Tbilisi - those guys were on nobodies side but themselves ... ). The Georgians did retreat most of their troops and equipment, only maintained a small portion of professional untis in Gagra due to close proximity to the tunnel that connects both countries, a small garrison in Sukhumi and some battalions in Ochamchire. So three base strategic locations, the most base and most important ones. The Russians strategy was very simple. Their terms basicaly placed the Georgians exactly where two simultanous strikes would culimate in the capture of the regions capital if things went as planned.

Fact 3: Russia kept denying active, even passive involvment despite the absolute contrary observed by everyone in the conflict region, with the sole exception of "humanitarian aid" - just like in the Ukraine. This is important for the next points.

Fact 4: Right when the Georgians had finished removing their troops from Abkhazia, the separatists suddenly popped up in the several thousands, heavily armed with artillery, tanks, vehicles and supported by the Russian airforce attacked the remaining Georgian garrison. At that point, even Russia found it hard to find excuses, thus why they apparently didn't give a dam anymore for the next thing. The main assault was carried out against Gagra, while a secondary "unmarked" force landed via Russian landing craft in Ochamchiere at nightfall, completly devestating the unsuspecting Georgian forces resting there. That force however was almost destroyed in return ( Russian passports ) and was put out of the operation for the most part, but not entirely. The Russian Defence Ministry was overseeing and supervising the entire manouver which was also confirmed.

Fact 5: Russian still kept denying involvment, despite the fact its airforce kept continuesly bombing Georgian positions and troops which caused great losses. It became hard for them though, when one of its Su-27s was shot down after a sortie. That's the beauty about hard evidences.

Fact 6: No massacres committed by the Chechens or separatists before the fall of Sukhumi was "stabilised" by anyone.

Fact 7: Where exactly was their "stabilisation" when the insurgents and their Russian allies started rounding up and massacring thousands of innocent people ? or shot down almost every passenger plane that was trying to evacuate civilians ?

Here is what Russia "stabilied":
they "stabilied" the situation for the separatists so that any subsequent Georgian counter attack was prevented by threatening to bomb Georgias towns if it continued sending troops over the region's border.

However, as I said above nobody denies crimes committed by the Georgia side. The criminal elements of the Georgian force used the opporunity to pillage and steal from everyone in sight, and also committed some murders when people opposed them. That is what thugs do. Russia always uses that as argument of enthnic based violance, when Georgians were just as valid targets for those people than anyone else. I know people who lost everything to them. The reason 'Abkhazians' were their primary target is because they basicaly reasoned with opposing party, thus they were free to do whatever they wanted with them. None of that was ever approved by either Shevardnadze, the Georgian government and most certainly not the Georgian people, who - different to Crimea - also made up the greater majority of the population in Abkhazia while Abkhazians made less than 18% of the population. Most of those criminals on the Georgian side were prosecutad or fled to Russia .... and right there, is the delecate difference. I am not judging the Abkhazians but they are very well aware what kind of .... people ... are hailed as heros over there.

if you cared so little about the VDV soldiers

I am sorry, why should I care for terrorists, murderers and sabouteurs disguised as "peacekeepers" .... ? and even if it wasn't all their fault but the GRU's, it's still one and the same party that gets involved.

I feel very sorry for the people in Ossetia and I won't ever forgive Saakashvili and his thug party, but you are very apparently the one who is phobic towards Georgians.

The Russian actions created peace... if they had not acted it would have been another genocide...

At least be deluded without insulting peoples general intelligence. Nobody bought that back then and nobody will ever buy that nonsense, ever because it isn't true and there was not a single indication of something that horrible you accuse them of.

They tagged collateral damage that caused the unfortunate death of maybe some 160 people in war as "genocide". That is when all your credibility goes flushing. You are repeating the same idiotical media nonsense as the Russians in 2011. Please learn the definition of "genocide" and stop using that word so lightly.

Almost the same amount of deaths was caused on the Georgian side by pillaging Ossetians and Russian artillery / airforce shelling.

Just a little reminder. You speak on behalf of a nation that actualy committed genocides and caused some of the greatest death tolls in recorded history. They tried to wipe out an entire ethnic group in 1872 which also affected many other ethnic groups in proximity including, surprise, Abkhazians and Ossetians .... and also caused some of the most disgusting attrocities in both Chechnya wars and also Afghanistan.

So next time, before you post something like that, maybe contemplate about your life ....

You are fucking hilarious....

If I am fucking hilarous, than I wonder what that makes you comrade.

murdering people with artillery is OK

You are the one saying that not me. The very least you can do is to not put words in peoples mouth.

It is most certainly not OK. I neither approve the Georgian nor the Russian shelling of Tskhinvali and other areas.

but burning down peoples houses is a step too far?

Ossetians demolished first their appartments in Tskhinvali and after the war, pillaged and burned down every single village, not just that, but in the process of that purposefully killing people of all age who stayed behind just to make sure realy nobody could return. Some of those bodies were badly maimed beyond any plausibility. Same with POWs that were executed and some of them extensively tortured beforehand. Purposefuly massacring the peaceful population and collateral damage caused by warfare are two entirely different tings.

So glad you do not have access to chem and bio weapons... you could have gotten the job done properly... killed all those troublesome South Ossetians and Abkhazians but left their buildings standing ready for Georgian families to move it right away... once they clear away the bodies of course.

Is that what you keep telling yourself to maintain an unfounded toxic Georgia-phobic mentality ? it's always the same with you devoted to death haters and c-suckers who aren't even Russian but get upset about entire ethnic groups and things not concerning them in the slightest. No offense.

First of all I am not Russia, but their worst work was done under the control of Joseph Stalin for which the world thanks you.

Excuse me for assuming then.

Joseph Stalin is responsible for several attrocities against the Georgian people, especialy the prosecutions and mass-executions that ranged in the thousands following the August Uprising.

He was Georgian yes, but considered himself a Russian and a man of Russia for Russia above all.

Under him, the worst but also the best was done for Russia.  

He is the reason why Russia became a nuclear power, military superpower and survived the Nazi onslaught during WW2. To Russia he was like the necessary evil that built a powerful industry and military, just timely enough to repulse and destroy Hitler. Without the forced labor and sacrifice that wouldn't have been even possible. Neither the Soviet expansion to the West and what they to this date falsely consider "lost territories".

So yes, in fact a lot of Russians and not just them do actualy still believe he was a great guy. I do not. But I can see how they'd come to that conclusion.

Saakashvili can't take all the blame... the timing of the attack was carefully planned and I don't thing he came up with that idea. The west is normally very quick to react to this sort of thing when their own interests are under threat but they were very tardy in this case, which suggests if it wasn't planned in the west it was certainly OKed before hand.

You who are in charge of your nation, especialy when having created a tight monopolised police state, have the last say on everything. Of course you are to be blamed for what happens.

You don't simply consider the military option when it is not dead obvious and visible to everyone in the galaxy, that what you do is absolutly justified. A full blown assault into the region was neither justified nor served Georgia's interest in any way. Even if we had won somewhow I still would have dissaproved of that because sooner or later such solutions, which aren't solutions at all, always backslash.

We should have at best simply raided, destroyed or apprehended the separatist elements that were contineously causing trouble to keep things in check. We had all the advantiges to keep our guys in the field over there on top of their forces. Saakashvili completly blasted that high ground. He is just a gullible narrow minded idiot and I can't believe the Ukrainians are tolerating him.

Right now that propaganda centre is the only centre putting out an alternative view on any topic... they don't seem to have a fixed agenda like blind support for Israel or the US or UK unlike western media services.

No matter how long serving you are in the western media you can get fired in the US simply for stating that Israel does not treat the Palestinians very well... what sort of environment are they operating under?

I am not sure what you are referring to but there are tons of US and European media outlets criticizing Israel, the West and even the US but nobody gets fired over it. So it must have been at least a bit controversial.

Besides, when do you ever hear criticism against Russia in Russian media ? Never, just as it should be right ?  

Hahahahaha.... All that recon your side did, identifying locations for targets, they could not avoid the area the VDV were based?

They didn't avoid the area, they attacked them .... after they came under attack FROM them. Get it now ?

That is their position and I tend to believe that because there was literaly no other reason to shoot at them.

If your job was to protect a woman in an abusive relationship and the man says he is drunk and he is going to kill her should you step aside to keep yourself safe?

Or do you punch him in the nose and call for backup.

Right .... except nobody was killing anyone. They are the ones with such tendencies.

If only Russia was such a champ to it's own minorities  

You know, instead of not just abusing, but virtualy rape-murdering Chechnya to the stone age and back .... give them their independence. No ? thought so.

The obvious solution is to build up Russian forces in the region so that further attempts are fully deterred.

The only solution is the complete withdrawal of Russian troops and partial replacement with UN troops ( just in case of more GRU nonsense ), remove all the fences and walls so that Georgia can finaly go back to dialogue with both regions in a peaceful environment. There is no other solution.

not to mention active georgian support for terrorists in the chechen conflicts

More bullshit claims without any proof.

Russia constantly tries to sabotage and destabilise us for two decades now and yet complains about supposed assassination and sabotage committed by our agencies. Even if any of that was true, what gives them the right to complain ? That is just rich.

That is what I am saying... an anti Russian military alliance....

You are bullshitting in circles here and confuse the United States with NATO. If that was the prime case it wouldn't be almost physicaly non-existent. NATO is right NOW creating what one could consider a deterrent force against Russia, the Nato Response Force.

Literaly everything else is base defence of individual member countries not even in the neighbourhood .... and not even with effective defence systems.

Yup, finds the potential threats in the area and makes them into an enemy...

More personal opinions without anything to back it up. What news, much surprising.

Poor innocent Poland... that stole parts of other european countries as germany expanded  early in WWII and stole land from the Russia at the end of WWI... yeah poor innocent Poland...

Of course they are poor. Russia literaly has nukes shoved up their noses.

Yeah poor Russia, didn't expand by conquering half of Europe and Asia or something and now feels like a victim because those countries got their independence back .... what is this now, a circus of ignorance GarryB ?

They haven't got any effective ABM missiles yet but have already deployed them... it is only a matter of time before more NATO countries get the same.

No it's not and it won't happen. You are massively overbloating and overrating NATO and its European members. They don't and won't ever even meat the base spending requirements.

Just like the promise not to expand NATO and then not to include the former Soviet Republics within NATO... a promise one day is worth nothing the next...

That's rich. You mean just like Russias promises to anyone it ever gave promises to ? I don't know about you, but the scale of that historical embarassment streak is far greater.

On that matter, Russia can barely take care of itself. What are the prospects for other and allied countries then .... ppl don't take such promises seriously anymore for decades now.

Openly hostile? Attacks which countries in Europe?

Western sanctions are tantamount to an act of war BTW.... Japan invaded the Pacific for similar provocations.

Sanctions and War are two different things comrade lol and good luck trying to prove there are any severe sanctions going or even approved against Russia and not just politicians and Oligarchs

Hahaha. Russia did not invade Georgia, Georgia invaded South Ossetia and was pushed out of that region to a safe distance inside georgia.

Russia has been physicaly invading Georgia since 1993 and none of the conflictet territories are recognised as independent by the vast majority of the international community. Russia has also abused its "peackeeping" status to boost military presense in both regions years before the 2008 war and to this date, and has also committed hostile activities against Georgia also before and after the war. The most recent issue being continues "border" establishments and "pushing of fences" continuesly deeper into uncontested Georgia.

So please spare both me, yourself and people who can read up all those documented facts, such painfuly intolerable and ignorant nonsense.

I am sure that is what hitler said when he invaded france...

You sure like to compare anything non-Russian agenda or anything to "Hitler" and "Nazis". Congratulations. Your credibility has reached a new low. Conversions with actual Russian patriotic fanatics results in more intelligence discussion than this ....

Funny thing is that when Georgia attacks a small province with artillery trying to take land

*restoring control over said rebelious province. We don't take foreign lands. We are not Russia.

but not caring too much about the people

except the military that was fooled in believing that operation was actualy supported by the international community ....
literaly noone approved of the operation. The first thing I said when hearing about what was happening literaly was  "...damn why & Russia will go at war over this". Just politicaly it was a stupid decision, let alone all the harm done by it.

And that is the crux of the problem... you and they think it was OK because now they are better off without Saddam anyway...

Yet again more bullshit, you are again trying to put words in my mouth. When did I say I'm OK with any of what you are claiming ? I am actualy not Okay. I approved neither invasion and I generaly don't approve occupation. But the US and its allies at least don't try to physicaly claim lands on false pretext.

Why are you doing this ? does personal credibility even mean something to you ?

Funny that I don't see the mass protests in the Crimea and South Ossetia to bring the Ukrainian troops and Georgian troops back and for the Russian troops to leave.

I don't know about Crimea, but every time since 2008, whenever some form of communication is established with the separtists in Smachablo and prospect of reconsilation becomes apparent to the authorities in Kremlin, the Russian side immediate counter acts by installing or moving the fences deeper into Georgia so it becomes more difficult. The most apparent case was when they ordered their separatist puppets to take over a piece of land near a pipeline and remove the Georgian flag. They did so reluctantly and ceased doing it after they were asked to explain themselves peacefully in the observers tent. Most of those guys weren't even Ossetian but Russians and guess what, they couldn't explain what exactly they were supposed to do in the first place.

That IS funny but also sad ... on so many levels.


[quote]Russia went full medieval against Georgia twice now and currently Ukraine is in the process of a similar misery.

your family would already be dead or in the far east in a salt mine

.
You'd really like to see that don't you ?

If that was a NATO peacekeeping force in South Ossetia

At least learn the difference between NATO and UN.

they would have shot back at the Georgian forces and when Georgian forces destroyed that VDV base there would have been regime change and all of Georgia would have been overrun

....

The rebuild would have cost Georgia all its available funds

O god. This is hilarious and you are so adorably naive with your severely flawed anti West sentiment. The "West" has a lot flaws and things I disagree with, but this is just cute.

You really don't grasp the cosmic political difference it would have made / and make do you .... ?

There wouldn't have been any war in the first place because if there really were mandated UN troops as in US or German etc instead of anything representing or remotely resembling Russian armed forces or any other Kremlin related nonsense, no Georgian government would have even dreamed of considering a military option, because there would be virtualy no reason. No skirmishes would have taken place but maybe at very best, limited individual events and that's a big maybe. At best.

Why ? it is childishly obvious buddy. Because it wouldn't of been in UN or NATO interests to destabilise Georgia. It is only in Russia's geopolitical interest.

Thus no Georgian government would have been forced to respond to any provocation, skirmish or sabotage and spy affairs. In fact the complete lack of toxic Russian fiddling in all spheres of economy and politics would have given the country better chances to improve overall living conditions.

... so no real change there I guess.

The situation would be in an incomprehensibly improved level.

So NATO is therefore guilty of doing what they claim without evidence that Russia was doing to support an illegal coup.

How democratic is that?

"without evidence" lol

NATO is supporting and equipping the military forces of Ukraine, an independent and souvereign country, to fight Russian-backed and acitvely supported sessession.

More than a legit cause.

What hostile take over? How many were killed trying to stop Russia from doing this?

That is the most miserable excuse for a hostile military takeover of souvereign forreign territories I've ever read.

Really ? so what. Because the UA was unable to respond due to all the Chaos in Kiev ( what makes Russia' takeover of Crimea that more treacherous ), it excuses the hotile take over of Ukrainian lands ?

wow, you are realy running out of excuses aren't you ?

[quote]

Russia has some good neighbours but most have been turned against Russia...

Yeah I wonder why and "some good" realy reflects your mentality. So the rest are all trash I take because they have valid reasons ?

but then most of the ones that have turned against Russia were not worth having as friends anyway

lmfao, of course you'd say that.

So it is nothing to do with Russias neighbours.... it is all Russias fault... yeah, you sound brainwashed.

Says the man, who considers everyone unworthy peoples because they fear Russia due to it's hostile relations that are partialy consistent for centuries. Go figure.

When its blatantly obvious Russias fault, it IS blatantly obvious. Stop playing the stupid fluite. It makes you look like a blunt instrument ....

If the opposite was the case, Russia would not be in the position it is right now. Reality doesn't lie.

Of course reality lies.... was Germany really to blame for WWI?

Not exclusively no .... and nobody does exclusively blame Germany. Everyone agrees it was the general war mentality back then.

I mean from the perspective I read history from (ie the west) it was all Germanys fault.

Than I have no idea books you've read, because even earlier historical books don't put all the blame on Germany. But Germany was still the one that declared war on all of the Entente and its allies.

The UK and France were totally blameless.

Not totaly, but let's do some more basic fact checking alright ?

When the Austrian Empire delcared war on Serbia, its ally Russia mobilised but didn't declare war yet. Germany declared war on Russia because it was mobilising an army. It was Russia that requested France and Britain to join them because the Germans initialy put Russia in a grave military position. France responded to Russias call for help by mobilising because their earlier defeat against the German Empire in 1870 still haunted them. But yet again it was Germany that declared war on France when they found out they were mobilising .... so go figure.

Who gives a fuck what Kiev says... an illegal coup and armed actions against its own population warrant Russia moving forces to its border.

and exactly because of statements like this, Russia loses all credibility and excuse to any form of intervention.

Soviet forces moved out of europe and NATO forces moved in to replace them.. who was the aggressor again?

Easy. The force that occupied said European countries in the first place. Who was that again ? yes right, the Soviet Union.

Was everyone unhappy and felt oppressed by NATO troops when they replaced the Soviets who oppressed and eliminated and voice of reistance during their rule ?

.... exactly.

If you have evidence that the Russians killed more South Ossetians than the Georgians did please present it here.

I never said they killed more civilians in Samachablo, I said, they virtualy caused the same amount of collateral damge by using the same artillery.

Do you have any evidence of all the bullshit that was claimed by Russia early into the conflict ? most of them they refuted themselves.

Concerning everything else, no evidences to this very date. Meaning they are talking out of their arses just to make us look bad.

Now let's fact check how much Russia "stabilied" in that conflict.

but seeing as how you have already said everything that is at fault with Russias relations with its neighbours is solely Russias fault

then how can I believe anything you say here...

Simple. Look it up yourself. You don't have to believe anything I say. All is written down and archived.

I am using like the most base of basic facts to support my argument, I am very engaged in historical matters and have learned over the years to put all things into wider perspective besides of just blunt historical facts - that cannot be denied wheter you twist them or not.

You don't care what the facts are, Russia is to blame.

Are you crying ... ?

If I didn't care for facts I wouldn't be blaming my people in the first place for what happened in 2008.

But Russia is factualy and historicaly to be blamed for always cultivating and aggravating general instability in Georgia and other countries due to that fantasm of geostrategic needs. That is not my personal opinon, but basic historical facts, not even they themselves denie. Their analysts even pride themselves with those "achievements".

I feel very sorry for the people in Ossetia and I won't ever forgive Saakashvili and his thug party, but you are very apparently the one who is phobic towards Georgians.

Bit of a hypocrite aren't we... why don't I forgive Georgia for murdering peacekeepers and South Ossetian civilians, but everything that happens to Russia is Russias fault and Europe needs a large bloated military organisation called NATO to defend themselves because Russia is so evil and aggressive.

You people are the greatest hypocrites. You overlook massive attrocities committed by the Soviet Union AND the Russian Federation AND insurgents and separatists, yet turn all puppy and care for people killed by collateral damage and declare it genocide.

How much credibility do you think is left there ? it has passed the positve sphere now ... and is running into the negative - 100 credibility.

Funny thing is that the people of South Ossetia or Abkhazia or for that matter Crimea could easily vote to get them to leave...

They can't and that's exactly the point.

Both the Abkhaz and Ossetian commanding echelons and authorities are Russian or isntalled by Kremlin. Literaly nothing that happens in both regions bypasses Kremlin. The Kremlin did once allow votes but since then not anymore because the people actualy vote based on their opinion. Not anymore after that .... and why would they now when they are building bases all over ther frikin area and boosting their military presense and shareholds along the entire coastline ? the people in Abkhazia have already tried to display their dissatisfaction on how poorly they are being represented and treated but it got completly ignored by the authorities and partialy cracked down. Do you think the Abkhaz are happy with all the Russians and Armenians appropriating their entire coastline ? they are not. But the authorities don't give the slightest dam about what they want and think. They all have their good share in it. The region suffers from intolerable conditions and criminality is blooming there like in some backwater African country. Those people need help and reconstitution, not Russia.

As noted earlier, every effort to reconsiliate or communicate is being prevented by Kremlin with phsycial barriers like they were suffering psychotic paranoia.

I learned from NATO in Kosovo that the G word can be used based purely on intent and I can keep using the word even after boots on the ground reveal no such massacres every happened and that if anything it was the Albanian seperatists that were responsible for body parts trade and other despicable activities.

You can claim whatever you want, ( and massacres were perpetrated and mass graves found, that is a dam fact - however still not genocide, but massacres although noone knows what might have happened if nobody intervened ) but the term genocide applies only when you realy deliberately aim to remove or exterminate an entire ethnic group.

It is most certainly not OK. I neither approve the Georgian nor the Russian shelling of Tskhinvali and other areas.

The former made the latter necessary, but you blame the people responsible for the latter.

Your twisted perspective will serve you well for the US military machine.

You say that ignoring what would have come next if Georgia had successfully taken South Ossetia...

Oh sure ! please educate me, us and the world on what would have come next if Georgia had successfuly regained control over that region.

This is gonna be fun. We listen.

Saakahsvili was not after new voting public, he just wanted the territory... not the people currently there.... just like the Jews don't give a shit when some Palestinians die..

Sorry but that is an idiot comparison. Israeli intervention does actualy serve to expulse and clear ground for the Israelis and by doing so many thousand people have died. That is realy on the verge of a genocide. Nobody in Georgia wants to genocide anyone, that's just forced stupdity.

It wasn't only about restoring territories but first and foremost about securing his power. Saakashvili is a man who is after votes and supporters to surround him with. He was actualy counting on at least parts of the population there to support not just the operation but his person. If he had won the war, his popularity would have completly overshadowed all the crimes he had committed since 2005. Samachablo was simply the more realistic option for a military success than Abkhazia given the limited capacities of the Georgian army at that time and the heavy Russian military presence.

Even the defeat, made him a hero. Russia completly diverted the peoples attention from him. He just had the population cracked down in 2007 during the 100.000 protest. But the war literaly elevated him back to popularity because the country was at war with Russia and there was a new enemy that thretened the entire country.

How convenient that he thought that.... perhaps Putin thinks he is Georgian and so the attack to push georgian troops out of south ossetia can be blamed on georgia?

Actualy Putin did spend part of his youth in Georgia, so maybe he is in fact upset that it is growing more distant from Russia. Who knows. Or a random child bullied him and now he is seeking revenge. We can't be absolutly sure about that.

On a serious note though, how is any of that relevant ? if I was President of Russia I wouldn't have become one because I promised its people to surrender to the US and make Georgia a greater country than Russia. I'd be fully devoted to improve living conditions and the military power of Russia to counter act any US expansional ambitions. The same applies to Stalin.

Wow, you mean you had special American 122mm grad rockets that only kill bad people and special western shells that make flowers grown and children giggle in the park.

Actualy those Israeli Lar-122 one are exactly configurated for maximum accuracy and yes mostly government facilities were struck by those. What caused greater damage was less precise heavy mortars and Czech RM-70, but not nearly as much as Russia likes to claim, because anything Grad related was used mainly against the VDV garrison and the Russian column advancing from the Roki tunnel.

It was still a grave mistake to deploy them against a town. First because not least because Russia instantly used that for its propaganda and everybody ignored the fact that Russia used the same Grad systems in response and also deployed heavier Smerchs to destroy villages in which Georgian troops were suspected.

Shelling a capital city is the sort of love the Kiev Junta gives to its people

Like Russia did to Grozny right ? yes, we will never get around that, and its not just Grozny. It is also not just the people in Grozny but tens of thousands of innocents people all over Chechnya. Ballistic missiles were used for crying out loud ....

But hey, you apparently also support Georgians being massacred in the thousands so ....

They let them have autonomy after the first fuck up

wow ... what a fucking excuse ...

and they acted like ISIS

So now, everyone who was raped, mass murdered, including children who were droven over by tanks - you know innocent people by the many thousands - were all ISIS so the Russian army did nothing wrong.

I have no words.

Nah, the status quo is just fine...

Of course you'd say that. You virtualy disagree to everything that is not following any Kremlin agenda, through and through. I don't expect reasnoning from such people, but an amsuing discussion nontheless.

Of course I can feel the love from here.... there is no way either of you could do anything bad to the other... that just would not happen.... at all... ever.

Why would I or anyone for that matter ? except the unification of my people I have no ill desire towards Russia or its people. Nor do others.

It is literaly the only source of trouble and spite. The Georgians never desired any ill against Russia in their entire history.

Russia should cease antagonising a unified and stable Georgia and that could give the Georgian people reasons to stop desperately looking f for military and political support from the West and particularily the US. There is virtualy no other solution and I would like to see things get normalised between our countries.

The US is NATO...

If the US was ever NATO, there would be unity and at least half-way consensus on US proposed actions. There is not and whatever nonsense you claim, you can't denie a simple political and historical fact. US dominance has been detoriarating continuesly since 2003 and as of right now is at an all time low. It is not to be confused with contribution and presence. The US has allies that support them in war efforts, that is what military allies do. Most of NATO support exclusively in peacekeeping and humanitarian operations and counter terrorism. Russia was even part of those in some occasions, as long as it didn't touch their "sphere of influence".

The US uses NATO like it uses the UN... as a rubber stamp tool to enact its regime change foreign policy.

Noone has illusions in regards to US ambitions, but those are US ambitions, not that of Europe or the UN.

The UN is not been engaged in any expansionist or unjust regime change agendas. Don't try to look more stupid than you already do.

... the slow lumbering NATO needs a rapid reaction force component....

thats .... what I just said ....

Only you still try to make it sound like NATO was arming to attack Russia which is beyond silly. Deterrent against potential and real threat or aggression is deterrent, not aggression.

So Russia is upset that it won't ever be able to successfuly attack Europe if it ever decided to. Cry me a damn river.

Every nation has the right to be able to defend itself no matter of part of an alliance or not.

They are virtualy demanding that countries remain weak and served on a silver plate to Russia if war ever broke out.

So tell me, why in the hell would anyone ever agree to that ?

Would you agree to that ?

What other threats to NATO countries are there? Iran? North Korea? Cuba? Fiji?

Fanatical Islamist and fake communist countries that threaten to destroy you and your allies and actively support terrorism against a number of countries, for decades now ? seem like legit threats to me. Even Russia sees North Korea as a threat now.

Ignorance? Are you forgetting that the so called conquering was actually liberating their own country....

Wtf hahaha, are we real here ?

GarryB you are so full of poor excuses it's beyong hilarious.

First of all, I'm convinced the Polish would like to have a word with you about how much the Soviets "liberated" them and kept "liberating" them decades after.

For that matter, I think every single nation occupied by the Soviet Union and especialy suffered oppression and crack downs for their desire of independence would like to have a word on that.

One miserable occupyer who oppresses and executes changes the other. What kind of debile excuse is that please ... ? get real man .... realy take a book from the local library and get some education. This level of ignorance is truly intolerable, albeit funny as hell.

The Soviets broke the back of the Germans, but they were supposed to just withdraw .... ?

Uhm .... yes. ^^

But US bases bring lots of money.. of course they want the yanks there saving them from the communist invasion... they said intially that their ABM system would just be 50 interceptors in Alaska.... it has since expanded around the world... go figure...

Really ? where. Just give me one example.

The US have embarassed themselves on a failed delivery promise of stockpile Black Hawks to Georgia .... for free ...  and you are talking about spendings on others ? lol

Nobody gets sophisticated US equipment for free, especialy nowadays. You have to pay yourself.

Less sophisticated weapons such as small arms, maybe. But there's no hand outs either. When they donate equipment, they do it for a price nontheless. Maybe not money, but politics.

I can fully understand that the US is concerned about the fact the Russian nuclear arsenal is even greater than theirs plus they have the more powerful nukes.

Now they are violating the INF treaty by installing Mk-41 cruise missile launchers of the US Navys AEGIS system on land in eastern europe. Why would they stop now?

Right, because Russia was never or isn't violating any arms agreements or status quo or boosting its strategic offense capabilities consistantly. The f outta here ....

That's rich. You mean just like Russias promises to anyone it ever gave promises to ? I don't know about you, but the scale of that historical embarassment streak is far greater.

On that matter, Russia can barely take care of itself. What are the prospects for other and allied countries then .... ppl don't take such promises seriously anymore for decades now.

So promises don't need to be kept.... good.

according to them, no apparently. I don't see what's good about that.

I promise Georgia can have South Ossetia and Abkhazia back.... I will tell you when later. 

You're a real joker ....

Economic embargo is a type of siege and can be construed as an act of war.

Yeah, construed is the magic word here amigo. Apart of your personal opinion, tell me what decision maker in Kremlin declared those little sanctions as an actual "act of war" ? do you even know what an "act of war" is .... ?

I love when people declare wars in the name of word leaders. Thank god none of that has actual effect lol

You could argue that the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour was pre-emptive self defence...

except when Russia attacks a foreign land without being neither physicaly nor economicaly pressured into submission, but just to secure its foothold in weaker countries to eliminate potential EU membership, than it's a completly different thing.

Are you through with all the weak comparisons and excuses ?  

Personally I thnk it is great because it stops Russia building ties with the west and the US because that would only end up making them more like the west and the US and one west is enough.

What exactly is wrong about a more unified world ? you are basicaly insisting on eternal hostility, nonsensical cultural division and ambitions of single peoples so that war may continue inevitable leading to world destruction at some point.

I don't get that mentality.

Ironic considering it was western actions in the Balkans that created the scene for 8-8-2008 to occur.

The West had zero interest in splitting a unified slavic country. Stopping senseless blood shed however was in everyone's interest.

When the west recognised the independence of Kosovo, the Russians changed their policy regarding south ossetia and Abkhazia. When they opened up to both regions they were suddenly no longer dependent on Georgia and that is when saakashvili attacked to keep them in georgias sphere of influence.

His problem was Russia struck back.

Yeah good chaps aren't they. Poor Russia, forced of taking actions that undermine stability and unity.

I can fully understand that since the entire world intervened in Chechnya and is now occupying a certain percentage of Russia as supposed "peacekeepers" ....

oh wait, they dont.

it was all Russias fault

Not all, but pretty much most of it, yes.

Of course, but you wanting to be part of NATO means you are the enemy so stealing land from an enemy is fine.

Lmfao. I won't lie. This was good. It's such a stupendously blunt and weak excuse, this one had me rolling.

When the shoe fits... the only problem is that I would consider being compared to a nazi as a slur, but I guess in your part of the world with your buddies in the Baltics and ukraine you probably see it as a badge of honour...

hahaha what ? you are calling everyone a Nazi now ? have I hurt your feelings that much with logical arguments ? I am sorry.

So basicaly everyone who disagrees with your personal views on the world and has a debate with you, is a Nazi now .... go figure.

"...damn why & Russia will go at war over this". Just politicaly it was a stupid decision, let alone all the harm done by it.

So your first reaction was not "why was your armed forces attacking people you consider georgian?", it was.. oh oh Russia are going to attack us for this.... but Russia has been attacking Georgia since 1993 so WTF difference would that make?

I literaly wrote my first reaction was "damn why" as in why has this to happen as in why is there to be a war you blunt instrument. But twisting words and facts is all people like you can do when confronted with logic. It's nothing new.

Hahahahaha... you don't understand the US war machine at all do you?

I absolutly do ... and none of it has anything to do with phsysicaly claiming territory in the manner Russia does.

If it was about liberating the Iraqi people why did they race around the open desert and leave most of the cities to be dealt with later?

Ever heard of basic military tactics and diversion .... ?

Why did Rommel not exclusively take the roads or desert roots during his Africa campaign ? it has something to do with basic and deliberate military tactics.

If you want to educate yourself about both Iraq Wars and the military manouvers of US forces and their allies, and on their hows and whys, you should read some books.

The US and allied troops deployed the way they did to combat the Iraqi army with minimum casaulties. The Iraqi army was deployed mostly in the desert so ofc most of the combat took place in the desert .... does that answer your irritating question ?

So instead of securing the Oil fields, they should have been destroyed right ? stripping first and foremost Iraq of its valuable resources.

Gottya.

Why were oilfields secured first?

The damage done to Iraq has to be paid

At least the US is putting somewhat effort in rebuilding. If only Russia was doing remotely that much.

once the US has set up a puppet government

*democratic elections, even acknowledged by Russia.

You have little to no idea what is being established in those countries and how much is done or how much is not done and still has to be done.

So spare us that tin foil nonsense. I at least know more because I know people who help over there.

They don't need to take control of iraq it is already a puppet state.

Noone tops the top puppetier and that's no the US.

Look at the history of the royal families in the Middle East... do you think they are thousands of years old? They all date from the 1920s when the european powers that won WWII divided up the known oil reserves between themselves... ignoring who lives where. That is why the place is in utter turmoil right now, which is how they like it... if they all got together as one arab state they could dictate terms of oil sales to the west...

Better to have lots of little warring princes undercutting each other... it also gives them something to spend all their wealth on instead of health and education for their people.

Thing is, none of those nations that are all in relative wealth complain about that monopole because there is no internal fiddling and the economical part is something the entire world benefits from even Russia. They get all they need and also the Arab nations get weapons enmasse and physical as well as burocratic assistance in all spheres of society despite being ruled by oppressive regimes basicaly.

It's ironic, because if that wasn't the case, wherever you live right now, you'd not even have access to the internet.

It is also ironic you mention that because Russia's puppets aren't any different, except they are full of facades and in truth decaying as Russia can barely even sustain them properly let alone improve as quickly.

Don't even know you... I am just average westerner who doesn't like Koolaide... do you think your friends in Washington care more about you and your family?

I do really hope so lol

No naturaly they don't. Why should they ? do you care for your own family first and foremost or your distant friends ?

That applies to everyone.

The difference between them and Russia is that so far US support has been progressive, not always positive but progressive for us.

Russia likes always like to bark and claim about heavy US military financing and all that nonsense. They started supporting and training our military and security forces in 2001. It is 2017 now and since 2001 there has been no kind of US support that elevated our armed forces from local police-counter insurgency force to an actual conventional defence force.

It is 2017 ... and only now, next year, in 2018 they are starting to train the battalions of our armed forces in how to adequately defend against enemy armed forces .... as an armed force.

Neither has the US ever supplied us with heavy weapons. All we got originated from post Soviet sphere stockpile of Eastern Europe and some artillery, SAM systems and some fancy looking small arms from Isarel. All financed by the wealth of Georgian and jewish-Georgian business men, Saakashvili was completly depending on. Most acquired hardware from Eastern Europe was in miserable condition nontheless ... so poor in fact, half the equipment Russia captured in the August War was blown up because they couldn't even move them.

They are arming you up and pushing you towards the bears cage in the zoo because for some stupid reason they think if the bear kills to many idiots, they might get some support to have the bear put down.

Except the initial involvment of the US only focused on fighting Chechens in connection to ricin affair and Al Qaeda. Russia actualy supported that operation despite being nervous about US influence in the region. Georgia and the US denied the Russians participation simply because both feared it would boost Russias foothold if they started bombing the shit out of Georgias Pankisi Gorge and sending troops into yet another Georgian region.

Why?

NATO peacekeepers in Kosovo would be a good analogy of the situation.... if Slobodan had attacked the terrorist KLA forces and NATO had intervened directly and the Serbs ended up shelling the NATO base do you really think NATO would have done nothing?

Really?

Can you say regime change... and slobodan/saakashvilis head on a platter.

You know when facts are facts ? when they happen. Everything else is speculation. Learn the difference. You can't declare wars and steal foreign lands because you have a hunch or your left ball is itching ....

Russia didn't destabilise Georgia... Georgia did.

Good joke. Next one.

I am sure they would say the same about Georgian provocations...

Except there wouldn't be any, because there wouldn't be any reasons. Get it now ? I guess not.

But yes.. all Russias fault. Sounds like you are ready for NATO and the EU.... you sound as whiny as Poland.

They stop antagonizing, let us reunite and become valuable allies ? we will all but forget NATO.

NATO is supporting an illegal coup made up of those nazi bastards you so dearly support by providing weapons and military training.

Stop calling all Ukrainians who disagree to Russias needs Nazis for the sake of what credibility is left in you.

Stop also with that BS-ass "illegal coup" nonsense. It was a Revolution and Russia can cry me a damn river that theiy Yanukovich puppet was disposed. He was a criminal anyway and like a criminal scum the first thing he did was fleeing back to his puppeteer, leaving behind his fancy golden dacha.

Personally I don't care... I don't think Ukrainians are Russians and they don't seem to think that either. so I really don't care what the illegal government in Kiev does to them... they need to sort out their own problems.

Yet you care enough to call them things and support Russia's illegal military actions against them. Legit.

having said that, the illegal junta in Kiev is shelling a section of its population... why does the democratic west support that?

Nobody supports the indiscriminate shelling of populated areas and killing of innocents that were / are commenced by both sides. Whoever does, is inhuman scum and sadly some people on both sides do.

Perhaps the reason I don't like the west is that its very high morals don't amount to shit when it comes to their interests.

At least they have high morals and more perspective, also it amounts more than from anyone else. Not perfect, far from good, but still better than the crippling alternative.

they could care less about iraqi lives in 1992...

Give me a damn break

Russia didn't and doesn't give the slightest damn either, neither in Afghanistan, Chechnya, Abkhazia, Ossetia or the Ukraine. It's all about political interests. At least the West and Western organisations are helping and providing proper aid and shelter on a massive scale. Compared to that Russia has virtualy done nothing.

Hostile? Read a fucking book mate... no one died and few shots were fired... either the people of the Crimea are total cowards ....

that is not a damn argument, like literaly. Russia used its military power to disarm the UA and completly seal off the entire peninsula kicking the Ukrainians out. This isn't even a matter of debate or "perspective" and POV. Only a delusional blunt instrument would try to twist it into anything else but hostile takeoever.

hostile force ( any force intruding without mandate or approval of intruded country is hostile ) invades foreign land, repulses military of foreign land out of its recognised territory to ultimately absorb it. What is so difficult to understand here .... ?

Listening to Auslander the Ukies did send some people who got turned around and sent right back and not by the Russian military.

Right. I also heard from my deceased grand parents recently that the supposed unmarked Russian troops were in fact not Russians, but Ukrainians who kicked out their comrades.

Please ....

the Russian forces who were there legally by the way... the agreement over the lease of Sebastopol means they can base soldiers there to defend their property and AFAIK they never exceeded the amount they were allowed and you can bet your ass if they did Kiev would have bitched about it.

Lmfao nice try. Nobody denies the mandate and lease that was in effect or troop numbers. What's your point ? the Peninsula still belongs to Ukraine just like Sevastopol even if that particular town had special status.

What ecactly has any of that to do with the fact that Russian troops rolled all over the place and took over the entire peninsula ?

The English language is quite complex and several words have different meanings in different contexts.

A good neighbour does not mean they are priests and bad neighbours does not make them devil worshippers.


But in this case however you are fight that some of Russias bad neighbours are .

Yeah in case of you, it's virtualy everyone who disagree with Russias politics. We got it

What future can you have with someone who thinks all the problems in the world come from you?

A good future if the one who causes all the problems improves and starts behaving more reasonably towards its neighbours.

Just break the relationship and move on with someone interested in cooperating and moving forward.

We already do that. There is only one problem. Russia has to give us back our territories, then we can move on.

They don't fear Russia... they hate Russia.

Hate comes from fear. But nobody is wholeheartedly even hating on Russia

If they want to give up their future because of the past then Russia should not hold their hand.

Nobody is giving up anything. They had and have a choice, they made theirs and you can't blame them for it.

Russia simply doesn't offer much prospect. Especialy not in its current state.

Of course... the US and its stooges can invade Libya and have Gaddafi murdered and they can invade Iraq and have Saddam murdered, but whoh be tide Russia helping people getting shelled by an illegal group of nazis and weirdo pro EU assholes, just because they have the support of the west...

Russia has an equal murdering streak when it comes to deposing opponents and even more obvious streak in taking out political opponents or rebelious indepdence seekers.

The only reason I do not approve of any of that be it US or Russia is because A ) you are fiddling in the internal affairs of another country, what may destabilise the situation ever further and B ) it will draw other powers into the conflict that guarantees even further destabilisation and death.

Generaly however I completly approve of the removal of psychotic murdering despots.

Well what happened to Germany after WWI led directly to Germany starting WWII... you think the terms after WWI were not a bit hard on a side that you agree was not really at fault?

Victors always tend to bully the losers and it's never fair. The French in particular wanted payback for their humiliation a couple decades earlier. Germany in return humiliated them in WW2.  

The Germans lost an entire empire... the Middle East was completely redrawn by Britain and France so they could split up former German territories.

So did many peoples when losing a conflict. Another reoccuring theme in history.

Yes that's what victors do. Like the Soviet Union for instance. Was also good in redrawing borders and causing cultural conflicts.

When the Austrian Empire delcared war on Serbia, its ally Russia mobilised but didn't declare war yet. Germany declared war on Russia because it was mobilising an army. It was Russia that requested France and Britain to join them because the Germans initialy put Russia in a grave military position. France responded to Russias call for help by mobilising because their earlier defeat against the German Empire in 1870 still haunted them. But yet again it was Germany that declared war on France when they found out they were mobilising .... so go figure.

So everyone mobilised to fight Germany but Germany declared war first... the bastards.

It is a historicaly a dumb move wheter you call it "preemtive" or not. Because if all of them had declared war on Germany first, it would lead to even greater support of a more neutral POV on the entire matter.

Now I understand your opinion.. NATO is moving armour east towards the Russian border so when Russia has had enough and pushes its forces to its own borders with NATO it will be Russias fault when NATO invades for all those material resources....

US mobilising a couple thousand troops in several NATO countries not even damn close to Russia's border for military manouvers to train a multinational brigade ....

and Russia deploying almost 100.000 men at Ukraine's border with thousands of corresponding equipment ....

Yes clearly NATO is the potential warmongerer here ....

finally living space in the east....

Wtf lmao. I'm a Georgian, not a German based Nazi who cries after Hitler and "space in the east".

What is credibility? Being popular on CNN or BBC?

Basic reasoning and elemential truth. You talk CNN or BBC, yet love RT. Any sane man would despise such media in the first place. THe only thing they are good for is to compare their propaganda BS in relation to events and construct something that makes sense out of that mess. But if you are half way smart and care for your mental stability, you don't bother with that BS in the first place.

The west sees Russia as the bad guy

That's rich. Have you ever watched Russian TV .... ?

Compared to Russian TV there is almost nothing reported in Western media about Russia. Only if something controversial happens.

Russia has entire documentaries and shows devoted on slamming not only US / Western politics but also lifestyle etc.

Yeah... in fact fuck Georgia... keep moving those fences...

Now we finaly see his true face. Let it all out

that can be reparation for the damage Stalin did to the world perhaps...

but for the love of god, at least come up with excuses that make some kind of sense or doesn't make you look like a complete mustard ....

Been literaly facepalming on this one for 2 minutes straight. Good job. Noone has ever achieved that.

First place? that would be Nazi Germany.

So second place then. Does it change anything .... ?

I think you can answer that question yourself.

You mean like the people of Crimea getting rid of the Ukies and getting Russian troops in there... yet you still call that occupation.

Except we are talking about peoples that got actualy occupied and oppressed .... and by foreign powers. None of that applies to Crimea in regards of Ukraine.

So georgians killed civilians and Russians levelled buildings trying to remove georgian soldiers and you think that is the same thing.

It is. Russians also killed civilians bombing Georgian towns and settlements and also people who remainded in Tskhinvali with their bombs and missiles, not just Georgian troops. It is called collateral damage.

I am pointing that out because of your stupid unsupported claim of "genocide".

So Russians and especialy Ossetians also committed genocide then, because in particular Ossetian fighters deliberately massacred civilians in their homes.

Genocide, no discussion.

How hard could that be, your side attack a civilian capital city with artillery and shot at civilians escaping in cars

Very, when you have no proof, only claims. Or are you sources for proof the two horrible Russian PR movies made about the war ?

You know where the Georgains are driving around and yelling "Yeehaa" in American accent, while shooting a running civilian ?

Almost all claims are ones neither the Russians nor Ossetians could prove to this date. But what is proven is that Russia blatantly lied about cluster bombs, napalm and ballistic misiles and most other things it denied to have used against populated areas.

Nowadays you can proof who fired what and when based on the trajectory that can be determined and it has been proven that Russian artillery did almost as much damage.

... your forces clearly wanted the land but not the people.

You are absolutly in no position to know what was wanted by whom in the Georgian miliatry, neither have any right to claim such things especialy without any evidence or proof to back it up.

I however do because I spoke to the people who fought in that war and they naturaly had and have a completly different and undestandable POV and position on the whole thing that makes you and people like you look completly stupid. The most important thing is that they shot at whoever shot at them and avoided harming civilians as much as they could. Of course there are always idiots you can single out in every army. There are many among the Russian troops and separatists fighting in Ukraine, who show zero respect to POWs and evem fallen enemy soldiers.

If you cared so much about civilians that were harmed, why haven't you said anything about the Georgians who were killed as well in 2008 or massacred by the thousands in 1993 for that matter ?

If you cared so much about civilians that were harmed why don't you contemplate about who you are supporting and look into and be upset about the thousands of innocent people that were systematicaly tortured and killed in both Chechen Wars ?

Your personal papers or the NATO archive?

There is tons of literature and analyst papers about those wars both Russian and non-Russian. Why don't you pick one and read.

You aren't blaming your side, you have insinuated several times that Russian provocations before and after the attack is what caused the attack... amusing you think that really but when have you suggested logic is important?

I blame the Georgian side for reacting to all the provocations with a full fledged military operation when there could have been less harming, overall more logical and if retaliation to those were realy necessary - then more subtile responses. So that neither civilians nor Georgia's territorial stability would have suffered further. Get it now ?

Everyone hates Russia because Russia is bad.

I hate Russias politics and the general war mongering mentality of Kremlin. I don't hate Russia as such, and neither does the rest of the world. Anything else is delusional cacaphony.

I hear what you say, just understand that I reject it as nonsense.

I know, and you are very clear on that, though if only your reasoning was even remotely logical and in touch with reality ....

And there you go again... you don't care what the facts are Russia is to blame...

And now it is a fact because you said it was.

Look its hard to argue first of all with historical facts and when you studied the history of the parties involved. Be my guest and prove me wrong.

I don't understand...

I see that.

So you basicaly can't even grasp the difference between Kremlin not wanting to and the Ossetians not wanting to .... because that's the point. The Ossetians have absolutly nothing against that notion, even welcome it, while Kremlin is the one that violantly flails around to prevent it by all means, even physicaly.

That's the sad reality.

What would have happened if no one intervened?

Purely based on the mass atrocities committed by several sides in the conflict, if noone intervened, it would have escalated in greater blood shed.

Silly boy, I come from the west, so I can bend any meaning of any word to suit my needs... democratically elected people like Chavez and Putin can be called dictators and communists, and I can suggest invasions of countries for all sorts of important reasons but at the end of the day don't need to provide any actual proof... there are no consequences later so who cares?

Joker. Except you actualy can't. I mean you can try to insist sure, at cost of your own credibility. But it won't change the actual meaning of a term and it makes people who use that on anything look very stupid and lose all credibility. But sure, be my guest on that as well.

Careful there buddy.... Anti Israeli rants like that will get you dropped from Americas best buddy list in a heartbeat.. even suggesting Israeli settlement expansion is anything like genocide will get you dropped like a rock.

They themselves aren't realy settle about it.

Hahahaha... yeah, people are idiots.

Unfortunatly that is often true.

Yet he has lost no sleep over Lithuania and the Baltic republics or Poland... what a complex guy.

Yeah right. So much so that he is constantly worried about Poland's defence acquirements and shoves Topols into their nose.

I am sure he hates Georgians as much as Georgians seem to hate Russians. The thing is that he clearly sees that South Ossetians and Abkhazians don't want to be Georgian.

He doesn't give a crap about Abkhazians or Ossetians. Read my previous post. It's not about them at all, let alone in the first place. Russians are building investment ala Israel in Abkhazia and treating both regions like giant troop polypgons while the population is starving and sinking deeper into all high corruption and crime. If any of that was even remotely true, they wouldn't be in such unworhtly inhuman condition.

If goverment control was restored over them the people would get jobs, the regions, especialy the coastline would flourish even moreso than Batumi, order would be in place, police and anti crime measures would be enforced etc. There is not base individual protection or any saftey and esnurances. Both population and infrastructure are rotting away.

Perhaps when Georgia works this out too there can be real peace.

Of course there would be. But that requires Russian authority and troops release the leash on the Abkhazians and Ossetians and let us work in a peaceful environment on dialogue with them. Dialogue works perfectly well. That has been proven before the 2008 even when there still was tension and skirmishes. You cannot come to terms and compromises if you aren't even allowed to have dialogue with the other side. Russia prevents exactly that. Because guess what, they decide everything.

Stalin did as much damage as he did good and got action and cooperation through fear and threats and murder.

An abusive father can bring up a good son but the son is not going to thank the father for doing things that way... the fact that his father brought him up that way is no excuse.

Yeah whatever. You can twist and tweak it as much as you like and nobody disagrees on the fact he was a mass murderer, but he is the reason to why Russia stands as it does and at all for that matter.

You beat a dog to force it to behave and you end up with a fucked up animal that you cannot trust.

Stalin is what happens when you put a child abuser and wife beater in charge.... he was a sadistic  

.... what ?

Wait wait wait wait ..... wait.

Let me get this straight. So you're saying ... it's basicaly our fault, because we are responsible for a greater and more powerful Russia but now must feel the consequences and wrath for an abusing relationship as our own monster now turns on us .... ?

Are you sure you don't want to become a Hollywood director ? because that sounds awesome lol

Ohh come on... pull the other one...

Base military operational facts.

Hey, your guys started it... did you expect the Russians to wait until they had improved their recon forces before they counter attacked?

Even if I approved of the Russian intervention in the first place at all, good reconnaissance is the least you can expect from a powerful country like Russia that has frikkin satelites .... unless you simply don't give a dam, what is more likely.

Good analogy... Chechens use terrirost attacks to lay claim to land... they did it twice, the second time they already had autonomy but still attacked their neighbours, and so the Russian forces went in to deal with the problem.

and by doing so tens of thousands of people were killed. Just put that into perspective for a moment ....

The Georgia forces shelled a city... obviously a terrorist act, and when the Russians pushed them back there was damage...

This is gold.

When Georgians shell a city where the shelling is mostly targetet at enemy forces its "a terrorist act", but when Russia levels entire towns and erradicates half a regions population it's completly out of necessity.

One question. How long is Putin's d*** ?

Must have enjoyed stroking that one, based on that nonsense you just wrote.

Yeah, the Russian army went on a frenzied rampage in Chechnia... just like the Georgian army did in South Ossetia

Never ever again compare those two events .... ever.

Russians drove their tanks over children ....

and you question my moral compass ?

Besides you should have supported that aggression... Russians fighting Russians.

Why exactly would I support that or any blood shed for that matter ?

I actualy feel very sorry first of all for the Chechens that were brutaly massacred but also the Russian troops that were not involved in crimes and just fought and died there in equaly poor circumstances.

Either way you can claim it was Russias fault.

The subsequent war and it's consequences ? Yes.

I don't speak or read Russian so I really don't know how you can trace my attitude to the Kremlin, but whatever... as long as you stop dissing Israel you should be very happy getting your instructions from the Trump...

Oh realy ? wow, sorry for assuming then lol I realy had no reasons whatsover right ?

Pluis it's not like you've been calling me things or claiming stuff I haven't even said here or something.

Really mate, don't play the flute. You don't have to an ethnic Russian to support Russian politics and be biased towards Georgians for whatever reasons. I know a person who has zero input on all those conflicts but defends Russian politics more aggressively than any of my Russian pals ( who btw many of them disagree with lot of it despite their resentments against the US ) just out of spite for the "West" yet can't for her living explain to me why. They only get upset when I question their motives and arguments. That is a common symptom that applies more often to devoted Putin supporters than anything else.

But it has also become a thing with Trump I noticed.

a region you claim as your own...

*is our own as it always has been.

With your logic, Crimea and half of Russia does not belong to Russia.

We can at least claim more than a millenium and a half.

If you want change then you have to grow a pair

We have to grow a pair ? we are not the insecure nuclear power with unused massive territory that bullies its small neighbour because it has its own independent political desires, besides maintaining a stable souvereignity and unity.

and your niggling provocation shit is what has kept their attention.

Yet a greater display of insecurity. When a country the size and power of Russia sees a simple non-hostile political step of a small independent souvereign nation, as provocation and threat, than it is in a greater crisis than I thought and needs some proper progressive leadership.

GarryB wrote:
Really? Tell Gaddafi about the UN imposed no fly zone and how the US and France used that to provide ground support to their terrorist proxies for regime change... Oops, no you can't because he is currently dead and able to tell no tails... convenient?

Nice try. First of all it was NATO not UN.

Secondly, the UN resolution on Lybia was approved by 10 and 5 declared abstinance, including Russia, not veto. That's the decicive part here.  If those countries were opposing the notion they had all the right to express it. They didn't.

Funny that you throw your consciousness completly out of the window when defending Russia's past and current actions but are completly devoted in rambling about "NATO".

It's not like NATO outright attacked Gaddafi. The UN intervened after deliberate purges and heavy human rights violations became too obvious as to ignore by anyone.

Obviously  the West also used the opporunity to reform that country, but Lybia is anything but under their influence. In fact neither the EU nor US do realy want to have anything to do with the mess especialy due to ISIS threat, which is being fought and that fight is supported by both the US and Russia.

But you probably gonna put the tinfoil hat on all of that.

Just like you claim about everyone non-Russian he thinks it's all exclusively Russia's fault.

You keep rambling it's all the "Wests" fault.

Nice self reflection.

Besides. Keep supporting terrorists and despots. We understand where you're coming from.

Hahahahaha... yeah... NATO moving NATO bases and NATO forces to Russias border

Sigh .... that ignorance ....

Nobody is .... moving .... NATO bases ( especialy lol ) closer to Russia. Neither are NATO forces moving closer to Russias border. Like where ?

Boosting military presence in NATO countries for manouvers .... and actualy deploying troops close to the Russian border .... are two cosmic differences.

Russia is literaly placing thousands of troops AT the border and INSIDE its neithbouring countries ....

is deterrent, and Russia responding by moving its military forces within its own border to position them nearby in case of attack by NATO is aggression

What a damn hypocrite lol

Not "nearby". Physicaly *AT and IN.

Yeah right lmao

So Russia is upset that it won't ever be able to successfuly attack Europe if it ever decided to. Cry me a damn river.

Russia is upset that it needs to spend money on weapons

Poor uncentralised non autocratic Russia, had all its resources originaly devoted to development, infrastructure, non-military science and social progress before all the crisis ....

lmao

Yes, every nation has the right to join a Nazi organisation and antagonise its large neighbour.

So now not only actual Nazis ( of which there are more in Russia btw ) - EVERYONE is a Nazi now. Sure you haven't left out anyone on this planet ? you should double check.

Don't listen to me though...

Ehm ... are making me chose between your credibility and the rest of the world and myself ?

Look man, no offense, but I gotta side on the rest of world here lol

Was a hard decision though. ^^

Those countries ARE weak and would be rolled over in days...

You sound to me like someone who realy wants to see those countries get destroyed. What does that type of rhetoric make you look like ?

an aggressor maybe ?

do you think being a member of NATO will help you any if you decide to take back South Ossetia or Abkhazia by force?

Oh ghad. You don't even get the elemential reasoning to why we want to join NATO.

Do you realy think we are sacrificing and crippling our people in foreign countries just so we can get at war to lose and cripple more people and the entire country ?

What do you think we want NATO protection against .... ? very difficult question You consider yourself a genius. I am sure, you can at least figure that one out ....

You become cannon fodder and fighting space for NATO...

What concern is that to you ?

Besides getting salarey bonus for deployment and extra compensation in case something happens, many people do join those efforts because they actualy believe that they are fighting for a just cause.

It is their decision.

Why does Russia not committ more resources in fighting domestic terrorism ? because it still hasn't dealt with it in a peanut sized region of it's huge ass territory.

So NATO hands over anything you ask for with full training...

You are insane and truly suffer delusions.

NATO didn't hand over ( especialy hand over ) anything we asked since 2001 and not even adequate training. All the Soviet junk we got was acquired for actualy more money than it cost.

If you don't take my word for granted, at least do some basic research and look at what we acquired since 2001.

If NATO and Israel handed us over what we actualy wanted our T-72s would have been replaced by Merkavas, the AK-74 replaced with actual COLT M-4s and our vehicles and flying apparatus all be replaced with Western gear.

All you see on our soldiers, except the AR-15 Bushmasters and Kalashnikovs obviously, is domestic product. The uniforms, helmets, vests, and the Georgians.

I love how some people even to this date try to draw the Georgian army as an effective fighting force clad in NATO armor. If only.

how many trillions of dollars in debt do you think you would need to spend to make Russia fear Georgia?

Our military goal is not make Russia fear us, but think twice about attacking us, and so that we can hold out at least for a bit and inflict some damage or delay so that the internatioal community can react - if at all. We are not even counting on it.

That's like the modest of goals any country can have.

How many civilians would you have left for that sort of armed force?

Georgia doesn't need a large military force. It needs a professional one and that's what we are trying to build in 2018.

You make it sound like joining NATO will suddenly make you an equal to Russia

From the POV of Georgia, NATO serves as deterrent against Russian aggression, but also boosts its military defence capabilities.

Former is arguable, latter is a fact.

be able to do what you want

based or implied by what ? your anti Georgian sentiments are irritating. They would have been somewhat understandable during the 2008 war at best. But now you are talking with no evidence or even implication.

In 2008 Georgia launched an offensive.

Since 2008 Russia has been further detoriarating the situation while Georgia trying to do everything to improve it.

Now you shit all over us for acquiring basic defence weapons as Russia is continously boosting its troop presence in both regions for no reasons whatsoever.

Even if the Georgian army was fully prepared and fortified to anticipate any Russian aggression and fight it, the available Russian force in one of the regions alone with support of naval and air elements would completly steamroll it.

Again, if you don't take my word on this, check how many troops they have deployed in Georgia.

They deployed yet more T-90s and other tanks recently, way before the US assured further assistance and you babble some nonsense about Georgian "threat" ? at least sound somewhat credible.

How do you think all those activities are received by Georgia ? a gesture of good will ? especialy in connection to the fence policy.

Try to put things into perspective for a moment and look at the situation from the POV of the opposing side also.

But oh wait, you consider us any everyone who isn't in support of Russias political agendas, Nazis ....

Surely such a person is capable of reasoning

BTW we don't have a large military here in NZ... we don't need one.

Our army is used for peacekeeping ops around the world and our navy patrols our large EEZ and the seas around us.

Our air force had a useless fighter component to it for a long time but now it is just transports for the army, though normally like most armies they mostly move by sea.

Ehm ... neither does Georgia and we also don't need one, contrary to the overbloated armies of virtualy all our neighbours.

btw NZ - New Zealand ? seriously mate ?

New Zealand is surrounded by frikkin oceans mofo lol

What, do you have territorial struggles with the Atlantians and Aquaman .... or the penguins ?

Bit of a hypocrite aren't we ? you took part in all of those wars.

Fanatical Islamist and fake communist countries that threaten to destroy you and your allies and actively support terrorism against a number of countries, for decades now ? seem like legit threats to me. Even Russia sees North Korea as a threat now.

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahaha...

Yeah, I realy don't see what's so funny about that situation. The Iranians have been smuggling weapons and terrorists all over the place way before many of the recent conflicts. The North Korean leadership is just bat shit crazy. Those are two problems.

You are frikkin hilarious.

So what exactly is Russia's excuse for arming the Saudis ? they just recently signed another 3bn dollar arms deal with them. Let me guess, in this case its absolutly reasonable since it suits Russia making money with it, but all the rest are Nazis of course. Big bad Nazi West !

Saudi Arabia has been the sin pool for everyone, not exclusively the West amigo.

"damn, didn't think of that....better shift topic". Be my guest. You're welcome.

The Soviets didn't owe the Poles anything...

Yeah, you have been very clear about what you think of Poles .... probably would have suited you if the Nazis and Soviets killed them all.

soldiers from eastern european countries took active part in destroying the Soviet Union with their Nazi allies

Are you fucking ..... 'not very intelligent' ? the Soviet Union attacked, sacked and occupied Poland with their at that point in the conflict, Nazi buddies.

Then they proceeded massacring their entire military officer cadres because they were a potential threat for the future. Thousands were executed.

Then during the Warsaw uprising, they just watched how the Nazis quelled it so that the Polish resistance was removed and it was easier for the Soviets to take it from them and establish control without any Polish resistance. Thats a fact even many Russian historians acknowledge.

Then followed decades of Soviet oppression.

Yes Poles hated the Soviets just for the sake of hating.

They had absolutly no historical reasons for resentment whatsoever ....

Read a damn book GarryB. Your ignorace at this point is offensive.

the allies took Paris because they suspected the communist resistance

The allies took Paris along the way to clear it from the Wehrmacht mate .... because France was an occupied country.

The race to Berlin, yes that is definitly something that happened, but the Soviets won that race.

They can bitch all they like...

Very self reflecting comment.

They let the Soviets take the losses instead...

Yeah right, because launching a risky invasion that could have cost the allies hundreds of thousands of troops if they met even adequate, not just decent, but only adequate German resistance .... instead of you know that confused mild mannered mess of opposition they faced, thanks all to diversionary intelligence and espionage building up the operation for years, would have been so much better.

Soviet losses were unproportionaly high in the first years of war, but then became more or less acceptable and similar to German losses when their military operations were better organised and resembled some form of decent strategy and tactics and also because Germans blasted their load in the first 2 years.

Sure, its all the allies fault.

In fact it was the "West" that attacked Russia, not Nazi Germany.

Those bastard Americans, supplying the Soviets with arms and food !

One miserable occupyer who oppresses and executes changes the other. What kind of debile excuse is that please ... ? get real man .... realy take a book from the local library and get some education. This level of ignorance is truly intolerable, albeit funny as hell.

If they had the spine to liberate themselves there would not have been a problem.

Easy thing to say for someone in his cosy basement somwehre in the sorry - but anus of the world, surrounded by nothing but peaceful oceans.

So it's just your fault when you are weak and someone more powerful comes into your house, punches you in the face and declare all your belongings and your ass his play thing right ?

Btw it not makes it any better if one drunk absuing invader replaces the other.

... maybe if they want to be liberated by a third world country with nukes then they need to learn to live in a third world country.

LMAO - you do have a comedic gene. Maybe use it.

The Soviets knew they could trust the west no more than they could trust the Germans...

Those excuses getting funnier ....

eastern europe became the buffer between the Soviets and the west and performed that role nicely.

.... and funnier.

If the west wanted eastern europe to be free they simply could have withdrawn first... they didn't either.

The West didn't withdraw because of the Soviet threat. Where do you think would the Soviets have halted if the presence of Western allied forces didn't stop them ? in Berlin right ?

Don't be a fool, they are American bases in Eastern europe... the claim is that they are ABM sites but the one they orignally planned had the mid course interceptor that would be no use against anything targeting europe... they were to intercept missiles on their way to the US.

American .... bases yes.

Not weapons "donated" to countries. Otherwise all of Europe would be full with Patriots.

The radar setups look deep into Russian air space though... and not by accident.

So what are you implying ? that the US wants to attack Russia ? based on what ? defensive weapons ? Russia's radars also oversee neighbouring countries, except Russia actualy DOES attack its neighbours.

You don't know them at all...

You literaly see what they are doing. I resort from speculating and wait for actual facts.

they will be generous and give Georgia soft loans of millions ..... of dollars... two catches of course...

Even if so, you are reaching for some insignifcant stuff trying to make it look bad and evil.

A loan is still a loan, you need to pay back. We already have massive issues on that in regards to French anti air missiles.

or billions

lmfao ^ if only ....

.... old F-16s that are pretty worn out, old armour, that sort of stuff...

You realy have absolutly zero clue about Georgia and its current situation and general political interests do you ?

It is not in Georgias interest whatsoever to acquire new tanks of fighter jets. We are not talking about political interests only, but base military interests of the Georgian military.

The goal of the Georgian military is to boost defence capacities, but also replace what is currently rotting away out of pure base necessity of maintaning an armed force. The air component is almost completly defunct because all the Su-25s are becoming obsolete despite modernisation, half of them are stuck in the plants for repairs, same with helis.

What the Georgian army is trying to do right now is sell all of that and replace its strike aircraft with less durable, but cheaper drones with weapon configuration. If that's not sad, I don't know what is.

Getting spare parts for Mi-24s and Mi-8s has become difficult to almost non existent, as Ukraine is at war, every other nation with Soviet inventory won't because their stuff is also becoming obsolete and they have the same issues. Russia is modernising all their current equipment.

The US promised us Black Hawks as a gesture of partnership etc in 2014, but it's 2017 and we haven't seen a single Black Hawk rotor ....

It is fun to be the west.... just not very ethical.

It is not fun to be Russia on top of not very ethical.

It would be fun, if Russia was at least as powerful a nation it pretends to be.

Maybe they need another Georgian leader ....

You mean like moving troops over a border and shelling a capital city? Yeah I know...

I wonder if you are talking about Afghanistan or Sukhumi that got shelled by Russian jets during the Abkhazia War, since Russia wasn't involved in any of that.

Oh, oh now I get it. You are referring to the Georgian operation in Samachablo. Yeah, too bad you don't have a point because it's not a foreign country but a rebelious region.

Come up with an actualy valid analogy I guess .... ?  

So lets call it a police action like the Vietnam war.

The questions tands: where is NATO physicaly attacking Russia with its military ?

It would make any sense if NATO was actualy attacking Russia.

Funny thing is, you make claims, Russian athorities don't.

You mean to defend people from their own government who is shelling them in South Ossetia or the Donbass?

Yes, the Georgian people are so happy that Russia "protected" them by occupation.

At least you aren't denying involvment in Donbass.

Btw, nice try diverting from your crappy analogy there lol

The unified world the west wants is a world run by the US dictated to via the UN, and controlled by big business... fuck that.

So you'd rather a unified world run by Russia dictated to via a Russian constructed International Institution for Rights controlled by big business that are even more oppressive and undermining ?

This is what I meant by "crippling alternative".

Yeah... UNSC resolution 1244 or something talked about the fact that Kosovo is a part of Serbia and that should not be changed... and then they ignored it.

Just like Russia ignored anything it previously had signed with Georgia before even the war, starting with its supposed "peacekeeping" status and several incursions into Georgian airspace, and suspected ground incursions to "fight militants". Because fuck established and recognized nations borders right ? didn't seem to care about that in 2014 either.

If they were against senseless bloodshed WTF have they been doing in the Middle East for the last two decades?

But the Soviets invading to violently overthrow the Afghan regime and establish full control over Aghanistan leading to millions of dead and displaces is absolutly OK or what ?

NATO intervened because Bin Laden openly declared war on them. They removed the Taliban and Al Qaeda threat and fought insurgencies since 2001, now left in 2014 and currently are underway with the Resolute Support Mission.

The Afghan population actualy welcomes the protection provided by those efforts. If you'd had any insight apart of your personal opinion, you wouldn't be so incredibly biased and one sided about it.

There is literaly no comparison to both wars.

Many thousands of people, I think around 30-40.000 have died mainly deaths caused by terrorist attacks, compared to an estimated almost 2 million dead in the 90s ( both Western and Russian sources ), and some of it as result of Soviet punishment for supporting the Taliban.

What about their rapid and decisive action regarding the massacres in Rwanda... no oil and they are black so who cares right?

Does Russia care ?

Now you are getting it..

Not me, but I think you're slowly grasping reality and that all the excuses you are trying to make are complete nonsense.

You're welcome.

And why whether you join NATO or not you are a small weak country... just like NZ.

and ?

so we have no right to exist or have rights ? is that what you're saying ?

What you don't realise is that joining NATO wont make you stronger..

We don't want to get stronger, but be protected against Russia. It is like base survival instinct. You as a nation get attacked, you seek for protection from a force that can provide for you.

The baltic countries and eastern european countries you so strongly defend miss their nazi rulers more than they miss their commie ones

oh come on .... because Russia is so caring and symphatetic to letting in thousands of refugees ....

and you sympathise more with them than with the Russians so it makes sense to me.

Lmfao. Top reasoning. Academic level.

So your strategy is basicaly surrounding yourself with Nazis so that I can't say I'm not supporting Nazis .... clever.

Half the nutters in the illegal government in Kiev are openly nazi and you support them too.

I mean, I appreciate your effort deciding in my stead who I support or not ... lol

But I support the more resonable part of the Ukrainian goverment.

I actualy disapprove of Poroshenko, not least because he was sheltering Saakashvili and now can't grow the pairs to extradite him to Georgia despite being oppenly insulted by him .... what a man.

... Soviet troops withdrew from Austria and made no attempt to assimilate any of the countries of the countries they liberated.

you mean besides trying to assimilate and force their socialist doctrines and lifestyle onto them .... right.

....but otherwise there was no major expansion of Russia...

the f ... are you smoking .... ?

after 1991 they let them go too and have made no attempts to get them back despite their treatment of Russian citizens within their new countries.

If only Russia was so christian with all its other neighbours and countries it had occupied.

Ever heard of basic military tactics and diversion .... ?

No it does not.

Your denial doesn't really negate facts.

They didn't give a fuck about the Shia majority, because they know they are pro Iranian anyway. The Sunni forces they were fighting are more their natural ally being pro Saudi.

Neither agreeing nor disagreeing here, because things were done and things were not done ....

... but still it's a fact that those basic of basic military manouvers were first and foremost aimed at eliminating the enemy military. So you have no point.

....they thought it through

At least they actualy thought it through and contemplated and considered. But then aggain Saddam was still Saddam just like Assad is still Assad.

Rommel didn't give a shit about the Arabs either... he wanted Middle Eastern Oil to run the German war machine... he could care less about liberating anyone.

Neither did and do the Russians. It's all about politics and economy to them as well. Would be a hard loss for Russia if America eliminated their their military presence there and established those pipelines.

Set fire to or capped an oil field can't be destroyed, but they still secured them first, because the oil was more important than the people.

They secured them first you genius, because they were literaly physicaly in their way as they were advancing from Kuweit and the Saudis from Saudi Arabia. They didn't secure the oil fields with their advancing forces, but forces they detached explicitly to secure the oil fields. You are stretching wide an issue that is virtualy non existant. Try harder with your excuses ....

Because it's becoming very repetitive and boring.

The Americans did the damage in the first place and let the Iraqis pay the Americans to rebuild... do you think they did it cheap.... most of the American money was loans and went into American pockets and the Iraqi people have to pay that back.

Yeah those evil American bastards. Not like the Soviet Union, that invaded, raped Afghanistan then left, because its army was worn out by the conflict and it became pointless, just to leave Afghanistan in a greater mess than it already was.

Where were the reparations there ?

I am sure on your side of the fence everything in the Crimea and South Ossetia and Abkhazia is chaos and criminal gangs.... and Russian aggression ....hahahahahaha...

as I said. I can't talk for Crimea because I've never been there and people tell me mixed stories, but in case of those two regions, it's miserable.

What some people think, still doesn't negate actual facts of illegal military incursion.

.... but you can in Moscow or Washington or Brussels.

Learn the rules.

So what does that "rule" make them all look like ?

Russian aggression

Yeah admittedly in 2008 it was less obvious, but in 1993 it was blatantly obvious, and it is blatantly obvious since 2008.

Well Russia is a big country and Georgia isn't...

I mean, everyone has the right to have personal views and opinions about the world  .... but not when it comes to rights.

Rights make people equal. If you are an advocate of power over right, than that is were we already fundamentaly disagree.

I don't see Russia having more rights than any other souvereign nation be it the size of an appartment or the moon.

The fact their mentality and perhaps also yours dictates that it is laughable that a nation the size of an appetment compared to them should even have rights in the first place, just perfectly reflects what everyone dismisses, fears and hates.

Cause and effect... the effect will only stop when the cause is removed from the equation...

That is what I'm saying. They stop beeing a bully, we may fully reconsider our political ambitions of joining the West and rather become a neutral buffer.

And "All but" is not good enough...

Yeah, because fuck souvereignity and independent decisions of other countries right ?

You are sounding like a NATO promise from the early 1990s.

and you're sounding like a typical oppressor and invader.

When you openly support Nazis you are no better.

So credibility means nothing to you ?

It was not done via a ballot box

Yeah, Russia an it's famous "ballot boxes" with 103% ....

it was a violent coup.... which is illegal.

*Revolution

Of course its illegal when it doesn't suit Russia.

But storming a capital and shooting the current leader of a country is acceptable. Legit.

I don't care at all..

But you do. You care enough to wish them ill.

because the forces they are fighting against are illegal and not a legitimatente government.

So, after that Revolution, how long are you going to call every democraticaly elected government in Ukraine "illegal" ? until Russia takes over Ukraine and installs another puppet ?

Personally I don't hope for a pro ukrainian government...

Why is that ? would that make the Russian goverment look weak ? you people are greater war mongerors than any of the governments. Good god ....

The ideal situation is for the fighting and shelling to stop and the separatists to get their own country

Absolute No.

Generaly I don't understand people who want further division and honestly I see you as a threat to humanity.

They can then have close ties with Russia and the rest of the Ukraine can go fuck itself.

Again, good thing ppl like you have no authority over such questions. Kremlin for all its massive and unforgivable flaws and cimes, does still have reasonable people compared to you lot.

The problem there is that the West never applies its own high morals on its own actions, only as a judgement tool on others.

Sounds very familiar, like a certain other highly hypocrite nation ....

North Korea and Iran can't have nuclear weapons, then why does Israel not lead by example and give up theirs?

According to even Russia they shouldn't ....

Because the entire Arab world tried to swallow and devour them alive and its one of the deterrents that make those guys think twice before launching another multiple front attack.

... couldn't Iran and NK say they need them for the same reason? Or can you pick and choose who can defend themselves?

If those countries where so stable, trustworthy and credible ( instead of you know ..... openly threatening to attack and destroy you and special emphasis on your allies .... ), why would they need nukes or even exist in their current states ? why do all other countries not have nuclear deterrents ?

Complicted world .... except not.

The west has done more to create misery in this world than it has done to alleviate it.... just look at chinese investments in africa... they drill some oil and build roads and schools and hospitals.... more than any western oil company ever did.

What a bloated and pretentious nonsense. If there was an alternate timeline of events, say Russia was repacig the United States in being more powerful and able to expand its sphere of influence and dominance, what do you think it would have caused less misery in the world ? that's a horribly unintelligent assumption.

They disarmed the UA military

That exactly is what makes everything else illigitimate.

If they can fucking do that in the Crimea why didn't they do it in Kiev?

What kind of comparison is that ? obviously that would have lead to open war and not limited to Ukraine.

Crimea was an easy target because the Russian army and navy was already in place and the Chaos in Kiev made Crimea ripe for the taking.

Kiev was not in Russias interest. Finaly taking over the peninsula however was.

Doesn't matter if they were the tooth fairy... they disarmed the nazis and allowed a free and fair referendum to take place.

Yes it does. It were unmarked Russian troops, even Putin openly acknowledged that. But funny he violently denied it during the takeover.

What "Nazis" ... so now the UA troops on Crimea were Nazis trying to invade Russia or what ... ?

get real mate.

If they really wanted to stay with the Ukraine they would have by now.

You are deluded beyond comprehension. Crimea is part of Ukraine with a majority ethnic Russian based population. Nobody denies that. But the Russian military was deployed on Ukrainian soil and attacked and disarmed the Ukrainian military to seal off said Ukrainian soil. If it was a realistic referendum all of Ukraine would have taken part of it. But obviously it was deliberately sealed off so that people could "vote" for "independence" - which quickly turned into absoruption. Viola, smart way of seizing territory. Except it isn't, nobody agrees and nobody got fooled.

Keep trying twisting it.

When Russia can't even respect the base rights, constitutions, souvereignity and territorial integrity of other countries, what kind of credibility is left there ? an aggressors credibility ?

Hahahaha... I see you are getting your numbers from your NATO allies... 100,000 troops going to exercise in Belarus...

We are not talking about Belarus but the Ukrainian border Sherlock.

Yes, maybe 100,000 is a stretch but a good 40 - 60.000 is still good enough to raise concerns.

I believe about 8,000 troops were involved

plus recently 8,000 in tiny Belarus. Congratulations.

listen to Russias point of view means

You are trying to imply that what they do is reasonable. What exactly is reasonable about their fence policy and efforts to undermine communication ?

Actually it was a claim by a young American girl
They interviewed her on CNN but cut her off when they worked out she wasn't saying bad things about the Russians.

*Ossetian girl Amanda Kokoeva with her aunt who live in the United States.

She didn't say anything about Georgian troops deliberately targeting civilian cars trying to escape.

She says in the interview: "before I say anything else I want to say we were running from Georgian troops that were boming our city, not Russian troops" and it seemed very forced or pre-discussed with her aunt. How in the hell would she know who was firing in the first place ?

She says that, after she answers the interviewers question "where there bombs falling all the while" ? with "I didn't see any". So go figure.

On top of that her aunt is sitting next to her, stressing that the Saakashvili started the war and that 2000 people were killed. GG

Basicaly repeating Russian media claims and a figure that was debunked later by none other than Russia.  

What are the odds, that she wasn't just another one of those people who were told to claim attrocities committed by Georgian troops that were never proven in the fist place ?

Or maybe it was just that a person who was upset about Saakashvili for what happened, for what I can't possibly blame him or her, and told her niece to say exactly what she said. I know I would have done so as a parent.

The only recorded incident of Georgian troops supposedly firing at civilians is when one of them approaches with a white arm strap, but ignores their calls to identify. The Georgains open up on him, but you clearly see in the footage he was armed. White arm straps were generaly worn by the separatist volunteer combatants and some Chechen troops. Something you can also observe in the Donbass conflict.

Yes because RT doesn't pay ppl for claiming any kind of BS and tin foil theory abut the West lol

When a burglar breaks into a house.. even if he owns the house and is the landlord, and starts killing people... even accidently I am not going to cry that he cut his hand on the window getting in.  When the occupiers of the house start shooting back and hit a neighbour then that is sad too but why would I blame anyone but those that broke into the house illegally and created the whole situation in the first place.

Burgler isn't even a fitting analogy but yes, basicaly you ouldn't have described the wars in Chechnya any better.

And then you say it was Russias fault because of their provocations it never would have happened...

Yes, because that's all the cause and reason. Nothing just happens.

You new buddies invented this, but they are the most credible pillars of the moral international community.... no wonder you love them they can do no fucking wrong.

It kinda shows you have absolutly no idea what you are talking about .... how can you when living thousands of kilometers away .... ?

Never said or claimed that. They do a lot of things wrong.

Why would Russia have satellites operating over Georgia?

I don't know. For starters looking more compotent ?



You know, irony makes sense when you have a point ....

how exactly does it negate the fact they are massive hypocrites who are responsible for tens of thousands of deaths in Chechnya just because those people wanted their independence ?

You are trying to argue with collateral damage that caused the death of a couple hundred people for which Georgia is prosecuting and punishing the people responsible ....

While supporting separatists who hail people as heros responsible for perpetrating mass murder on an ethnic group ....

.... and supporting a country that will basicaly nuke you to hell if you try to seperate from it.

Of course they did.... it was on CNN and the BBC...

Again, all of those cases can be read.

No wait a minute that was school children being murdered in Beslan by Chechen terrorists and Russian soldiers fighting them.

We Georgians also have to deal with Islamic terrorists. But we can differentiate between Islamic terrorists and the rest of an ethnic group.

You just throw them into the same basket. Figures I pressume. Since you also consider everyone a Nazi.

Of course... not just Russias fault but also Putins fault too.

Putin is kind of the President of Russia and the one who decides things .... at least I remember him to be.

*is our own as it always has been.

With your logic, Crimea and half of Russia does not belong to Russia.

We can at least claim more than a millenium and a half.

Might makes right.

Oh come the F on. Aren't you the least bit tired of that excuse ? lol

Grow a pair in the sense of being a man and not hiding behind the US or NATO

.... show a bit of respect to Russia and the two regions you want to take control of...

Right. Politics is so easy.

Why didn't I think of that or the Georgians for that matter ? damn !

Its not as if Russia was completly undermining any efforts of Georgia or anything .... frikkin smartass ....

What is "showing a bit of respect" ?

completly bending your knees and putting the ass up right ?

Russia has to respect us too.

Behind NATO skirts they will just see guns and not be interested.

Russia has not been forthcoming to Georgia whatsoever after it annexed us a couple centuries ago. So what in the hell do they expect ? "Understanding" for being asswipes ?

It doesn't matter how friendly and cuddly you try to make yourself now, they saw you hit the bitch and they don't think you are genuine in wanting to make up...

Russia is in no position to question anyone's genuinety.

It has violated every single point in the Six Point Agreement it signed and its fence policy and troop boosting without any provocation whatsoever is a testiment to the fact they don't desire peace, but only conflict.

That is why they see reconsiliation and communication a threat, not because Georgia isn't trying. If anything, Russia isn't trying. Rather aggravating the situation continuesly since 2008.

Right. Maybe the entire world should have gone to war with Russia over Chechnyas independence. Would have been only fair.

Except nobody is trying to physicaly attack Russia and the US don't need to. They already assessed Russia has more than enough problems.

You are also confusing resentment and fear of Russian politics with resentment against the Russian populace.

Georgia has a grudge against Russia for what happened and vice versa. Its apparent in Russias actions.

Georgians however have no general grudge against Russians and vice versa, at least for the most part.
There is still more brotherhood and mutuality with them than with Americans and Europeans. However that won't be much longer the case if Russia keeps being antagonistic the way it is, to the point where it doesn't respect Georgia's base rights to exist as a stable and unified country. That's how it is.

People who are supporting that are nothing less but criminals and a threat to any country and also humanity. I realy have no understanding for that.

TheGeorgian wrote:

NATO isn't an organisation dedicated to war with Russia for several decades now.

Ohh boy....

GarryB wrote:The problem was the US and France.. both NATO members, went beyond the mandate of the no fly zone and became a proxy air force to provide air support to the terrorists...

lol wrong again. First of all, the resolution ratified all means of intervention except occupation to force an immediate ceasefire, with the establishment of a no fly zone as a consequence. Russia was perfectly aware of what was going to happen, yet instead of vetoing, merely abstained. They neither had any foothold there nor prospects of benefit at that time. Plus Kremlin most likely was counting on destabilisation that would possibly bite the "West" in the ass. So it makes sense.

Secondly, *Opposítion

You are trying too hard.

Russia has never claimed to be the worlds police or the moral centre of the universe like the west does.

and that excuses everything in your eyes .... see there's the problem.

there is less hipocracy there...

Good joke. Only it doesn't catch up when Russia pretends to be christian and caring about separatists in other countries because of conflict of interests, yet erradicates anyone who attempts sessession in its own country. Just to name one.

Yeah, the west fucked the country up by removing the government and then left it to fester... like a moral respectable high standing individual would do right?

Yeah, like Russia does with all the countries it attacks. But I guess its okay in case of Russia then because its not a moral respectable high standing individual who runs a brothel ? .... right.

Because fuck others rights.

Of course... the west misusing a no fly zone to support a civil war

Do you even read up on anything ?

The resolution clearly establishes the approval of intervention not just a no-fly zone lol.

What exactly is hard to understand about "all means necessary except occupation to protect civilians".

When it comes to misusing mandates and BS excuses, Russia realy shouldn't be the one complaining here ....

AT and IN from the same people who said Saddam had WMDs ready to use on the battlefield within 45minutes of the order being given and that Irans nuclear weapons will require ABM systems all over the place....

It was a threat, that got debunked. Iran is an actual threat and also very active terrorism supporter, yet supported and armed by Russia. Iran consistently threatens with the annihilation of Israel and is running a nuclear program. You can't be more direct. Only if they try that they are the ones who will get destroyed not Israel and in all likelyhood, Israel won't even require US support.

Keep drinking the koolaide mate....

You are calling everyone a Nazi and put your opinion above the entire world.

Who is realy drinking Koolaide here ?

If they would shut the fuck up and quit their constant bitching and moaning I wouldn't give them a second thought to be honest.

Right .... because people just complain and take measures for shits and giggles.

Are you trying to say you are a country of peace and are joining NATO so there wont be a war?

We are obviously, and yes. Give me a single implication or reason we are not. What has happened since 2008 from our side that implies aggression ?

You are arming yourselves up and trying to join an organisation dedicated to war with Russia so you can avoid a war with Russia?

NATO wasn't in question at all until 2005 despite several instigated conflicts in the 1990s. Russian provocations preceed Saakashvili and Shevardnadze could do only that much, like his call for US support in 2001 because of Putins threat to intervene against Chechen refugees in Georgia. The goal was to join the EU in the first place. Prospect of NATO membership was emphasized after the 2008 war as detterent against further Russian aggression.

The pathetic thing is that they don't even care about their own vets, and you are sending your own people to the little wars they love to fight.. sad.

The men and women who are deploying are doing so to help and assist. Apart of our SF noone deploys just to fight.

BTW NZ went to Vietnam to help the US and that assistance has never been mentioned in any American Vietnam movie or TV series or Documentary I have ever seen...

.... and ?

you also hear little to nothing about Georgians.

Our SF was one of the primary QRFs in Iraq in 2003 - 2008. Everytime Coalition forces got struck those guys moved out first.

Our guys were the first on scene when terrorists struck the German consulate in Kabul. Yet they were just briefly mentioned by their ministers and later, the emphasis was put on their KSK and Afghan security forces to give them credit and promote them.

We have many such examples.

Ain't fair either.

There were about 15,000 Russians who went to Syria to fight for ISIS and Russia, by sending forces there has killed quite a few of them... money well spent.

That is no surprise because Russia first and foremost had to protect its military foothold in Syria. Of course they'd reinforce their base there ....

So NATO hands over anything you ask

for with full training... how many trillions of dollars in debt do you think you would need to spend to make Russia fear Georgia?

Not many at all, and definitly not trillions. Maybe a couple and at very best 4 billion annual budget over a span of up to 8 years .... well invested and strictly overseen. That's completly enough.

Right now our current annual budget tends to be just over ~300 million maybe and over 90% of that is pure maintanance of the army, saleries and insurances. That leaves barely anything to acquire equipment. Less than 20-40 million. That's pathetic. Take we boost individual saleries and maintainance capabilities so spending on that alone requires 600 - 700 million, then we still have 2-3 billion that can be invested in arms acquirement and military research.

Again. Georgia doesn't need an overbloated, overstuffed with weapons, army. It needs a professional, decently sized ( in adequate relation to size and demographics ) and perfectly well equipped military and reserve force. Capable of fully defending itself against any threats from the air, sea and land. But that requires some long term investment.

Plus maintaining the already established permanent NATO Evaluation Center to guarantee adequate preparation and training of troops for warfare and not just policing operations.  

Oh lets be honest, you have your opinions and believe all my opinions come from RT and Sputnik

Actualy I avoided going that far.

so you wont listen to anything I have to say anyway

I listen but I simply disagree.

If you say the western world then you might have part of a case but considering the western world includes me then you are clearly wrong.

Oh boy. You don't get it do you ? ^^

YOU are not the Western world. SOME PEOPLE from Russia are not the east ....

I know Russians who disagree with their politics. I know Georgians who are communist. I know Germans who are completly Merica, and others who are Putin admirers.

That's exactly why I put those adorable terms in quotation marks because I find them silly ah.

Ironic that you think you need NATO for that...

How does that not make sense to you ... ?

I wish we could just simply pull deterrents outta our arses or grow money trees lol

especially when joining NATO will guarantee you get the wrong attention from Russia and they will likely dig in their heels in any future negotiations.

Yes because Russia's been doing that shit only just very recently because of fear of NATO, and not just out of insecurity and punishment to maintain foothold and isntability since the breakup in the 1990s .... Georgia was the sharpest advocate of independence before the breakup. I wonder where all that resentment against us and Shevardnadze originates from

Actually all both will do is put a large target on your back. Without NATO in the picture you are an annoyance, but add NATO to the equation and you warrant a few nuclear armed Iskanders aimed at you in the case of WWIII.

I know that our mere existence is an annoyance to their rulers. But an annoyance is exactly why Russia supported sessession in Abkhazia that lead to one of the worst massacres in recent history.

I suppose the case of that rather unlikely event a quick death is better than a slow one..

How is a slow death ever preferably to a quick one ?

But jokes aside, Russia won't destroy anyone unless there IS a legit threat. Georgia is not a legit threat or NATO aggression transit route into Russia. Russia can very easily destroy the only 2 means to cross over the border without further bothering if it wanted to. Anything else is absurd. Like a potential NATO attack on Russia. To what end ? world destruction ?

The very maximum that can happen is Georgia establishing an inpenetrable missile shield if at all lol

So what would be in such a case ?

Russia can't easily nuke Tbilisi. Cry me a river. I find that prospect very welcoming and prefarable to our current state.

yes, I shit all over georgia for getting Javelins with the harsh comment of "good" now the russians will introduce APS systems on their tanks.
I should have warned young people and women to look away when I shattered the peace with that explosive and controversial comment...

I meant them. It's hard to differentiate between you and other phobics and Kremlo-supporters.

In 2008 Georgia launched an offensive.

You make it sound like you went on a picnic.... and you still pretend it was Russias fault...

Nobody is pretending. The operation was obviously our doing. Still Doesn't magicaly negate Russian involvment and provocations that lead to it and its previous instigations of conflicts years before.

Your views of Russia have not changed over time, why should my views of backstabbing georgia change?

Excuse me, "backstabbing" ?

You mean like when Russia backstabbed us, not one ( 1801 ), not two ( 1921 ), not three ( 1992 ) but four times now ?

You got some tasteless humor.

Russia does little to absolutly nothing - on the contrary - to change its status as a threat to us. Instead it cultivates and continuesly aggravates tension.

Georgia has been doing everything it can to normalise situations. Now as Russia has proven it doesn't give the slightest fuck about anyone, and would rather continue building up for war, why should we not prepare ourselves to meet a future, seemingly inevitable aggression by buying a handful defense weapons ?

Especially when you still to this day manage to blame Russia for everything.

There is nothing to "manage". Russia does shit and behave like a complete asswipe, it is outed as such.

Really... Iran and North Korea represent a threat that requires the existence of NATO.

Actualy those are exactle the role models of examples to why such alliances have benefits.

Saudi Arabia has been the sin pool for everyone, not exclusively the West amigo.

The Russians have barely dipped their toes in that pool

Right. Selling weapons for billions upon billions isn't dipping toes .... are you trying to fool yourself or what is this ? hypocrite beyond recovery ....

Yes, Stalin did do that.. If all of Russia is evil and Poland is innocent and pure then you are just as guilty as Saakasvilii for the invasion and murdering the people of South Ossetia.... see how that works?

You are implying to have a point .... you don't.

How are the Polish evil ? by trying to resist Soviet-Nazi occupation or fighting Soviet oppression and murder afterwards ?

The Georgian operations didn't aim at systematicaly murdering people, but restoring gov control over a rebelious region. You know what operation aimed at systematicaly murdering people ? the Russian organised and backed Abkhaz offensive in 1993.

Stalin is not the origin of Russo-Polish relation issues. They have their roots in previous conflicts.
If Stalins actions were not approved and hated, why did the Russians who actualy perpetrated those crimes not resist the orders and went "to hell with this!" ?

.... see how you are running out of excuses ?

Of course they did ... why rush to save those bastards based in and supported by the British ...

wow .... idk, because they desperatey needed help against the Germans slaughtering them .... ? what kind of a human are you even ?

they rose up early to take control so they could dictate terms to the Soviets

Of course they'd do Sherlock, it was their damn country ....

D-Day landings until 1944 and let the Soviet soldiers kick the stuffing out of the nazis

lol right.

D-Day happened when it happened because the Germans where mislead to the point they didn't even adequately respond out of pure disbelief for several days, partialy even weeks. A massive landing operation is not the same as a massive ground operation. A lot more many things can go wrong and the US already got a taste of it in an earlier exercise when German U-boats sunk almost their entire force. It requires a lot of planning, deceit and deliberate heavy misdirection.

Just like Rokossovsky had to before anything could be launched. It took the Soviets tremendous amount of preperation and misdirection. Now imagine how hard it has to be for a long expected huge invasion from sea.

If the western allies had mounted D Day in 1943 the west could have lost 2 or 3 million troops

Yeah, so the allies are at fault here now because of avoiding the death of countless many more troops and not reaching Berlin fisrt .... wow.

The west

Right .... the "West" that consisted of US, British, Canadian, French, Polish and various other nation's armies and forces, that also took part just didn't care .... they did it for the the lulz.

Besides, if they didn't "care", they wouldn't have considered it in the first place. Neither be part of an allied effort in the first place.

The allies held back from entering Paris so that the French resistance could take it themselves

The allies literaly took Paris in support of the French resistance with the support of the Free French Forces they had landed with ....

.... but it turned out the communist resstance might be the dominant force that took Paris ....

Sure, there was absolutly no other reasoning there, like uhm ... idk, defeating the Wehrmacht or something.

Nonono. It was a bunch of communists they suspected there .... lol

Like I said a sort of mirror to what happened in Warsaw.

.... yep, definitly has to be Koolaide

They could have gone earlier, but did not because they feared excessive casualties of their own forces...

That's what I'm saying.

They could have gone later but that risked and all Soviet Europe..

Which is actualy a valid reason.

Easy thing to say for someone in his cosy basement somwehre in the sorry - but anus of the world, surrounded by nothing but peaceful oceans.

Nice and safe yet our alliances with big powers have managed to get us involved in some of the worlds worst conflicts..

Oh come on .... you poor forced people you ....

Some countries bend down and ask for a filling... a bit like Poland, Saudi Arabia,  Others fight back...Finland, Chechnia, Vietnam, Afghanistan, Somalia, Cuba, North Korea...

So when you fight back and get destroyed by the bully, you are in the wrong. Ah, right.

Like it or not the Soviets experienced war on their own territory and realised that they needed to control a buffer zone outside their territory where they could fight NATO forces... that buffer zone was called Eastern Europe.

Like it or not, those are souvereign countries that have equal rights as Russia.

I mean in the immediate post war period... if the west didn't want the Soviets to feel threatened they should not have armed up western europe.... US forces should have left europe and western europe should have started demilitarisation.

The Soviets occupied and absorbed the entire eastern block into their empire and maintained it so until the breakdown. The only reason they didn't advance further was because they bumped into the Western allies.

What exactly is wrong about re-arming shattered nations militaries at their own request ? because the prospect of expansion became harder and harder for the Soviet Union ? the Soviet Union also armed its allies to its own benefit.

Instead both sides built up their forces and it all escalated out of control.

Yes but in that period it was deterrend versus expansion. Only later it grew into global expansion by both sides but the Soviet Union ultimately crippled itself with those ambitions, because economicaly it had little to nothing to back up the massive military buildup.

Why would there be any need for a unified world under any one country.... what right would any country control everyone else?

Who was talking about a single country ? that's exactly how it should not be. If the people of Earth were to unite, they'd mentaly be on a level where borders are seen as a petty nonsense. It is more likely we dumbasses bomb ourselves out of existence.

Ironically I doubt Russia would have accepted either region as being independent if Kosovo had not be accepted in the west and Saakashvili had not attacked SO.

That is very unlikely. It would have happened so or so, either by war or without any provocations from anyone whatsoever. Same with the fence policy, it was just a matter of time the Kremlin became frustrated enough with Georgia's EU ambitions it simply wouldn't have given a dam anymore.

CIA proudly admit they tricked the Soviets into invading Afghanistan

Why did the Soviet Union intervene in Afghanistan ? because the US was supporting anti-Soviet sentiment and movements against their pro-communist leadership. The Soviet Union wasn't "tricked" into anything. Nobody simply believed in its reasnoning that it invaded Afghanistan to fight those efforts it deemed hostile to its interests.

in revenge for Soviet assistance to Vietnamese forces in the Vietnam war.

Yeah, kind of understandable ....

All those millions dead Afghans because of American spite...[/quote]

what a load of horseshit. All those millions of dead happened due to the Soviet incursion.

If the Soviets cared in the slightest they wouldn't have caused so many unnecessary deaths over a decade, wheter you like to twist it this or another way.

Just a small reminder, wheter or not CIA was in place ( as GRU was in Abkhazia ) before the conflict, is irrelevant when Kabul is surprise attacked and its ( actualy pro Russian ) president shot where he stands just because there was fear of US interference and pure Soviet control over the country had to be established immediately.

What followed afterwards is all to blame on the Soviet Union. You want to blame the US for continues assisstance of anti-Soviet forces in those 10 years ? cry me a river. Why did the Russians (partialy actively) support the North Vietnamese forces ?

My nephew spent 8 months in Afghanistan with NZ troops building schools and hospitals and infrastructure like wells. The US has spent their time kidnapping people in the middle of the night and abusing and torturing prisoners and hunting down Osama.

Sounds very familiar.

What did the Russian GRU and internal troops do in Chechnya for two decades .... ? kidnapping, abusing and torturing civilians and executing prisoners and hunting down insurgent leaders.

If the US spent a small fraction of the money it has spent in the last 40 years destroying afghanistan to help the people of afghanistan they would be in a much much better place now. Instead the Taleban are getting stronger...

Gee .... I wonder what Arab nation is actively arming and supporting terrorist cells ....

Don't even bother denying it. One of my relatives who was deployed there was part of a unit who prevented weapons smuggling over the Iranian border to Taliban forces.

Probably not, but at least they don't pretend to like the west does.

The West doesn't just pretend, it's doing a lot but also undermining a lot because of misplaced resources and the fact they put people into charge who know little to nothing about the demographics.

You are a small country, no matter how big the bully is that you hang with.

The problem you are ignoring is that hanging with the bully gets you into fights with big kids that you are not really equipped for... but why bother... keep sipping the koolaide... you are not listening.

You are the one who isn't listening. You only care for the POV of the bully and justify his actions because "power gives you more rights" basicaly.

You as a nation get attacked, you seek for protection from a force that can provide for you.

Hahaahah... if you don't want to be attacked then don't attack smaller autonomous regions.. whether you think they belong to you or not.

So Russia can simply destroy sessessionists and committ mass murder, but we are to be restrained when trying to prevent sessession. Legit reasoning there buddy ....

Being in NATO wont change that.... if you are a fully fledge member of NATO and decide to roll tanks into South Ossetia

What reason would we have to "roll tanks into Samachablo" ... ? we are not Russia. We want to solve this peacefully despite the continues provocations.

Being part of NATO would completly eliminate even the thought of a military option.

do you think all those Russian forces will just leave and let you get on with it?

get on with what ? peaceful negotiations .... yeah, Russia made it blatantly obvious it will take all physical means to prevent that ....

I am just calling a spade a spade....

If you were, we wouldn't have this long ass discussion.

The Soviets didn't run Poland or any other country...they found local communists and put them in power.

Get real.

They claimed they were liberating the people yet avoided all the populated areas and controled the oil fields...

lol this guy is for real ....

They first and foremost attacked the IRaqi army and secured strategic strongholds. Then they moved into more populated areas when the Iraqi army was already shattered at that point and virtualy disbanded, so it eliminated the threat of bloody urban warfare. Air strikes saw to that as well.

The operation in Iraq was pathetic... it was like they had no plan for when they had control of the people.

Like military interventions tend to be. Not all, bust most.

The Soviets built all sort of things there... the americans just blew stuff up.

lol sure buddy.

The only illegal military incursion happened on the 8 8 2008.

Cute. Keep riding on that one stick.

Anything by Imperial Russia, the Soviet Union and many unforgivabe things in regards to Chechnya and also 8 8 8 in relation to annexation, invasion, genocide and intervention is what you can call illegal.

Russias fiddling in Georgia's interal issues since the 1990s is illegal to begin with. Russia shouldn't have even supported those Abkhaz criminals that attacked Sukhumi in 1992, but handed them over. Instead they armed and supported them with thousands of fighters and all sorts of weapons and involvment, despite insisting on not having part in any of that .... and we also know what that lead to.

THAT is illelgal.

That is what I'm saying. They stop beeing a bully, we may fully reconsider our political ambitions of joining the West and rather become a neutral buffer.

You have to make the first move, because you are the one making the moves.

We already made the first move in 1992 giving Abkhazia full autonomy on their demands, yet for some magical reasons ( nothing to do with Arzingba being a Kremlin puppet and GRU operators in place to prep everything ) an armed gang lead by Arzingba attacked Sukhumi and I won't repeat myself on how Russia instigated a war. Those are facts you can look up yourself. Russia was the bully in that conflict.

In regards to Samachablo. Why did their Russian puppets insist on provocations before Saakashvili made an issue out of it .... because of provocations .... ? is it maybe because of Kremlins paranoia that they might lose Georgia for good and would rather cause isntability to avert EU and NATO membership ?

We've been making the first movie ever since 2008. Russia has been responding with hostility to any prospects of reconciliation. So who is the asswipe right now ?

We are well known for it here in NZ..

You hardly account for all of NZ and not even a fraction of it. Your strong pro-Russian position rather indicates you are not realy pure NZ heritage. But sorry for assuming again ....

I don't wish anything for them.... I really don't care.

If you say so.

When there are free and fair elections where all parties are represented and all regions get to vote.

I agree. Crimea should be able to vote too.

Except Russia is better off without all those nazis and weaklings and hangar ons.

Sure you ain't the Nazi here ?

So if no one is allowed nukes... except of course Isreal the why does Isreal have nukes?

But who decides that noone is allowed to have nukes ? are there any special rules or laws maybe ... treaties ?

it's mostly based on balance, threats and political as well as just basic credibility and many other requirements.

You can claim whatever you want about Israel, but did it ever use nukes ? be it to just test them ?

What credibility does Iran have for example, when threatening to destroy Israel at any given opportunity ? would you give them a nuke that could potentialy cause grevious consequences to the entire world ?

tell me, how stable is North Korea ? so stable I guess, that even Russia is concerned about their entire nuclear program because of recent events.

Kiev was not in Russias interest. Finaly taking over the peninsula however was.

Taking Kiev is in Russias interests

Nonsense. If it was, they would have attacked Kiev, but not even the Kremlin is stupid enough to wage a senseless war without reason and one it could also never win.

the point is they kept the nazi ukrainian thugs from the ukraine going to the Crimea and causing chaos

Ah yes, the mother of all bullshit excuses to why Russia invaded and claimed Ukrainian territory when there was literaly no prospect of that whatsoever. Especialy when there was still political chaos on Ukraine mainland and a Crimea referendum wasn't even talked of at all at that time.

Let's be at least a little credible here okay ?

Actual Reasons: fear of Ukrainian EU membership and subsequent withdrawal of Russian forces from the peninsula after expiration of mandate, thus losing an established cosy base for the Black Sea Fleet.

Plus potential oil reserves.

... which all by the way had similar results... those results were just ignored by the democratic government of Kiev.

all of those supposed results were already proven nonsense.

That is not an unusual amount considering its .... unstable neighbour...

.... that it is attacking. Fair enough. Then why be so upset as an aggressor about NATO manouvers in NATO countries .... ?

satellites

So we all should be glad, the Russian armed forces have finaly reached somewhat NATO standarts after the post-2008 reforms. Good for them. Only if they also tweaked their mentality and blood lust a little, that be nice.

No, those people wanted to rape and murder and steal...

and there goes your credibility ....

and quite honestly also that you are a fully blooded NZ

Why should Russia help Georgia with anything... even then you were in bed with the Americans and NATO.

I don't know. Let's start with base friendly relations with neighbours ?

Your generaly mentality GarryB so far is that all those people are weak and bitching too much for being victims and would only be dead weight handing on Russia's feet if Russia ever normalised its relations with them.

The fact Russia is actualy managing to do the very opposite to some of its neighbours, is exactly why the US is preferred by many over Russia and why it is being surrounded by neighbours who fear Russia. How is that progressive or anything to look up at .... ?

You attack SO, and then ran to the US when the shit hit the fan, now you want NATO to hide behind... what is to respect?

Idiocracy and forced stupidity at its peak capacity ....

So Russia has the right to annex and invade us whenever it wants, and do whatever it wants to us in order to serve its own interests despite being a massive hypocrite and we should be bend on only pleasing them and presenting our asses.

Sounds absolutly acceptable no ?

"people" who agree to that can go merrily F themselves. Very very hard.

GarryB wrote:
If it had mentioned intervention to support the rebels against the government then Russia would have vetoed.

Russia knew exactly what was going to happen and the political determination to fight Gadaffis troops as well as the resolution was perfectly clear on that.

bent the meaning of the reslution

Nothing was "bent" anywhere. You are trying too hard GarryB

backstabbing nature of the west

Classic communist banter 1 + 1  

Russia does nothing as bad as the west and does not preach to the world about how they should behave unlike the west.

Russia just can't go as full retard as the US because they don't have the same power and influence.

Except when it does within its limited sphere of influence ( or backyard as they like to call it ) their deceitful politics are awfuly clumsy and more obvious to the naked eye than that of the US.

That's literaly the only difference.

That makes Russia better in my book.

lol right ....

Won't judge your standarts, but simply ... no .... that's not how you have a valid argument.

The purpose was to prevent bloodshed and stop the violence to start dialog and a political solution... not bomb the shit out of one side so the disorganised chaotic rebel side prevails.

Yes, bloodshed caused first and foremost by the regime, and not only Gaddafis but also rebel forces were bombed, although their support seemed obvious. NATO even restricted their movements to lessen the continues bloodshed.

The civilians are still fucking suffering even after the west called success, because they could care less about the Libyan civilians, their goal was to kill Gaddafi and they achieved that... pack up and go home.

Just like everyone else who intervenes usualy does. Oh wait, not true ....

Not justifying it btw. When you also cause damage, you also have to contribute to repairing the damage. Seen none of that, from either side in any recent conflict.

WTF has that got to do with Europe and the necessity for NATO?

Israel is a strong NATO ally and which the US has vowed to defend against any threat. Iran is consistant on threatening to destroy it. So put 1 and 1 togheter.

Is the only thing keeping Europe safe is the existence of Israel fighting the good fight against those evil persians... after Israel is destroyed is Europe next or something?

Actualy that's not a very far fetched prospect at all. Arab-Turkish regional dominance in past history speaks for itself.

If they had the chance, they would re-emerge. But they won't because already fight eachother because of different beliefs in their own religion. One source of conflict that the "Western" world got rid off.

What they really need to do is use the internet and get a Russian penfriend and actually talk to a few of these evil aggressors that want to occupy eastern europe again.

Again, you are confusing nations manipulating governments with agendas and politics with the avarage people.

The avarage population can perfectly differentiate between those as is easily observable in every society.

Name me one people who outright hate Russians or vice versa.

They take measures and complain because they are ill informed by people

I am sorry, but that applies to both sides.

Don't expect credit or recognition except when they want something...

And in the end you will be giving rather more than you will ever get in return.

We don't and we are. NATO support from the pop is dvindling continuesly since 2008.

However they are aware that nothing else could possibly protect us against a currently continuesly aggressive Russia.

If Russia wanted to destroy Georgia you handed them the opportunity on a plate in 2008.

Yes, Saakashvili did indeed. But even the drunk hotheads in Kremlin aren't stupid enough to destroy an entire nation especialy when said attacked country didn't justify anything of that proportion and the rest of the world disapproves of it.

What makes you think now that they want to invade you?

Continous military buildup when there is zero NATO buildup.

And more importantly even though the US seems keen what makes you think the rest of NATO wants you to join NATO?

Nothing. I firmly believe we will never joint NATO because NATO fears exactly what we and the US want. Having NATO right next to Russia. The US tried to push us into NATO twice now and each time at least a couple or handful Nations vetoed that notion. Even one single veto is enough to not become a member. That is exactly why your "US is NATO" claim is complete bullshit.

You can't say the western world agrees with you because the western world does not agree on anything.

Thats funny.

Now re read what you wrote in your previous replies and contemplate about it

There is no such thing... though for the price you might think so...

Obviously not, but what we could do would be enough to cause more trouble for an attacker than he is comfortable with. That's more than enough.

Yes, I can see the trial now... you are guilty of murder.... how do you plead... I am guilty of doing the deed your honour, but it was not my fault because the victim of my attack looked at me funny,... I simply had no choice but to attack.... I didn't realise the gun was loaded till after about the 5th round fired and by then I had to finish the job...

Yeah no. Except "looked at me funny" doesn't equate to "instigating wars" and also "5th round shot" would fit more to what happened in 1993 to the Georgian population than anything else. Bad effort.

Still tasteless humor ... also leave matters of law to people who know that shit. Murders ( be it out of self-defence, pure spite or provocation ) and crimes in general have many faccetts and yes, the motives actualy matter and do in fact decide over how much you are guilty or at all. So please, reading such ignorant nonsense as a jurist realy rustles my jimmies.  

Excuse me, "backstabbing" ?

You mean like when Russia backstabbed us, not one ( 1801 ), not two ( 1921 ), not three ( 1992 ) but four times now ?

You got some tasteless humor.

The history is irrelevant..

wow *clap hands*, but proclaiming BS is relevant yes ?

Of course it is unrelevant whenever it doesn't suit you.

Georgia signed a peace treaty

Yeah Russia also signed some treaties making them our allies but instead ended up annexing us. Whoops I guess.

with agreed clauses that I am pretty sure did not allow the Georgian army to go into SO and shell its capital city.

Funny because said clause also didn't allow Russian troops to act as saboteurs and boost their overall military presense way above any agreed "peacekeepers" mandate. Russia's MC presense was overshadowed by additional troops already long before the 2008 war.

Russias behaviour was so obviously cheeky and sassy it did not even protest too much when the Georgian army boosted its presense in both regions in response to that.

So what both sides ended up with, was MC forces boosted by further military presence. But who started ? Russia.

Backstabbing is by definition promising to be friendly to conceal an attack without warning.

Yea, we know that. Experienced that. Many times. Thank you.

You lied and attacked without warning last time, why would they think you will change and give plenty of warning in writing next time?

Without warning ? the Russian MC was warned beforehand. Their puppets in Tskhinvali were warned multiple times over the years to cease provocations or the military response would be harsh.

So what, we should have let them keep shelling and saboutaging us ?

..... and wont do that by providing bases for the US and asking to join NATO, which as I said is a military organisation dedicated to "countering" Russia.

Clearly Russia seeks a peaceful resolution with its recent and current behaviour .... We are the ones pushing fences and continuesly saboutaging the dialogue ....

There are claims they will buy S-400 and Iskander but there are lots of claims about lots of things... mostly from the Jerusalem Post or other impartial media source...  

You mean like the "claims" with Iran yes ?

Stalin approached Poland and the UK for a military alliance against Germany and both rejected the whole idea.

what a shitty ass excuse.

Right. Now you're defending Stalin huh ?  

as I said, whenever it suits you ppl ....

The hostility of the polish forces and people probably made elimination of members of her military seem like a good idea at the time.

Again. Are you sure you ain't the Nazi here ?

Considering the number of people arbitrarily executed by all the power (including the US and UK and Germany and Japan) the fact that the Soviets did it too is no great surprise.

Yeah especialy considering the earlier purges and domestic execution waves not only in Russia, but Georgia and all other Soviet Republics .... go read a book ....

Lots of people opposed Stalins orders... they usually got shot on the spot.

No excuse. That ppl who did were no less evil than the Gestapo, especialy with crimes against Jews as well.

I don't need excuses...

That's all you've been doing this entire time. Trying to find excuses for them.

Nobody was talking about you .... or do you also have some skeletons in the closet ? ^^

I haven't done anything, but it is you condemning the Russians over their past actions and alot of made up shit as well, without looking at who they were doing it to and why.

That's the problem I have with people like you.

You can for what ever mysterious reasons find great admiration and support for Russia and whatever they create and have complete understanding for their POV but utterly shit on everyone else who suffers under them. Its the pinnacle of hypocricy. Go fucking figure ....

Either way, it does not change anything.

It actualy reflects and validates a lot.

That is not how you turn people on your side.

They are as much a threat to a subdued Poland as the nazis are... if you can get them to kill each other all the better.

Thank you. Subdued being the key word here.

Why not simply liberate and simply leave ? same question you asked before

The west had the same policy.... let the Commies and the Nazis fight each other in a land war.. supply the commies with equipment and food and hope they destroy each other.

They supplied the Soviets with equipment and food a) because Stalin requested it and b) hoping that the Wehrmacht gets worn out and slaughtered in Russia so that an allied invasion wouldn't be a catastrophy.

No, at that time it was Germanys country.

You are running not just low but also miserable in the excuses.

An occupied nation, is still an occupied nation. No matter how you twist it, it doesn't belong to an invader just because he establishes a temporary hold. Even if he holds claim on it for several years or decades.

Of course the Soviets wanted Poland to have a government friendly to the SU and not Britain.

That's exactly the problem with expansionist policy. It won't work in the long term. Especialy when you offer little to nothing in return.

When you "liberate", make sure, you actualy "liberate" and don't occupy. It will bite you in the ass eventualy. Just a matter of time.

The first few landings might have failed, but they didn't even try because they didn't want to take casualties...and if you think it was so fucking hard to go across the english channel how the fuck did they get expeditionary forces to north africa or to invade Italy?

Hold on there alright. It wasn't the rest of the allies fault that the Soviet leadership was inititaly so ruthless and uncaring to its own troops.

Secondly, the British especialy and French already had forces in North Africa and those bore the brunt of the Axis ( initialy only Italian ) offensives there. Only later were they reinforced first with US equipment, than actual US troops and logisticaly speaking it was indeed a  nightmare for the Allies.

How the hell did Aussie and Kiwi troops get to europe and africa to fight if moving forces by sea takes years of planning?

Aussie and Kiwi troops always were part of Commonwealth forces no ?

Britain declared war against Germany because Germany invaded Poland... surely if Poland is so fucking important a few million dead soldiers to liberate them should have been their first priority.

Lmao. Now I know who I wouldn't put in charge of my army.

So the fear of excessive casualties in their attacking force led directly to the Soviets spending much longer to defeat the Germans themselves with excessive losses.

.... and you blame them for what exactly ?

The Boers never did us any harm, and nor did the Germans or Japanese or Vietnamese for that matter... yet we travelled thousands of kms to kill them and be killed by them and for what?

So who forced you ?

No.

When you fight back and keep fighting the bully eventually gives up and goes away because no matter how strong the bully country is it can never wipe out an entire country unless it does it poltiically.. ie palestine does not exist because it has been removed from all western maps.

The palestinian people are still there though.

Hahhahahha... and right and wrong have nothing to do with anything in conflict.

The bully in case of Russia doesn't give up at all and the Palestinians don't because realy what are they supposed to do ? swim away, get drowned ?

Really?

I know it doesn't reflect current reality, but that's how it should be.

The places the Soviets could "occupy" were agreed to.

Look. I get where you're coming from, but those are simply no excuses for being the arguably slightly lesser asshole than the arguably slightly bigger one ....

You still don't get that I neither approve US nor Russian aggression. I am only comparing and using them as counter argument to display how unjust any of that is.

If the American military forces had gone home and left civilians to help with the rebuild the Soviets likely would have withdraw most if not all their forces too.

We both perfectly know that wouldn't have been the case and in Stalins interests

Their purpose was to counter US forces and to ensure that Germany never again became a threat.

Why "counter US forces" ?

The only reason to counter US forces is because they stood in the way of further Soviet expansion.

The US didn't want to take part in the war effort to begin with. They deemed the war as "the Europeans business, leave us out of it".

Without the precedence of independence of Kosovo, the Russians would not have considered the solution of independent SO and Abkhazia as being acceptable.

If Russia had not the ambition to maintain a military foothold in Georgia to prevent future aspiration of joining the EU it wouldn't have support any of the sessessions since the beakup. That is clear as water.

Our mere existence is troubling them.

Talk about massive insecurity

1979 the CIA was kicked out of Iran, the reason the Soviets invaded Afghanistan was to stop them setting up shop there.

See the reason why that doesn't hold up as excuse is because the Soviet spy cells were just as equaly all around the world including the United States ( as they are today ) as the US spy cells were all around the world including Russia, though comparably less, ( as they are today )

And the American CIA claim responsiblity for the Soviet invasion, but all those millions dead was because of Afghan opposition stirred up by the west and Pakistan and Saudi Arabia.

Right, because the Soviets didn't directly and physicaly contribute to that in the first place at all ....

So the Russians are only as bad as the Americans.... OK...

That's all I'm saying.

Iranian weapons have been crossing that border for 30 years.... no, probably 300 years.

That just proves the my point with Iran and the US has its own quarrels with the Pakistanis despite their fragile alliance.

The simple fact is that might is right.

Sad fact yes, legit excuse no.

And when your little country attacked the even smaller region of SO you gave up your rights by stirring up an even bigger country.

It simply doesn't add up as an excuse when you attack your own separatist region and in return ( for that very reason ) get attacked by a bigger nation that makes Shashlik out of its own domestic separatists.

That is just bad comedy.

So Russia can simply destroy sessessionists and committ mass murder, but we are to be restrained when trying to prevent sessession. Legit reasoning there buddy ....

When Chechenia started attacking neighbouring regions Moscow had to do something.... remember the Moscow Theatre Siege? Beslan? I don't remember South Ossetian forces doing anything like that in Georgia...

When armed militants started attacking Sukhumi, Tbilisi had to do something .... It did something, the region was secured but the armed insurgents were sheltered by the Russian army, so they couldn't be captured and prosecuted. But at least hostilities ended .... right ?

Remember when there were still just those handfull but in the following months Russia snuck hundreds of instructors over the border, secured hunreds more paid mercenaries and then with thousands of armed combatants and troops with corresponding equipment and Russian airforce and naval support launched a surprise attack on the Georgian military ?

No. South Ossetian forces only committed several attacks on Georgian villages and troops that weren't even part of any of the skirmishes that typicaly took part between checkpoints.

I have a question for you. I remember one of Putins former advisors ranting on TV about Kremlin should destroy Georgia for killing so many Russian troops during those skirmishes up until 2008. None of that was ever mentioned, nor denied in any Russian media outlet or by any official. If Russian troops were killed ( and they were as shown in more known engagements ) why did Russia not attack then or retaliate if they were so innocent ? ....

Why?

Do you think being part of NATO will save you if you try to take SO by force again?

Is that a serious question ?

Alright, I'll play your game. No. Obviously, technicaly speaking, the only guarantee for a successful military operation is complete withdrawal and neutrality of Russia.

Secondly, we don't consider a military option in the first place. Neither now, if we join NATO or in the event Russian troops withdraw. Internal questions like that should never be even attempted to be solved like that.

But I guess its okay if you can simply bomb or rape them into submission so they are terrifyed to even consider seperation for the next 1000 years. Apparently also works   ( Sarcasm )

NATO does squat for Turkey against the Kurds.

NATO also doesn't intervene, nor support them, or did you see them kick Turkey out of the Alliance ( not least because of recent betrayals ) or establish a no fly zone even over the Iraqi part of the Kurdish population .... ?

NATO does not oblige member states to join an attack on a third country... hense Turkey was not obliged to support the operation of Desert Storm despite it being led by NATO member US and including the UK and France etc etc.

It is one of the main reasons they don't like taking countries with territorial disputes...

You are literaly proving my case for NATO here. Thanks

Hahaha... I am a 6th generation New Zealander with my ancestry coming from England, Scotland, and Wales.

If you say so. I already apologized for assuming.

They did.

And they seem happy with the result and are not calling for more votes.

You know exactly what was meant

Sure you ain't the Nazi here ?

The Soviet Union had an ideology to push, which means carrying the weak and pursuading the strong.

Oh man .... are you a devoted communist or something ? because none of that procclaimed bullshit took form in any reality .... or you come from a parallel universe in which the Soviets conquered the Earth with all their love and caring .... ?

Russia has no baggage and can ignore the weak that don't want to be friends... let them join NATO and be safe there... let the west pay for them.

What is that to you then if you are so "not care" with your attitude ? clearly you take sides and very obviously support Russia and spite against the West and its allies.

Israel is surrounded by hostile more populated countries which it has attacked on several occasions to steal land. Why should they be trusted with nuclear weapons either?

Because you'd virtualy expose them to another attempt of genocide. Not just their capable arsenal but also the mere possibility they may be stockpiling some nukes is completly enough of a deterrent to make the Arabs think it a 100 times over.

Plus the nukes they got aren't even missiles, but bombs I assume. So what, the Israelis an irrational threat to the world ? how are they worse than the US, Russia, India, China, England, France etc ?

tell me, how stable is North Korea ? so stable I guess, that even Russia is concerned about their entire nuclear program because of recent events.

how stable is the US.... a few more black people get shot by police and they can have problems...

That is very unlikely ....  

they have a two party system where everyone seems to be sick of both sides....

How more boring and sick can it be than a one party system .... ?

I mean granted if you are a great dictator and people love you ( or at least the vast majority ) than maybe it could turn into something, but with the current systems that are being used .... eh .... not so much.

that is not going to end well... and they are the only country in the world to have actually used nuclear weapons against an enemy... unless you count Putin who regularly uses polonium to kill his enemies....

A fact that realy disgusts me even if they keep insiting on "casaulty reduction" which would seem only plausible for inhuman idk what ....

You make fun of that, but do you know what physical torture that is ?

Or the fact that the majority of the population in crimea are Russian, and its status being Ukrainian is merely bureaucratic nonsense from the cold war.

Sigh ....

You realy like to make everything look cuddly when it comes to Russian behaviour don't you .... ?

The west pushed them into a corner with their coup in Kiev

and they don't even have the balls to admit that, instead come up with bullshit excuses.

Thanks for proving my point.

It sill would have been an illegal intervention, sorry.  

Well first of all I don't see how you can equate Russian forces inside Russian borders with US and other NATO forces in Eastern Europe.... and second of all it does not bother me in the slightest where they practise... having them close to the border puts them in Iskander range.

Easy. It's not just inside Russian borders, but foreign.

Secondly, US is a NATO member and the US don't simply deploy their troops for manouvers into NATO or non-NATO states without their approval and permission .... and let's be perfectly honest here. None of those especialy Eastern European countries that do dissaprove of it. People come out and cheer.

America has created such a strong image, that people applaude them simply when they see them. Wheter you approve of them or not, which I often don't either, you can't denie that fact.

Russia is not the Soviet Union.... it has no political view to sell, so it can be friends with pretty much anyone.... and its communist heritage means it can be friends with communist china or communist north korea, or myanmar or cuba or Saudi arabia or Pakistan.

So why then, does it struggle so much with literaly anyone even its allies ?

The point is that no other country is obliged to be friends back, so while they can be friends with everyone there are plenty of people not interested like Poland or the UK.

You mean politicaly. Because economicaly and culturaly there are not realy issues, until you threaten the EU with border conflicts and it dissaproves of Russias actions.

Russia could bust a gut trying to be best buddies with everyone

please spare me that river of fake tears ....

Russia never busted anything trying to be best buddies with anyone. That is not of recent decades the case but their entire history. Generaly speaking there are only few nations or peoples that realy bust their guts and those are more Central-East European and Caucasian-Eastern nations.

What I am saying is that to be friends with Poland or the US requires Russia to be their bitch...

Not true at all. That means you and them are lacking imagination and actualy powerful and competent leadership, not what they have now. Putin is good at what he can, nothing can take that away from him, but thats about it, especialy when the rest sucks.

That will be great for the US and overnight the rich people who own the media like CNN and Fox news will go from hating Russia to loving everything and anything about them, and soon after all of Russias resources will start to be used up faster than you can pour a drink of coke down a sink.

Not when you are smart.

Russia does not need those sort of friends....

What Russia needs is a neighbourhood which trusts it and in turn can rely on and share innovations, ideas and resources ( not just raw material ).

Russia has not annexed anything.

Joke of the century.

If you insist on joining NATO and letting the US military come and play on your territory there is nothing you can do to please Russia... other than not attack SO and Ab again.

There is only one thing we insist on. Everything else is a consequence due thanks to Russia.

It is about rebuilding trust

The absurd notion is that Russia is in any position to demand that.

I have told you plenty of times and you want to ignore me.

Not ignoring, only pointing out how absurd that notion is. Nothing works just one way. It starts with the hypocrite bully learning to behave and respect others. No matter how small and weak he is.

Noone is just bitter, because its a preferred state of mood. Its because factual reasons. You need to learn to understand that.

What else is there to say?

Idk, work for a peaceful environment, lead with example ? and all that stuff ? Russia established it won't. So we do.

But its hard doing that when all we get in return is Russia is seeing our gesture as a sign of weakness and uses the situation and our reluctance to response like other nations would, to further boost military presence and push the fences. From our POV that is just unbelivably disgusting.