Fox: U.S. Troops in harm's way in Georgia...

[Shakespear]

Re: Fox: U.S. Troops in harm's way in Georgia...

Do you remember the Reagan mini invasion of Grenada to "rescue" some medical students October 1983. There are other examples, but it goes to show that if the big boys want to do something an excuse will be found.

More good examples can be found here

Why we won't see an American-led invasion of Haiti

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/m...43/ai_11832058

Great photos Metalman !!!! :-)

[marvenger]

Re: Fox: U.S. Troops in harm's way in Georgia...

because the US has a big army they like to use and Europe doesn't. Russia is no superpower but by watching Putin's demeanor for about 3 seconds I'd say they've got goals and they probably see this as a good opportunity to see what political power they can wield and build a base to further increase it. If the west intervenes they can turn off the gas and force real war which no one wants, russia's bluff might work better than georgia's, ot depends how much the west needs secure gas supplies which is a pretty high need. My feel is that this Georgian situation has a fair bit of smoke about it.

[phirang]

Re: Fox: U.S. Troops in harm's way in Georgia...

Well, you can be sure as shit that the Euros will insist on making their renewable power quota now...

[c1ue]

Re: Fox: U.S. Troops in harm's way in Georgia...

I think it is funny how perceptions of Russia's power have been fluctuating wildly.

Sure, Russia had its hyperinflationary period.

But all this time they still have thousands of nuclear missiles, have a huge fleet of land based modern fighter and bomber aircraft, have a huge fleet of pre-eminent submarines, and lots of tanks and what not.

Even beyond that - Russia has economically tied up Europe, has aligned economic interests with China, and has kept up relations with Iran.

I can see how an idiot would try to start a war with Russia, but even our pathetic State Department and US executive branch leaders cannot fail to see how a shooting war with Russia is vastly different than one with the Taliban-Afghanistan or Hussein-Iraq.

I also fail to see how the US would encourage Georgia to provoke Russia; again I can understand how an increasingly unpopular Saakashvili might want to engender a rescue reflex but I don't see how anyone else would believe it in any way possible.

I still cleave to the belief that what we're seeing is payback for Kosovo made possible by the machinations of an idiot.

[phirang]

Re: Fox: U.S. Troops in harm's way in Georgia...

I think it is funny how perceptions of Russia's power have been fluctuating wildly.

Sure, Russia had its hyperinflationary period.

But all this time they still have thousands of nuclear missiles, have a huge fleet of land based modern fighter and bomber aircraft, have a huge fleet of pre-eminent submarines, and lots of tanks and what not.

Even beyond that - Russia has economically tied up Europe, has aligned economic interests with China, and has kept up relations with Iran.

I can see how an idiot would try to start a war with Russia, but even our pathetic State Department and US executive branch leaders cannot fail to see how a shooting war with Russia is vastly different than one with the Taliban-Afghanistan or Hussein-Iraq.

I also fail to see how the US would encourage Georgia to provoke Russia; again I can understand how an increasingly unpopular Saakashvili might want to engender a rescue reflex but I don't see how anyone else would believe it in any way possible.

I still cleave to the belief that what we're seeing is payback for Kosovo made possible by the machinations of an idiot.

Kosovo gave Russia the political capital to intervene in Georgia...

[Rajiv]

Gorbachev Op-Ed

A Path to Peace in the Caucasus
By Mikhail Gorbachev

MOSCOW -- The past week's events in South Ossetia are bound to shock and pain anyone. Already, thousands of people have died, tens of thousands have been turned into refugees, and towns and villages lie in ruins. Nothing can justify this loss of life and destruction. It is a warning to all.

The roots of this tragedy lie in the decision of Georgia's separatist leaders in 1991 to abolish South Ossetian autonomy. This turned out to be a time bomb for Georgia's territorial integrity. Each time successive Georgian leaders tried to impose their will by force -- both in South Ossetia and in Abkhazia, where the issues of autonomy are similar -- it only made the situation worse. New wounds aggravated old injuries.

Nevertheless, it was still possible to find a political solution. For some time, relative calm was maintained in South Ossetia. The peacekeeping force composed of Russians, Georgians and Ossetians fulfilled its mission, and ordinary Ossetians and Georgians, who live close to each other, found at least some common ground.

Through all these years, Russia has continued to recognize Georgia's territorial integrity. Clearly, the only way to solve the South Ossetian problem on that basis is through peaceful means. Indeed, in a civilized world, there is no other way.

The Georgian leadership flouted this key principle.

What happened on the night of Aug. 7 is beyond comprehension.
.
.
.
(continued)

[Chris Coles]

Re: Fox: U.S. Troops in harm's way in Georgia...

Right at the outbreak of this, but not since, here in the UK we were told that one of the groups behind the build up and encouragement of the Georgian armed forces was Israel. I am left wondering if this has a parallel with the Suez Crisis where again, Israel encouraged the UK to invade Egypt and again for pretty well exactly the same reasons, (not thought through and juvenile strategy), the whole thing fails miserably.

To my way of thinking, it is the United States that has been shown to have totally miscalculated and that fact raises very serious issues for all of us, no matter which nation we are from.

Let us look at this in another way? You have a friendly nation who is having trouble with a belligerent neighbour. You have a very expensive organisation, (indeed, access to more than one very expensive organisation), that have detailed strategic assessments of that neighbour. You reckon you know everything there is to know about them. So you have complete knowledge of their forces, where they are stationed, what their mandates are. Indeed, if you have done your job properly, you even have a few friends inside. No, not spies, but individuals with whom you make contact from time to time and can, through ordinary conversations, for example at conferences, get to know the overall thinking.

You have set out to strategically improve your defence by adding several new radar bases and some missiles in other, surrounding, nations.

This little nation has asked to join the rest of your organisation, NATO, and you have not only given your approval, you have also set up the supply of a large increase in the small nation’s military capability. So you have your own people on the ground, right there, reporting back.

Again, you must always have your own, internal groups, (mostly within these expensive organisations), that will be constantly questioning your overall strategy, usually by way of what are called games, where you "try out" various different strategy's. What ifs if you like.

You therefore must also know that there are steps being taken by the neighbour. Some have been very plain to see. The leader of the neighbour comes on TV with his most senior officer in their Army and tells everyone they are unhappy about the radar and missile sites and tells everyone they will respond "militarily".

While all this is going on the neighbour issues new passports to everyone in the troublesome enclave, (causing the problems for the small friendly nation), and the neighbours Parliament creates a new LAW stating they have the right to defend the rights of all their citizens, regardless that they might not be inside the nation. Did anyone give any thought as to why they might do that?

Then the enclave starts to create more trouble.

If you look at the map, you will see that the small area where the trouble starts is some miles from the real border with the neighbour. Moreover, to get to the small friendly nation, the neighbour has to either cross impassable mountains, or drive through one small tunnel. A tunnel that gains most of its income from taxing the movement of the neighbours traffic through the tunnel.

So you have a small friendly nation, who you have been helping that has a mountainous border that creates a natural barrier for the neighbour that prevents it from making any sudden moves across that border. And the trouble starts some miles inside the small friendly nation. What do you do?

If you know the neighbour, you will have been able to brief the small friendly nation in detail of the likelihood of various strategies. But, whatever, you let the small friendly nation get the idea they can start to return fire with the troubled enclave. Why else would you sell them all those new arms and train the special forces?

I believe what happened is that the US and their "friends" lost control. They did not have anyone with sufficient "clout" intellectually, in place to argue against the idea of returning the fire, and when the SHTF, they dropped out of sight. (Nothing to do with me Gov, a load of nutters! We gave them the arms, but did not expect them to use them, did we?).

They had not strategically briefed the small nation and had not given any thought to the need to close the tunnel; that their strategic thinkers had completely failed to foresee the eventual situation that developed.

The result is that now the United States, indeed Europe and Eurasia too, has Russia with what will become fully armed military bases that will be supplied through the tunnel and on this side of the impassable mountain range. The neighbour also gets a deep water port and we can all be quite certain that the small friendly nation will very shortly be faced with a small coup and the installation of their own, "neighbour friendly", government.

I place the blame firmly at the feet of those expensive organisations, the strategic thinkers within the United States and Israel. They have got so convinced that their long term strategy of using arms to destabilise various small nations always seems to produce results that they must have thought that a small enclave within such a small nation would be a pushover.

They were wrong, very badly wrong.

It seems today they have never ever questioned their long term strategy where small groups must be put in their place with force of arms, regardless of if they are a part of an old Communist block, or a supposedly free nation.

Force of arms is a dead end, has no validity and anyone. ANYONE, purporting to use force as a strategy will now be seen as out of touch with reality. And yes, that includes Russia.

Again, it is well past time that someone told Israel to go take a hike and get its own act in order. Their strategy has not worked. The idea that they could "train" the Georgian army to create "special forces" to then take on Russian citizens holding Russian passports is some sort of a mad joke.

Whoever thought of that as a strategy was just plain stupid. PERIOD!

What did they have in mind? Some sort of guerrilla war with Russia?

Madness! Complete and utter madness!

Far from succeeding, their strategy has left them with egg on their faces and looking like they started the whole thing. They have been well and truly trapped; outfoxed by a very visible, well thought out strategy into grave errors of judgement.

What is needed is a complete change of direction by the United States; not just politically, but militarily as well.

I ask; what if they had instead done everything they could to improve the lives of the troublesome enclave? Given them the freedom they so desired and made them feel like they had a place at the table of trade and friendship?

Russia would have had nowhere to go if Georgia had, instead of firing on the belligerent enclave, sat just out of range and asked the cameras to come in and record what was going on.

The United States must take this setback as a clear signal for the need to at long last put to one side the idea they can do as they will, militarily, with any nation, or any group of individuals within any nation. They must also recognise the complete failure of their "expensive organisations" who, when faced with a few hundred belligerents in an enclave, have come away with what? - I will let history answer that question.

As for Russia, they will have to learn that they are just as at fault as anyone. I say to them; stand up and say it like it is, yes. But always the answer must be found by dialogue and compromise. You have made your point, now you have to a lot of hard work to do to regain our respect for you as a peaceful nation.

We, here in the West have, through this stupidity, perhaps lost the high moral ground for some years. I will not be surprised if decades pass before the dust completely settles again. But the sooner the United States learns the real lessons, the sooner we can all get back to a peaceful coexistence.

There is absolutely no other way forward. For whoever wins the November election; the time for change has arrived with a vengeance.

Chris Coles.

For your further information http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Ossetia