Results 1 to 30 of 812

Thread: Heavy Fighting in South Ossetia

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Part-Time Polemic Senior Member ICantSpellDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    7,237

    Default Re: Heavy Fighting in South Ossetia

    Quote Originally Posted by Evil_Maniac From Mars View Post
    Well, let me rephrase that. They're Ossetians with Russian citizenship.
    Wait wait wait. Around 50% ofthe South Ossetian population hold dual citizenship between Georgia and Russia. That means that around 50% are technically Georgian only. If around 2/3rds of the population are Ossetian and they hold the majority of the dual Russian citizenships - around 1/3rd are simply Georgians with Georgian citizenship.

    There are hardly any ethnically Russian people in Georgia (maybe 1-2%?) and South Ossetians are Russian in honorary citizenship only - and this is a relatively recent occurrence. Do we just ignore the 30% ethnically Georgian population or the 98% Georgian citizens, 50% of which are dual citizens?

    Nonsense.
    Last edited by ICantSpellDawg; 08-11-2008 at 06:17.
    "That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
    -Eric "George Orwell" Blair

    "If the policy of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned the government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."
    (Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, 1861).
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  2. #2
    Formerly: SwedishFish Member KarlXII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    San Diego, California, United States. Malmö/Gothenburg, Sweden. Cities of my ancestors and my favorite places to go!
    Posts
    1,496

    Default Re: Heavy Fighting in South Ossetia

    Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff View Post
    Wait wait wait. Around 50% ofthe South Ossetian population hold dual citizenship between Georgia and Russia. That means that around 50% are technically Georgian only. If around 2/3rds of the population are Ossetian and they hold the majority of the dual Russian citizenships - around 1/3rd are simply Georgians with Georgian citizenship.

    There are hardly any ethnically Russian people in Georgia and South Ossetians are Russian in honorary citizenship only - and this is a relatively recent occurrence. Do we just ignore the 30% ethnically Georgian population or the 98% Georgian citizens, 50% of which are dual citizens?

    Nonsense.
    You forgot the fact that the Russians were handing out the passports and citizenship.....
    HOW ABOUT 'DEM VIKINGS
    -Martok

  3. #3
    Part-Time Polemic Senior Member ICantSpellDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    7,237

    Default Re: Heavy Fighting in South Ossetia

    Quote Originally Posted by SwedishFish View Post
    You forgot the fact that the Russians were handing out the passports and citizenship.....
    Like candy. "Who wants a free passport?!!!"

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 
    Will Russia Get Away With It?
    By WILLIAM KRISTOL
    Link

    In August 1924, the small nation of Georgia, occupied by Soviet Russia since 1921, rose up against Soviet rule. On Sept. 16, 1924, The Times of London reported on an appeal by the president of the Georgian Republic to the League of Nations. While “sympathetic reference to his country’s efforts was made” in the Assembly, the Times said, “it is realized that the League is incapable of rendering material aid, and that the moral influence which may be a powerful force with civilized countries is unlikely to make any impression upon Soviet Russia.”

    “Unlikely” was an understatement. Georgians did not enjoy freedom again until 1991.

    Today, the Vladimir Putins and Hu Jintaos and Mahmoud Ahmadinejads of the world — to say nothing of their junior counterparts in places like Sudan, Zimbabwe, Burma and North Korea — are no more likely than were Soviet leaders in 1924 to be swayed by “moral influence.” Dictators aren’t moved by the claims of justice unarmed; aggressors aren’t intimidated by diplomacy absent the credible threat of force; fanatics aren’t deterred by the disapproval of men of moderation or refinement.

    The good news is that today we don’t face threats of the magnitude of Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union. Each of those regimes combined ruthless internal control, a willingness to engage in external aggression, and fervent adherence to an extreme ideology. Today these elements don’t coexist in one place. Russia is aggressive, China despotic and Iran messianic — but none is as dangerous as the 20th-century totalitarian states.

    The further good news is that 2008 has been, in one respect, an auspicious year for freedom and democracy. In Iraq, we and our Iraqi allies are on the verge of a strategic victory over the jihadists in what they have called the central front of their struggle. This joint victory has the potential to weaken the jihadist impulse throughout the Middle East.

    On the other hand, the ability of Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas to get away with murder (literally), and above all the ability of Iran to pursue its nuclear ambitions effectively unchecked, are setbacks for hopes of peace and progress.

    And there is no evidence that China’s hosting of the Olympics has led to moderation of its authoritarianism. Meanwhile, Russia has sent troops and tanks across an international border, and now seems to be widening its war against Georgia more than its original — and in any case illegitimate — casus belli would justify.

    Will the United States put real pressure on Russia to stop? In a news analysis on Sunday, the New York Times reporter Helene Cooper accurately captured what I gather is the prevailing view in our State Department: “While America considers Georgia its strongest ally in the bloc of former Soviet countries, Washington needs Russia too much on big issues like Iran to risk it all to defend Georgia.”

    But Georgia, a nation of about 4.6 million, has had the third-largest military presence — about 2,000 troops — fighting along with U.S. soldiers and marines in Iraq. For this reason alone, we owe Georgia a serious effort to defend its sovereignty. Surely we cannot simply stand by as an autocratic aggressor gobbles up part of — and perhaps destabilizes all of — a friendly democratic nation that we were sponsoring for NATO membership a few months ago.

    For that matter, consider the implications of our turning away from Georgia for other aspiring pro-Western governments in the neighborhood, like Ukraine’s. Shouldn’t we therefore now insist that normal relations with Russia are impossible as long as the aggression continues, strongly reiterate our commitment to the territorial integrity of Georgia and Ukraine, and offer emergency military aid to Georgia?

    Incidentally, has Russia really been helping much on Iran? It has gone along with — while delaying — three United Nations Security Council resolutions that have imposed mild sanctions on Iran. But it has also supplied material for Iran’s nuclear program, and is now selling Iran antiaircraft systems to protect military and nuclear installations.

    It’s striking that dictatorial and aggressive and fanatical regimes — whatever their differences — seem happy to work together to weaken the influence of the United States and its democratic allies. So Russia helps Iran. Iran and North Korea help Syria. Russia and China block Security Council sanctions against Zimbabwe. China props up the regimes in Burma and North Korea.

    The United States, of course, is not without resources and allies to deal with these problems and threats. But at times we seem oddly timid and uncertain.

    When the “civilized world” expostulated with Russia about Georgia in 1924, the Soviet regime was still weak. In Germany, Hitler was in jail. Only 16 years later, Britain stood virtually alone against a Nazi-Soviet axis. Is it not true today, as it was in the 1920s and ’30s, that delay and irresolution on the part of the democracies simply invite future threats and graver dangers?


    And for all you Russia-lovers a different angle. Although I recognize the validity of this argument, I prefer the logic of the previous one. Both are accurate and two sides of the same coin - but life is about picking which side of the fence you are on. Georgia's argument is more sound and Russia has become more terrible by the month for the past 5 years.

    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

    Russo-Georgian conflict is not all Russia's fault
    But war could ignite further disputes in the region.
    By Charles King Link


    Washington - Following a series of provocative attacks in its secessionist region of South Ossetia late last week, Georgia launched an all-out attempt to reestablish control in the tiny enclave. Russia then intervened by dropping bombs on Georgia to protect the South Ossetians, halt the growing tide of refugees flooding into southern Russia, and aid its own peacekeepers there.

    Now, the story goes, Russia has at last found a way of undermining Georgia's Western aspirations, nipping the country's budding democracy, and countering American influence across Eurasia. But this view of events is simplistic.

    American and European diplomats, who have rushed to the region to try to stop the conflict, would do well to consider the broader effects of this latest round of Caucasus bloodletting – and to seek perspectives on the conflict beyond the story of embattled democracy and cynical comparisons with the Prague Spring of 1968.

    Russia illegally attacked Georgia and imperiled a small and feeble neighbor. But by dispatching his own ill-prepared military to resolve a secessionist dispute by force, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili has managed to lead his country down the path of a disastrous and ultimately self-defeating war.

    Speaking on CNN, Mr. Saakashvili compared Russia's intervention in Georgia to the Soviet invasions of Hungary in 1956, Czechoslovakia in 1968, and Afghanistan in 1979. Russia has massively overreacted to the situation in Georgia. It has hit targets across Georgia, well beyond South Ossetia, and has killed both Georgian military personnel as well as civilians. The international community is right to condemn this illegal attack on an independent country and United Nations member.

    But this is not a repeat of the Soviet Union's aggressive behavior of the last century. So far at least, Russia's aims have been clear: to oust Georgian forces from the territory of South Ossetia, one of two secessionist enclaves in Georgia, and to chasten a Saakashvili government that Russia perceives as hot-headed and unpredictable.

    Regardless of the conflict's origins, the West must continue to act diplomatically to push Georgia and Russia back to the pre-attacks status quo. The United States should make it clear that Saakashvili has seriously miscalculated the meaning of his partnership with Washington, and that Georgia and Russia must step back before they do irreparable damage to their relations with the US, NATO, and the European Union.

    The attack on South Ossetia, along with Russia's inexcusable reaction, have pushed both sides down the road toward all-out war – a war that could ignite a host of other territorial and ethnic disputes in the Caucasus as a whole.

    The emerging narrative, echoing across editorial pages and on television news programs in the US, portrays Georgia as an embattled, pro-Western country struggling to secure its borders against a belligerent Russia. Since coming to power in a bloodless revolution in late 2003, Saakashvili has certainly steered a clear course toward the West.

    The EU flag now flies alongside the Georgian one on major government buildings (even though Georgia is a long way from ever becoming a member of the EU). The Saakashvili government seeks Georgian membership in NATO, an aspiration strongly supported by the administration of George W. Bush. Oddly, before the conflict erupted on its own soil Georgia was the third-largest troop contributor in Iraq, a result of Saakashvili's desire to show absolute commitment to the US and, in the process, gain needed military training and equipment for the small Georgian Army.

    Russia must be condemned for its unsanctioned intervention. But the war began as an ill-considered move by Georgia to retake South Ossetia by force. Saakashvili's larger goal was to lead his country into war as a form of calculated self-sacrifice, hoping that Russia's predictable overreaction would convince the West of exactly the narrative that many commentators have now taken up.

    But regardless of its origins, the upsurge in violence has illustrated the volatile and sometimes deadly politics of the Caucasus, the Texas-size swath of mountains, hills, and plains separating the Black Sea from the Caspian.

    Like the Balkans in the 1990s, the central problems of this region are about the dark politics of ethnic revival and territorial struggle. The region is home to scores of brewing border disputes and dreams of nationalist homelands.

    In addition to South Ossetia, the region of Abkhazia has also maintained de facto independence for more than a decade. Located along Georgia's Black Sea coast, Abkhazia has called up volunteers to support the South Ossetian cause. Russia has now moved to aid the Abkhazians, who are concerned that Georgia's actions in South Ossetia were a dress rehearsal for an attack on them.

    Farther afield, other secessionist entities and recognized governments in neighboring countries – from Nagorno-Karabakh to Chechnya – are eyeing the situation. The outcome of the Russo-Georgian struggle will determine whether these other disputes move toward peace or once again produce the barbaric warfare and streams of refugees that defined the Caucasus more than a decade ago.

    For Georgia, this war has been a disastrous miscalculation. South Ossetia and Abkhazia are now completely lost. It is almost impossible to imagine a scenario under which these places – home to perhaps 200,000 people – would ever consent to coming back into a Georgian state they perceive as an aggressor.

    Armed volunteers have already been flooding into South Ossetia from other parts of the Caucasus to fight against Georgian forces and help finally "liberate" the Ossetians from the Georgian yoke.

    Despite welcome efforts to end the fighting, the Russo-Georgian war has created yet another generation of young men in the Caucasus whose worldviews are defined by violence, revenge, and nationalist zeal.

    Charles King is professor of international affairs in the Edmund A. Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University. He is the author of "The Ghost of Freedom: A History of The Caucasus."
    Last edited by ICantSpellDawg; 08-11-2008 at 06:48.
    "That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
    -Eric "George Orwell" Blair

    "If the policy of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned the government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."
    (Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, 1861).
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  4. #4
    Member Member Oleander Ardens's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    1,007

    Default Re: Heavy Fighting in South Ossetia

    IMHO a big red line is crossed when Russia starts to invade undisputed Georgian territory. If the do so Putins intention will be selfexplaining. Then the EU and USA should make it clear that a soviet-styled invasion of a democratic country is not an option.
    "Silent enim leges inter arma - For among arms, the laws fall mute"
    Cicero, Pro Milone

  5. #5
    Part-Time Polemic Senior Member ICantSpellDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    7,237

    Default Re: Heavy Fighting in South Ossetia

    It looks like the combat will be ending later today. Ban Ki-Moon and the office of the Secretary of the U.N. has reportedly taken the side of Georgia in communications with various delegations and Russia will be creating a "safe-travel" zone, whatever that means.

    This will be a perfect excuse to bring NATO into Georgia. Hehe. The sooner South Ossetia and Abkhazia get figured out the sooner Georgia and Ukraine can join NATO. Once that happens this type of crap won't happen until China inevitably starts pushing its borders into Eurasia over the next 40 years.
    Last edited by ICantSpellDawg; 08-11-2008 at 07:27.
    "That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
    -Eric "George Orwell" Blair

    "If the policy of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned the government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."
    (Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, 1861).
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

  6. #6
    Formerly: SwedishFish Member KarlXII's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    San Diego, California, United States. Malmö/Gothenburg, Sweden. Cities of my ancestors and my favorite places to go!
    Posts
    1,496

    Default Re: Heavy Fighting in South Ossetia

    Quote Originally Posted by TuffStuffMcGruff View Post
    It looks like the combat will be ending later today. Ban Ki-Moon and the office of the Secretary of the U.N. has reportedly taken the side of Georgia in communications with various delegations and Russia will be creating a "safe-travel" zone, whatever that means.

    This will be a perfect excuse to bring NATO into Georgia. Hehe.
    Means Russia will take it in to their hands to carve a zone out of Georgia's land......
    HOW ABOUT 'DEM VIKINGS
    -Martok

  7. #7
    Part-Time Polemic Senior Member ICantSpellDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    U.S.
    Posts
    7,237

    Default Re: Heavy Fighting in South Ossetia

    Quote Originally Posted by SwedishFish View Post
    Means Russia will take it in to their hands to carve a zone out of Georgia's land......
    That's what i've been saying, but we'll see what happens.
    "That rifle hanging on the wall of the working-class flat or labourer's cottage is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there."
    -Eric "George Orwell" Blair

    "If the policy of the government, upon vital questions affecting the whole people, is to be irrevocably fixed by decisions of the Supreme Court...the people will have ceased to be their own rulers, having to that extent practically resigned the government into the hands of that eminent tribunal."
    (Lincoln's First Inaugural Address, 1861).
    ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO