georgia Vs. Russia?

Post Reply New Topic

does anyone have some objective opinion as to what happened, what is currently happening and what will happen with U.S "humanitarian" intervention in Georgia.
The western media potrays Georgia to be a victim however i have heard that they were the original aggressor and came off second best?

See http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney08142008.html for a somewhat different viewpoint from that in the USA press.

ok thanks i have just realised that there is already a topic/discussion on this allready in this forum.
it is improtant to get anothers view(s).
i think it is a feature of AS.
Most As are fact orientated and literal preffering to know what is right.
Most other non-AS people tend to want to believe who is right.

What is right?

What is right is that we are STILL witnessing the fallout from World War I. (Not a typo, I wrote "I" and not "II" intentionally). The way the great Continental Western Empires (Prussian, Habsburg, Ottoman and Russian) collapsed, and all at once, was and still is disastrous for world peace. If they could have peacefully devolved, our current world would have been a much better place.

It is interesting to note that all but one of these empires were "pretenders to Rome". The Ottomans had the claim of "right of conquest" of the Eastern Roman Empire's last bastion. The Habsburgs were the final dynasty of the "Holy Roman Empire". The Russians had dynastic claims due to marriages between the Eastern Roman Empire's royal and noble families and Russian families--and they laid a claim to being the heirs of the cultural/religious heritage. Germany was an upstart state.

Bismarck had been smart enough to see that German (Prussian) interests really should not be aligned with the three Old Empires, but once he was replaced, Germany essentially became a useful fool for Habsburg ambitions.

If you look at any relief map of Georgia, you will see that South Ossetia is a dagger at the heart of Georgia, jutting into the transit link between the Black Sea and Tbilisi. Then you see how mountainous the South Ossetia-Russia border is (that range, btw, is the Caucasus), and how that mountain range extends into Abkhazia (which is just as bad, as those mountains are also what protects the Georgian coastline from an even worse Russian blockade).

Also, I see no crying of the 200,000 Georgians who were ethnically cleansed 15 years ago in Abkhazia and those now being ethnically cleansed in South Ossetia.

Or, for that matter, the Russian incursion into undisputed Georgia after the ceasefire. Remember, Gori is over the South Ossetia border and an important transit link between Tbilisi, the Black Sea, and South Ossetia.

Didn't Georgia start this war!

aspie chav i have heard from more than 1 source that they did.
but the western media is portraying it as a russian agressive move.

Georgia may have started it, but I don't recall them ever crossing into Russia. Unless, of course, you call South Ossetia part of Russia, which everyone except Russia thinks is utter BS.

BTW, when are we going to expect a full-frontal assault from some Muslim country against Russia for Chechnya? Yeah, didn't think so. Russia only supports separatists when it suits their needs. Next time Chechen rebels blow up something Russian, I'll just point to Georgia and say, "You asked for it, Russkie b*****s!"

BTW, I'm half-Russian, but in no way do I consider that part of my heritage, but rather where my ancestors happened to live (for that matter, 1/4 of my Russian heritage is really Lithuanian/Latvian (well, technically Litvak)).

I hope the russians dont attack florida next.

When Kosovo,populated by ethnic Albanians,declared independence from Serbia the West supported it.
When South Ossetia,populated by ethnic Russians,declared independence from Georgia the West were against it.
When the US and Britain enter Iraq it's to 'liberate' the people.
When Russia enters Georgia it's 'aggression'.

I'm not saying Russia is a paragon of virtue,far from it,but there's a degree of double
standards in the West.

From Mike Whitney at the Counterpunch site:

The American-armed and trained Georgian army swarmed into South Ossetia last Thursday, killing an estimated 2,000 civilians, sending 40,000 South Ossetians fleeing over the Russian border, and destroying much of the capital, Tskhinvali. The attack was unprovoked and took place a full 24 hours before even ONE Russian soldier set foot in South Ossetia. Nevertheless, the vast majority of Americans still believe that the Russian army invaded Georgian territory first. The BBC, AP, NPR, the New York Times and the rest of the establishment media have consistently and deliberately misled their readers into believing that the violence in South Ossetia was initiated by the Kremlin. Let's be clear, it wasn't. In truth, there is NO dispute about the facts except among the people who rely the western press for their information. Despite its steady loss of credibility, the corporate media continues to operate as the propaganda-arm of the Pentagon.

south ossetia is populated by russian passport holders and the signs are all in russian. as distinct to the rest of georgia who are georgian passport holders and have signs in georgian. it is geographically in Geargia, but the people there consider themselves russian, a similar situation exists in northern ireland.
there are alos russian loyal paramilitaries who exist in south ossetia to provide a psedo protection to the russian inhabitants. when thwe georgian military entered and killed around 2000 russians, the russians (?understandably) reacted with russian diplomacy.
but i am amazed at the as one poster explained "western double standard" and georgia has definetly won the media war and portrayed itself as a victim rather than an aggressor.

No. Rebels in the South Ossetia province started the war. This has merely been a resumption of hostilities.

Really? So the Ossetians HAVE ABANDONED THEIR OWN LANGUAGE, according to you.



Typical blind Russian propaganda. The Ossetians consider themselves to be OSSETIAN, which is an Iranian ethnic/linguistic group.

I oppose all of the above. So where is the "double standard" when it comes to me?

apologies for any confusion, in Ossetia the signs are in russian as well as other languages. the russian isnt seen in other parts of georgia , as a subscript to the main language it is the diminuitive in Ossetia but not in other parts of Georgia. so there is signs in russian in Ossetia. i should have been clearer.

As for the ethnicity of Ossetians, i presume since there is no Ossetia, even thou they may like one, they have a choice between claiming Russian or Georgian heritage and not Ossetian.

we dont thear about the russian georgian and Ossetian conflict.
It isnt propoganda, and it is an emotive topic but i wanted to discuss what is right. the facts as i can gather them. im not interested in opinion, which, goes of the relevant topic in an attempt to establish who is right.

from what i have heard, and currently believe the Georgians started this conflict by harrassing and killing russians in south Ossetia ( you call them Ossetians) and the russians responded with russian diplomacy.
however the georgians have convinced most western observers that russia was the aggressor.
remember im interested in what happened, not who is right.