Russia/Georgia Situation News & Updates

reply to post by -Rugged Shark-


Good find, too bad we don't have images from the other days.

As the images are from August 19th we don't know when the damage was made to what areas, it would be interesting because the more heavily damaged town is Tamarasheni, one town with a majority of ethnic Georgians, and it was probably destroyed after the initial attack, but we do not have any way of knowing it from this photo.

reply to post by -Rugged Shark-


Yes, Sky News has just carried that report. The Russians are going to control and patrol the port of Poti.

GORI, Georgia (AP) -- A top Russian general on Saturday said his country's forces will continue to patrol a main Georgian Black Sea port city even though it lies outside the 'security zones" where Russia claims it has the right to station soldiers on Georgian territory.

(AP)

Originally posted by -Rugged Shark-
Huh? What are you on about? Not all of the damage is caused by Georgia. Russian tanks did a fair ammount of damage aswell. Some people seem to forget that there was a battle going on in that city between the Georgian army and the Russian army.

Russian tanks destroyed the Ossetian town north of Tshkinvalli...? Okay..

To say that Georgia wanted to wipe out SO... where's your proof?

You just told me you think the Russians destroyed the town north of Tshkinvalli fighting the Georgian army. WTF was the Georgian Army doing there if they weren't killing the Ossetians? Setting up a circus tent and pony rides?

I can say the same about Russia, they deported Georgian families from SO and torched their homes.

They relocated the Georgians for their own safety. I doubt anyone seriously believes the Russian troops would burn their homes - but that's something I'm sure the Ossetians would do and it's a damn good thing the Russians moved them out before that happened, don't you think?

I think it isn't wise to choose any side of the conflict at the moment. Only a truely independent investigation can turnout who started this whole mess. But right now we have 2 sides argueing and turning over little to no proof.

But you seem to have made up your mind that the Russians are the agressors in this situation. There's plenty of proof that Georgia started this, right down to statements from the Georgian government that they went in to S. Ossetia to take control, statements from the US Government that they warned them not to do it, the South Ossetians fleeing across the border to safety and the subsequent response from Russia.

All of your posts are harping on about how Russia is violating Georgia's territorial integrity and breaking the peace accord and have some plot to overthrow Georgia and take control of the free world, when in reality they stopped their assault as soon as they drove the Georgians back a few miles into their own country and have done nothing but dismantle Georgia's threat to S. Ossetia and Abhkazia and set up a defensive perimeter around those regions. If they wanted to do any more than that, they would have utterly destroyed Georgia at least 10 days ago.

You should take your own advice and not choose a side in the conflict, so that people like me wouldn't have to respond to your obvious bias.

A little look at the long-term global 'PNAC'-Neoconservative strategy (in light of recent developments):


Rebuilding Americas Defenses
(PNAC)

Fundamental Propositions:

• We need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;
• We need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;
• We need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad; [and]
• We need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces, and Resources For a New Century

The American peace has proven itself peaceful, stable, and durable. It has, over the past decade, provided the geopolitical framework for widespread economic growth and the spread of American principles of liberty and democracy. Yet no moment in international politics can be frozen in time; even a global Pax Americana will not preserve itself.

(Pax Americana)

Statement of Principles:

[What we require is] a military that is strong and ready to meet both present and future challenges; a foreign policy that boldly and purposefully promotes American principles abroad; and national leadership that accepts the United States’ global responsibilities. Of course, the United States must be prudent in how it exercises its power. But we cannot safely avoid the responsibilities of global leadership of the costs that are associated with its exercise. America has a vital role in maintaining peace and security in Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. If we shirk our responsibilities, we invite challenges to our fundamental interests. The history of the 20th century should have taught us that it is important to shape circumstances before crises emerge, and to meet threats before they become dire. The history of the past century should have taught us to embrace the cause of American leadership.

Four Core Missions for the U.S. Military:

• Defend the American homeland;
• Fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars;
• Perform the “constabulary” duties associated with shaping the security environment in critical regions;
• Transform U.S. forces to exploit the “revolution in military affairs.”

(Revolution in Military Affairs)

Ways of achieving this:

• Maintain nuclear strategic superiority, basing the U.S. deterrent upon a global, nuclear net assessment that weighs the full range of current and emerging threats, not merely the U.S.-Russia balance;
• Restore the personnel strength of today’s force to roughly the levels anticipated in the “Base Force” outlined by the Bush Administration, an increase in active-duty strength from 1.4 million to 1.6 million;
• Reposition U.S. forces to respond to 21st century strategic realities by shifting permanently-based forces to Southeast Europe and Southeast Asia, and by changing naval deployment patterns to reflect growing U.S. strategic concerns in East Asia.

Specific Goals:

• Modernize current U.S. forces selectively, proceeding with the F-22 program while increasing purchases of lift, electronic support and other aircraft; expanding submarine and surface combatant fleets; purchasing Comanche helicopters and medium-weight ground vehicles for the Army, and the V-22 Osprey “tilt-rotor” aircraft for the Marine Corps;
• Develop and deploy global missile defenses to defend the American homeland and American allies, and to provide a secure basis for U.S. power projection around the world;
• Control the new 'international commons' of space and 'cyberspace,' and pave the way for the creation of a new military service – U.S. Space Forces – with the mission of space control;
• Exploit the 'Revolution in Military Affairs' to insure the long-term superiority of U.S. conventional forces. Establish a two-stage transformation process which:
- maximizes the value of current weapons systems through the application of advanced technologies, and:
- produces more profound improvements in military capabilities, encourages competition between single services and joint-service experimentation efforts;
• Increase defense spending gradually to a minimum level of 3.5 to 3.8 percent of gross domestic product, adding $15 billion to $20 billion to total defense spending annually.

Rebuilding America's Defenses emphasizes:

Fulfilling these requirements is essential if America is to retain its militarily dominant status for the coming decades. Conversely, the failure to meet any of these needs must result in some form of strategic retreat. At current levels of defense spending, the only option is to try ineffectually to “manage” increasingly large risks: paying for today’s needs by shortchanging tomorrow’s; withdrawing from constabulary missions to retain strength for large-scale wars; “choosing” between presence in Europe or presence in Asia; and so on. These are bad choices. They are also false economies. The “savings” from withdrawing from the Balkans, for example, will not free up anywhere near the magnitude of funds needed for military modernization or transformation. But these are false economies in other, more profound ways as well. The true cost of not meeting our defense requirements will be a lessened capacity for American global leadership and, ultimately, the loss of a global security order that is uniquely friendly to American principles and prosperity.

(PNAC: Rebuilding America's Defenses)

And, finally, the infamous passage:

Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor

(Source: Project for the New American Century)

reply to post by chips


Great cover of the subject for those who didn't red it. If after that another moran brings up that PNAC is fake, please ban him from this website. Seriously.

reply to post by Vitchilo


Hey, no problem.

PNAC fake?

BBC Panorama: Project for the New American Century

reply to post by mythatsabigprobe


No, I think you misunderstood me. I never said that the Russian tanks destroid that city. Please don't put words in my mouth that I have never used.

I said a battle was fought in that town, adding to the damage. Never did I ever state that Russian tanks caused it.

I haven't taken any side of the conflict and have stated that several times, also explaining why. I also posted articles from Russian newssites. So believe what you want to believe when you say I post only from 1 side.

But for arguments sake, let's just shake hands and agree to disagree and not further derail the thread.

Arms dump explosions rock South Ossetian capital

A series of strong explosions have shaken the area around the Emergencies Ministry in the South Ossetian capital, Tskhinvali. According to reports, the blasts happened at an ammunitions dump storing military equipment confiscated from the Georgians. It comes less than a day after Russian troops pulled out of Georgia.

RussiaToday

Spy Case

A Russian army officer accused of spying for Georgia has been arrested in the Stavropol region. The news comes one a week after Russian intelligence announced it had uncovered a Georgian spy network that was allegedly planning terrorist attacks in Russia.

Army officer Mikhail Khachidze, an ethnic Georgian, is being investigated for state treason, Russian news agencies reported, citing a statement from the Federal Security Service (FSB). Details regarding his apprehension were not disclosed.

Moscow News

reply to post by -Rugged Shark-


Ok, sounds good to me let's just forget it and go on with the thread. And I'll admit that you have been mostly impartial and I was wrong to say all your posts show bias.

Also, if what Armap says is true (and I know him to be a very reliable source), that town may have been a Georgian area destroyed in the later battle or even destroyed by the Ossetians.

I stopped posting here for a while, but I have been monitoring all the news and opinions. I must say that both sides - supporters of Russia and supporters of Georgia, are buying into their respective sides' news too much - news which at this point cannot definitely be trusted.


I started out by supporting Russia, and I do believe innitial military intervention to push Georgian military out of South Ossetia were justified. However Russia has made the grave mistake of pursuing the retreating Georgian military into undisputed Georgia. Even if Russia's actions are justified (especially seeing the American global aggression in the last 7 years), Russia will not be able to justify them in the eyes of the West. Before Russia entered undisputed Georgia - they had a chance to pull off a PR victory against Georgia and appear as genuine peacekeepers. But by going into Georgia they gave the West a perfect opportunity to do what they always wanted - paint Russia as an enemy and a threat to world peace.




If there is anyone who has proven to be at fault for starting the war and for the East-vs-West aftermath - it is Saakashvilli and S. Ossetian leader Kokoity. The two knew well enough that they are pawns in a geopolitical strife between U.S. and Russia. Both hoped to draw their big ally into the war to fight for them - both are provokators of the first degree. Of course Russia and U.S. were only too happy to get involved, and neither helped to resolve the conflict in any way - both only adding more fuel to the fire.

Saakashvilli can no longer be trusted as a good leader - he endangered his country and his people by starting a war which he knew would draw in Russia. He put Georgia nearly on the brink of outright invasion. Kokoity proved to be nothing more than a rebel-revolutionary wanna-be. Neither Saaka nor Kokoity (even if S. Ossetia becomes independent) will ever be taken seriously by the world again.


You have a perfect and very dangerous example here, of the pawns trying to control the actions of the players. Kokoity was successful in drawing Russia in and having Russia pound the Georgian military. Saakashvilli was successful in drawing the U.S. in, even if indirectly, and in having U.S./NATO sever what relations with Russia they had.


What really concerns me is not the war - but what is to follow:




The aftermath of this war may very well be far worse than the actual military conflict. As far as the conflict goes - it is an isolated bloody fight resulting from ethnical and territorial disputes - much like many dozens of other similar conflicts around the world which get far less media and political attention. But this small heated affair has driven a huge stake between Russia-U.S. relations - which lets face it were never good to begin with.

In just 2 weeks following the start of the War look at what has happened:


-NATO broke off all ties with Russia

-Tensions increased as US military became involved - supplying aid to Georgia

-US and Russia traded heated verbal exchange in the UN

-US pledged to help the unstable regime in Georgia military and politically, possibly inviting Georgia to join NATO

-US signed an ABM installation deal with Poland

-The already unstable Ukraine became dangerously divided into two factions over the war

-Tensions increased between Russia and Ukraine over the Black Sea fleet

-Russia started toying around with idea of supplying Iran and Syria with newest air-defence weapons.



As if these geopolitical changes weren't bad enough, there appears to be more on the way. Here is what to look for in the coming months/years:


-Yuschenko quickens the pace for Ukraine to join NATO. Meanwhile the sizeable pro-Russian opposition (now including likely Timoshenko) will block his attempts and rouse up the pro-Russian population of the country in hopes of starting "anti-Orange revolution". Add to the mess the Black Sea fleet, the calls for full automony in Crimea, and the Russian gas exports to Ukraine - and you got a really big feces-throwing contest on the way.


-Saakashvilli despite embarrasment as a leader will find a way with America's help to solidify his position in power - and rapidly remilitarize Georgia. There is little doubt in anyone's mind that Georgia is set to become the next proxy-stand-off zone between U.S. and Russia. What this means for S. Ossetia and Abkhazia remains to be seen.


-The importance of the Caspian oil pipeline has been underscored. Russia knew before, but is now assured as to the reason why the U.S. is so interested in the area. Russia also knows where to aim next time to hurt the U.S. the most.

And wouldn't you know it - the pipeline also lies nea a disputed separatist region in Nagorno Karabakh - the probability of the nest U.S.-Russia proxy war involving pawns Armenia and Azerbaijan there is quickly approaching one.


-Eastern European countries will use the war as an excuse to build up thier militaries and form a closer partnership with NATO - even if everyone but the dumbest mental patients know well enough that Russia is not a threat to them. This will help NATO fullfill its goals of creating a military buffer zone around European Russia - goals which it has been pursuing tirelessly for much of the last decade.


-Russia will counter NATO's advances by partnering with anyone and everyone who has reason to be opposed to the U.S. - Iran, Syria, Venezuela, India, possibly even China. Russia will look for any opportunity to indirectly get back in at the U.S. This could mean that Iran would no longer be a plausible target for the U.S.





Now none of these developments are new. Many people, including a sizeable group of us here on ATS, have seen this Neo-Cold-War coming for many years now. The U.S.-Russia split has been growing ever since Russia became a respected power again under Putin. All that was needed was a spark - a catalyst if you will. I think we've just seen the spark.


I am in no way saying that there will be any large-scale war (let alone any insane idea of a WW3), or even a Cold-War. But there will be a severe split in relations and goals between NATO/US and Russia.



Call it a Neo-Cold-War if you will - but not a Cold War. Why not? Because to have a true Cold War you need strictly opposing idealogies fighting for global influence (example - communism vs capitalism). But today Russia and U.S. do not really have opposing idealogies. In fact the two powers have never been as alike as they are now:

-Both are capitalist countries

-Both have government to whom war is a profitable business

-Both refer to themselves as being "democracies" despite having severe shortcoming in this sphere (yes U.S. too)




What troubles me the most is the beginning of militarization in Eastern Europe. This will lead to major tension between NATO and Russia - tension that didn't have to be. Tension that arouse because of a far-off isolated conflict in Georgia - which isn't even new as it has been taking place for the last 15 years. You start out with an ABM shield. Russia make its countering move by designing new ICBM. Then you see NATO military installation popping up around Eastern Europe. Suddenly Russia's defense budget jumps 500% in a matter of years.

People in Eastern Europe think housing NATO installations will keep them safe from the ghosts of their past. But all it will do is increase tension in the region - which will impede both the economic growth and democratic progress in Eastern Europe. Russia is not helping either, by living up to the folk legends of the big bad bear - even if everything it does is magnified 10 times by the media. Now there appears to be no way back - to how things were say 5-10 years ago.


At least we can be sure someone will be making a good profit on all this. Every side that willingly participates in a conflict expects some dividends. We have seen the conflict, and now it is time to see the dividends.

[edit on 23-8-2008 by maloy]

I seriously think this is a ploy by the neo-cons... to give Georgia a go ahead to mess with Russia.

After all, as you said Maloy, the resulting of this proxy war is chaos, russia is seen as a threat and the world is divided in two teams...

The neo-con mantra is ``order from chaos`` and of course they hate Russia and wanted to win the cold war with military means... and now they are in power. The ABM is a step towards military confrontation against Russia.

If I would be them, I would make China go against Russia. So this way Russia would have to spend money on conventional weapons too or at least defense of Siberia... but at the end of the day, if Russia feels too threatenned, they may launch a pre-emptive nuclear war to avoid being invaded by NATO and China.

After all, the threat may be non-existant, but the only thing that really counts is what the russian leadership BELIEVES. You all saw the reports where the Russian generals were talking about a china-nato plot to invade and divide Russia?

reply to post by Vitchilo


Well honestly I never really bought into that neocon legend.

And Russia also playing its own game and trying to twist everything in its favor - it is not really a victim of any plot.

As for China - I am sure China does what China sees benefit in doing - and will not be drawn into any conflicts by anyone unless it feels that it is necessary. Just as well Russia does what is best for Russia, and US does what is best for the US. No one really cares for right and wrong as we have seen in the last 7 years.


If anything it is like the colonial era - take as much as you can hold while you still can, and spit at everyone else, while completely ignoring the local "savages". Eastern Europe and the Middle East have been colonized already. Now the game is on in Central Asia - Armenia, Azerbiajan, Georgia, Iran, and the "stan" republics.

It might not be so bad to let Saakashvilli stay in power, the US may want Georgia a part of NATO but the europeans wouldn't want to risk war with Russia with somebody as impetuous as that sparking off another border dispute with Russia . He is a lame duck now , on borrowed time . Can the americans still back him even after this? they used up any international leverage they had just trying to prevent him looking the perpetrator in all this . They might be able to get away with telling the average joe fox news watcher that it's all Russia's fault but they are hardly going to be able to persuade the western diplomatic community of the same .

It seems the people of Georgia are unaware as to the reasons of the Russian invasion, their news telling them it was an unprovoked assault. Unlike the US , it will only be a matter of time before they discover Saakashvilli's role in this . And then it'll be the Georgians that decide his fate.. no regime change by the Russians, no Martyr's ending , no falling on his sword. More probably an ignominious demises at the end of a Georgian rope.

reply to post by Gun Totin Gerbil
Good point,Saakashvili and Medeved cannot be trusted,(although i could say this about most leaders) It will be difficult to see a Georgia/NATO membership,and peace in the caucasus, with them in power.




[edit on 23-8-2008 by all2human]

reply to post by maloy


Excellent!!!
It good to see that really not everyone russian is an brainwashed-fashistic-dumbass. No fence, but this come from personal experience.

About your post,well you are absolutly right, and think that this is a time when you must take a side-american or russian. And it doesnt even matter who is more right or wrong. Everyone will chose for what they stand-Russia or America. And its logical that the post soviet country's want to join Americas side, because Russia has made some very nasty things in the past against them, and doesn't have done anything to prove themselfs as new, or different state as it was in SU.

Originally posted by swesais
It good to see that really not everyone russian is an brainwashed-fashistic-dumbass. No fence, but this come from personal experience.

Thanks, but that is fairly offensive, not that I care. I don't know about your personal experiences, but it would be sad if that is the prejudiced picture of Russians they left in you mind.

Originally posted by swesais
About your post,well you are absolutly right, and think that this is a time when you must take a side-american or russian. And it doesnt even matter who is more right or wrong. Everyone will chose for what they stand-Russia or America.

That is exactly what is wrong with the conflict. No one sees it for what it is. They see it for what they want to see it as.

Originally posted by swesais
And its logical that the post soviet country's want to join Americas side, because Russia has made some very nasty things in the past against them,

Confusing Russia and Soviet Union is a mistake often made by people on these boards. Nothing is as simple as you put it. Realignment of ex-Soviet countries with U.S. is not necessarily supported by a majority of the population - it is a geopolitical restructuring by politicians. It has little to do with whatever "nasty things" you are referring to, and more do with personal goals of local politicians the rewards they see in joining a pro-American alliance.

As for the "nasty things" I am not even going to begin to decipher what you mean. Soviet Union is far more complicated than you think it was. The atrocities that happened during the Soviet Era are not so much the fault of Russia - as they are a result of malicious congruence of revolutionary principles, faulty ideologies, dangerous minds, and chaotic events at the turn of the century. Everyone suffered as the result - Russians not the least.

Originally posted by swesais
and doesn't have done anything to prove themselfs as new, or different state as it was in SU.

Why does Russia need to prove itself to the West? Don't forget that U.S. and NATO are also to blame for what is happening. They surely didn't prove themselves to be good partners and neighbors to Russia in the 90's.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that I am blaming Russia. I am blaming Russia and NATO and U.S. It's not that no one is right - it's that everyone is wrong.


[edit on 23-8-2008 by maloy]

Maloy - your posts on this subject are just brilliant. Thank you for providing such an unbiased account. I hope ATS make you a "subject matter expert" or whatever

NEWS FROM CRIMEA regarding Black Sea fleet's participation in Georgia:

Russian cruiser "Moscow" returned to military port of Sevastopol in Crimea, Ukraine today. It took part "peacekeeping" mission near Abkhazia and Georgia over the last two weeks. Several smaller ships of the Black Sea fleet remain off the coast of Abkhazia. About 500 Russian supporters gathered in port to welcome the ship. A smaller Ukrainian nationalist group gathered and countered the Russians' greeting by yelling out anti-Russian slogans.

Earlier there were reports of contention between Russia and Ukraine involving the status of Russian Black Sea fleet ships in Sevastopol and their return from the conflict zone. Russia complied with old rules in this return, but a new agreement has now been signed.

The new rules state that Russian ships may cross Ukrainian territorial waters only 72 hours after informing Ukrainian authorities. The information Russia must provide includes the number of personell, number of ammunition, and types of military equipment taking crossing the territorial waters.

lenta.ru...




So it looks like Ukraine didn't start a mess about this like Yuschenko wanted, largely thanks to Ukrainian parliament reaching an agreement with Russia. But there are still major tensions in Crimea - as the two opposing protests signify.

The status of Crimea will no doubt now come into question more than ever before. And I do not know whether the Russian government will choose to back the full Crimean autonomy. There is no talk of separatism yet, but I can feel that this is where we are heading. It may all blow over, or it may become worse - no way of telling yet. It all depends on what the politicians will choose to do.


I am going to Crimea in two weeks to visit relatives, and it will be interesting to see what is going on in Sevastopol.

Comedy Central's john Stewart on the War in Georgia:

www.echo.msk.ru...


The link is Russia and the two videos have Russian subtitles - but are in English. Couldn't find them on youtube. Why aren't as many Americans watching the Daily Show as they are watching CNN? Comedy it may be - but at least it's honest. Very nice analysis.

And yes - there is comedy central in Russia. Provided you have a 1 meter satellite dish and paid network installed like I do.