Russia quietly moves border hundreds of yards into occupied Georgia

I'll look for more sources, but this is not. The first time Russia has been seen doing this in Georgia. Last time I saw was a few years ago it was reported by Vice.

Russia has quietly moved one of its borders hundreds of metres further into Georgia, according to local media reports.

Kremlin troops reportedly moved a border sign hundreds of yards further into occupied territory in South Ossetia last week, ahead of talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump at the G20 summit.

Georgia’s security agency called the move “illegal” and said local farmers had been affected in the Gori Municipality.

source

If I had to take a guess it's a move by Putin to prod at the geopolitical environment and see who will push back.

Edit: here is the Vice article from 2014.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Sort of reminds me of the story, if I recall it correctly, where every year, the army of Guatamala loads up its army, (all 15) into its trucks (2) and invades Belize. They only make it about half way up the road because they have to turn back to avoid running out of fuel.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

There will a lot of bla bla bla talk be. Protest. And at the end Putin will win. Always the same. Nobody shoots at Putin.

originally posted by: TonyS
a reply to: CriticalStinker

Sort of reminds me of the story, if I recall it correctly, where every year, the army of Guatamala loads up its army, (all 15) into its trucks (2) and invades Belize. They only make it about half way up the road because they have to turn back to avoid running out of fuel.

Except Russia has 30 troops and 4 trucks.

Quite the difference

Geo strategically speaking, if Georgia falls the way of Turkey and Ukraine (to NATO) then the Russians could be cut off from access to the Black Sea.

Poor little Georgia becomes a geo political chip on the game board, whatever Russia does there is overall, a defensive response to NATOs encroachment into Eastern Europe.

Not that anyone is noticing that.

a reply to: CriticalStinker
Does anyone recall the brief battles Russia and Georgia had after Georgia was required to reign in its breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia in 2009 as a pre-condition to joining NATO/EU?? I have maintained that that was in fact the official opening of WW3. They shot down a Russian jet as well, and hit back at a drone in return.

Russia is in Ossetia because Georgia started to kill lots of people to get that juicy NATO/EU membership, including Russian citizens living there. Ukraine is essentially an evolution of that same foreign policy.

I mean, its not like the USA has technically seized a swath of southern Syria now in order to maintain control of the land route from Lebanon - Iran through the Damascus Baghdad Highway or anything ... oh wait ...

Here are some highlights I had added from those engagements.

monday,august 11th. last pockets of resitance stage an ambush on russian forces convoy

They lost a jet in Georgia too! This is the missile that took it down.

At least they got a Georgian UAV

And someone shot down a Georgian jet too

A quick and accurate summary of this 2008 incident where Russia pretty much added Ossetia and Abkhazia to its federation.

a reply to: intrptr

I agree, if Russia still had the Warsaw pact and got Mexico, then put troops on the border, the US and all of the international community would be up in arms... Literally.

Stalin was Georgian. Sweet troll by the ruskies.
Theyre all a bit off from my experiences.
Knowing the Georgians they probably moved the border sign back already

originally posted by: intrptr

Geo strategically speaking, if Georgia falls the way of Turkey and Ukraine (to NATO) then the Russians could be cut off from access to the Black Sea.

Poor little Georgia becomes a geo political chip on the game board, whatever Russia does there is overall, a defensive response to NATOs encroachment into Eastern Europe.

Not that anyone is noticing that.

What we're thinking is eastern Europe has a say in who they align with. That's what YOUR not talking about...

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: intrptr

Geo strategically speaking, if Georgia falls the way of Turkey and Ukraine (to NATO) then the Russians could be cut off from access to the Black Sea.

Poor little Georgia becomes a geo political chip on the game board, whatever Russia does there is overall, a defensive response to NATOs encroachment into Eastern Europe.

Not that anyone is noticing that.

What we're thinking is eastern Europe has a say in who they align with. That's what YOUR not talking about...

Why put those countries at risk for the sake of our chess game?

Starting those talks would put them at risk for being invaded again.

NATO is obsolete and an aggressor.

Look what happened to Ukraine when we started showing interest. And we didn't even honor the protective treaty we had with them. We asked them to surrender their nukes in exchange for protection, and now they lost Crimea.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: intrptr

I agree, if Russia still had the Warsaw pact and got Mexico, then put troops on the border, the US and all of the international community would be up in arms... Literally.

Putin wouldn't touch Mexico with a ten foot pole. At least not before he cleaned out the Cartels and took over himself....

originally posted by: CriticalStinker

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: intrptr

Geo strategically speaking, if Georgia falls the way of Turkey and Ukraine (to NATO) then the Russians could be cut off from access to the Black Sea.

Poor little Georgia becomes a geo political chip on the game board, whatever Russia does there is overall, a defensive response to NATOs encroachment into Eastern Europe.

Not that anyone is noticing that.

What we're thinking is eastern Europe has a say in who they align with. That's what YOUR not talking about...

They STILL have a say in their future. A fact you seem to ignore. The very fact they have chosen western alliances and have resigned themselves to pawns on the 'game board' speaks volumes on how much they wish to avoid being reabsorbed by Russia.

They know damn well they have no alternative to NATO in face of Russia's new expansions.

Yes, NATO is obsolete. NATO is NOT the aggressor. Russia is the culprit.

Why put those countries at risk for the sake of our chess game?

Starting those talks would put them at risk for being invaded again.

NATO is obsolete and an aggressor.

Look what happened to Ukraine when we started showing interest. And we didn't even honor the protective treaty we had with them. We asked them to surrender their nukes in exchange for protection, and now they lost Crimea.

a reply to: CriticalStinker

Or is there an oil field there...$$$$$

a reply to: CriticalStinker


Your post is contradictory. First you claim NATO is the aggressor then blame the U.S. for Russia's expansion into Crimea.

Besides blame the previous President for breaking that agreement. This President has promised the Poles a return of their ABM agreement.

originally posted by: intrptr

Geo strategically speaking, if Georgia falls the way of Turkey and Ukraine (to NATO) then the Russians could be cut off from access to the Black Sea.

How? Adler, Tuapse, Anapa, and Kavkaz are all inside Russia's borders and are Black Sea Ports. Combine that with the fact that Crimea isn't going anywhere anytime soon and I somehow don't think Georgia's lone port on the Black Sea matters much to Putin.

a reply to: nwtrucker

Some of those countries have ethnic Russians in them.

So why are the rules different?

Is Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, or Syria any better off after our freedom projection by bombing?

Let's not move the goal posts, we get to do whatever we want across the world then bitch when Russia does something next door.

FBI and Dea regularly operate in South America. So let's not act like we value sovereignty more than anyone.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: nwtrucker

Some of those countries have ethnic Russians in them.

So why are the rules different?

Is Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, or Syria any better off after our freedom projection by bombing?

Let's not move the goal posts, we get to do whatever we want across the world then bitch when Russia does something next door.

FBI and Dea regularly operate in South America. So let's not act like we value sovereignty more than anyone.

I'm not endorsing any of the ME activities at this juncture. I will not buy your points as some justification for Putin, either.

a reply to: nwtrucker

My point is, NATO does not respect sovereignty, so how can they US or NATO be the authority on what's right or wrong?

And if the UN can't do it properly, then we need reform.

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
a reply to: nwtrucker

My point is, NATO does not respect sovereignty, so how can they US or NATO be the authority on what's right or wrong?

And if the UN can't do it properly, then we need reform.

Where does NATO violate sovereignty? Is Russia has violated at least sovereignty at least three times. I do not side with NATO, per say, and would see it disbanded in favor of bi-lateral agreements.

The OP is Russia's actions, not NATO's. You seem to think that attacking NATO is all that is required to either change the subject via deflection or avoid the thread's topic.

If Russia has, in fact, moved the border, then it is yet another indication of Russian intent. Nothing about NATO or the ME has anything to do with that border change. Period.

Wait , hold . This is some serious shiite here. Russia is moving Georgia's borders back ? What has Trump did to stop it ? If nothing , that would prove Russia Trump collusion. Goin to fetch "Ol Betsy" now and join the resistance

Oh , that Georgia....