Lizbeth, let start from the very beginning. USA (together with other western countries) made all possible for the USSR collapse. They need control over all world resources. After the collapse USA started to explore resources of former Soviet republics in Asia. The next step should be the collapse of Russia. I remember Russian pro-western politicians insisted on confederation instead of federation. National cataclysms are the result of good CIA work (to some extent).
Now Russia becomes stronger. And She wants to control resources (all states are equal, all depends on their abilities). Due to Russia actions, USA lost their control on resources in those Asian republics. What has left for Nabucco? Only Azerbaijani and Kazakhstan oil. Btw, after these events, Kazakhstan will sell their oil to China. Iran can’t understand that His oil is necessary for USA pipeline. So, that is why Iran is absolutely non-democratic country.
USA was ( and is) involved in these affairs. They supported Georgia with weapon. They trained Georgian army. About thousand of NATO soldiers were in the country at that moment. NATO satellite was the part of Georgian anti-missile defense.
Or you tell about direct involvement? As Chinese people say :”USA afraid of nobody, Russian don’t believe that anybody can defeat them. Is it possible that they would battle each other?” Thus, pawn wars forever.

They don't control them. They don't involve into administration. Control? It was shown on TV. Russian vehicle wanted to move through the Georgian village. Villagers with their police didn’t let it through. Soldier asked them to stop it. “Why are you doing it?” Finally, they moved, slightly damaging police cars. I can’t imagine that Russian civilians could behave the same way during the WWII. They would be shot in spot. Occupants appointed their own administration. They controlled every sphere of civilians’ lives. I even don’t say about mockery.
Thus, it can’t be named “occupation”, because there are not any control.



Good answer!!!



It is difficult to say BEFORE or AFTER.
1. Is territory of South Ossetia a part of Georgia proper?
2. South Ossetia is so little. It was bombarding from military base near Gori (proper Georgia). Yes, it was possible to die heroically under this fire, but Russians prefered not to do it.
3. It was done in the evening of 8.08.08, after long attempts to find international help. During these attempts Ossetian civilians die under that fire.
4. How do you know, maybe after neutralization of the fire, Russians would come back?... But Saakashvili (he is obviously mentally ill) declared a war.

It's a pipeline, for goodness sake. If Russia isnt willing to sell its oil on the world market, so be it. But Russia shouldn't continue to think of it's former satelite countries as nothing more than contributors to the wealth of the Mother Country--not when they don't think of themselves as a part of the Mother Country `

For some reason, about 2/3s ofthe opening of my reply doesn't appear in the forum--I'll try again tomorrow.

It is not only pipeline. When Russian Empire and British Empire battled Osman Empire it wasn't because of pipeline. British Empire and Russian Empire battled each other only once, not because of oil. USA is a succesor of British Empire. It is an awful law of life. It will never be peace in Balkans and in Caucasus. They are key regions. Look. As soon as weak Russia lost Her influence in these regions, USA came soon. What have USA lost there? But if USA didn't come, Turkey would start to restore her influence.
I don't know how to explain it. For example, Russia freed Bulgaria from Turkish genocide. Why? Because Russia is so good? Of course, Russian soldiers thought so. But, in reality,because of Dardanelles.
What have Soviet Union and USA forgotten in Afghanistan? It was a neutral peaceful country. Who inspired the revolution? We will never learn. USSR was afraid that USA would occupy highlands and set their missiles there. Since then Afghani people suffer not through their own fault.
I really don’t know how to explain it. For example, powerful Poland tried to conquer Russia four times, till She became rather small and “teethless”. Is Poland good? If Russia and USA collapse (I say "if"), there would be other forces and it will never be a paradise on earth.
As history shows neither of International organizations could prevent wars.
Right or guilty nations? Look at Georgia. She is a little Empire, like Russia and USA, but weak. Constant wars, not only for freedom, but mostly of conquest. Are Ossetians good? They captured and enslaved Georgian children during centuries. Are Georgians good? They periodically eliminated as many Ossetians as could. Georgians say now:”Why do you, Russians, defense Ossetians and didn’t defense us in Abkhazia in 1991, when about 3000 of Georgian civilians were killed? Btw, Saakashvili just tried to discharge his promises. He promised to his electorate to give Georgians back their houses in Abkhazia. But don’t forget that in 1991 Georgians elected Gamsakhurdia with his fascist idea –“Georgia – for Georgians”. And they started to put it in practice. Etc, etc.
Shortly, why international forces didn’t involve in this conflict while Russia wasn’t entering South Ossetia? They had 16 hours for it. During all this 16 hours civilians died.

Essentially, Elena, what you have been telling us is that Russia is justified in invading pretty much any of its neighbors because they are neighbors and they may have what Russia wants...interesting of you to share the Russian perspective with us.

Lawmage:


Lawmage:


Lawmage:


Lawmage:


Lawmage I think that you being mr clever cloggs used the word "interesting" for some reason that I am not smart enough to understand.I am going to take a shot in the dark and say that an American like you finds nothing interesting in what going in Georgia.Russia has made America look like chumps,this was confirmed when Robert Gates said that America would not use military force to stop the invasion of Georgia..Lawmage why can't you just come out and say that you are pissed that another power can invade another country like America can and does.

Its all a power game, cassie, thats all politics ever is. Georgia holds no cards which would tempt the US to risk supporting it militarily.

I can understand Russian unease over the expansion of NATO, and what it sees as the erosion of its sphere of influence, and can see that such uneasy makes them likely to act forcefully to negate the threat it sees to the future it wants for itself.

I can understand also Russian anger over certain actions by the Georgians, against ethnic Russians within Georgia, but I cannot agree with the level and nature of the action that Russia took.

There are no saints on either the Russian or Georgian side, but I cannot help looking at Russia as being the main aggressor.

I dare say you're right. I suspect Lawmage uses the word "interesting" as a rather benign way of saying what is going on defies rational expectation. He could just a well use the phrase "What could they possibly be think?!?" just as well in some of those instances.

I know Lawmage's choice of language isn't as colorful as "tricknology" or "extracting the urine" etc. but YOU are the LAST person who ought to complain about the repetition of pet words and phrases.

Note to Dax: NO! I'm NOT telling CassielA that *I* am complaining about repetition of pet words and/or phrases, so don't start off with "So, YOU dare complain about someone else using..." because I'm not, as anyone with even a 7th grade reading comprehension can see. I'm merely commenting on CassielA's complaint.

Cassie, it might surprise you (or not) to learn that I think Russia is free to do whatever it thinks it can get away with doing. Russia is a sovereign nation with its own interests and the wherewithal to look after those interests as it sees fit. At the same time, Russia must consider how its actions impact the interests of other nations. That is not to say Russia must necessarily refrain from acting on its interest but rather it must keep in mind its actions may provoke a reaction from other nations, especially if those actions intrude unacceptably on the national interests of those nations with the wherewithal to act to protect them.

Russia calculated, correctly as it happens, that the West would NOT intervene in any meaningful sense in Georgia. There is no suitably compelling interest there at the moment. Russia's recent stance toward Poland on the other hand is rather interesting...Russia is making threats toward Poland over the US missile shield and Poland's cooperation in that arena. Today the Russians threatened Poland with possible military action, even nuclear weapons, if it goes forward with the plan to allow the emplacement of ten missile interceptors in Polish territory. If Russia thinks it will be able to treat Poland like it treated Georgia it is flat wrong. I believe the US, and possibly the Europeans, would indeed intervene militarily if Russia launched a military attack on Poland.

At the same time, I think this activity is itself interesting. Remember, I asked how the rest of the former Soviet client states would view Russian action against Georgia. The governments of those nations can do the political calculus. Georgia did not yet have significant entanglements with the West. It did not have the economic integration with the rest of Europe to trigger any trip wires. It was not yet integrated into NATO. As a result, Georgia faced the Russian onslaught alone. Poland today demonstrated it does not want to go it alone and so is moving even more tightly into the Western fold. I strongly suspect other culturally European countries, like Hungary, the Ukraine, and the Baltic states will follow the Polish lead and accelerate their push toward integration into Western Europe. The goal will be to assimilate themselves into Western Europe to such an extent that the politicians and the peoples of Western Europe are compelled to come to their assistance in the face of Russian aggression.

At the same time, Russia is doing ENORMOUS damage to its efforts to integrate into Europe as a partner rather than as an adversary. Frankly, my own assessment is that Russia is actively seeking a military conflict with the West. I suspect it does so in the hopes of regearing its economy and industry. I think that effort is doomed to failure. On the other hand, I do think there is something the US and Western Europe can do to help Russia avoid that confrontation...if Russia gives the West some room. For one, the West needs to acknowledge legitimate security concerns Russia possesses in terms of Western encroachment on its frontier. Given the history of Russian relations with Western Europe in the 20th century, Russia has a compelling interest in ensuring the existence of a non-Westernized buffer on its frontier. Two, the West needs to acknowledge Russian security concerns on its southern and southwestern frontiers. Those areas are not historically an integrated part of Europe and while we in the West may not approve of Russian activity there we ought to allow Russia to tend its interests there with limited interference.

We will see what we will see. Some time ago here I predicted widespread war in Europe in these two decades (2000-2020). I think it is quite possible we are seeing the opening steps in that conflict.