The Russians and Americans will meet in Tbilisi
Posted on 08/13/2008 11:52:34 AM PDT by MNJohnnie
Check back on your own and find out so you're not just taking the word of one person you don't know. Get several accounts, they're all over the place including FR, and weigh for yourself which accounts you find more believable.
The 175 must be for one Russian attack in one town. The Russians had butchered a lot more than that in the first couple days.
The Russians and Americans will meet in Tbilisi
Please site your source that Georgia started it. I’m not buying.
Actually, there are quite a few things wrong with your picture. For starters, no way the US prods 1,000 armored Russian vehicles to move into Georgia, before putting some armor into Georgia to stop them. Geopolitics is not chess. Chess is far too simple of a game. Also, the situation in Georgia was grave within just two days. Go back two days ago and quite a few people were proclaiming Georgia lost. The simple fact is that Russia took the most aggressive move it has taken outside Russia proper in more then a couple of decades. Who could have possibly predicted that ?
Oh no! Old Europe isn't behind us! They've always just fallen in line before! We're in uncharted territory now! Clearly we must rethink our course of action and regain their approval.
OK, time to get serious, I'll stop joking if you will. I mean, you were joking when you wrote that, right? You had to be.
Not a chance.
“....90,000 tons of “ humantarian aid...”
Actually, those 90,000 tons make good humanitarian sense.
There are physicians and surgical suites on board to treat the wounded.
Desalination plants to provide fresh water for the Georgians.
Helicopters to aid search and rescue.
The kitchens could feed thousands.
There is plenty of room for some the high-risk displaced and wounded.
Those other things you mention, well, those are just ‘incidental’ items. ;-)
Thanks for the map BK. I hope we don’t meet in Tbilisi. I hope the Russian invaders stay the hell out of our way.
” It is in no way easy or convenient, but defending freedom usually isn’t.
I don’t see why the Europeans haven’t mobilized to help a democracy on its borders being overrun. Hopefully, they get their heads out of the sand and stand with Georgia before Russia regains its iron grip on eastern Europe once again.
“
I am not sure the players involved are particularly concerned about whether georgia is a republic (democracy?) or not, but instead are looking at what economic and strategic assets are at stake, and what cards russia has to punish any critics, in the case of france/germany/etc..
Additionally, Georgia is geographically somewhat out of the way, in terms of converting tough talk into action.
I do not think it is the job of the US to ‘defend freedom’ halfway across the globe. Some of the founders might have suggested it was none of our business at all, but the US ‘defends freedom’ when it is convenient to and ‘ignores freedom/defends tyranny’ when it is as well. The ‘defend freedom’ is just for political posturing/domestic consumption.
I do think, given reality today, that the US must act to defend its own interests, which certainly include not allowing russia to simply take a former SSR and its pipeline and black sea port.
If you know this then why can't you figure out this? :-)
But I have yet to figure out why Georgia would throw itself in front of the Russian bus, for no good reason -- because S. Ossetia and Abkhasia doesn't really mean that much to Georgia, socially, religiously or economically. So why would Georgia subject itself to such punishment for no good reason?
Maybe you should talk to yourself more. Or not.
But this "humanitarian aid" that we are using the US Secretary of Defense and the US Military to deliver(?) has now given us an excuse to plant ourselves right in that main-hub transit neighborhood.
You're kind of overlooking the fact that we were already planted in Georgia BEFORE the Russian invasion, and had things continued as they were going Georgia was going to peacefully plant itself in NATO. We didn't need to plant ourselves there twice when things were already going our way.
This isn't "tinfoil-hat imaginings", is geo-strategic thinking.
Not quite. It's cart-before-horse thinking.
There is more at play here than just a Russian-Georgian border dispute.
That's obvious enough.
The pipeline transitting Georgia is an alternate fuel supply for Europe. The Russians want to control Europe by denying them alternative supplies. And control them they will if they succeed - lil' ol' Saddam Hussein had Europe by the balls for over a decade. Russia will be like Saddam Hussein only Russia won't be giving out bribes, just demands. Russia also wants to protect Iran. When you've got no friends, you have to keep the ones you can, right? So by doing this Russia can kill a lot of birds with just one stone. A conflict in Georgia is like throwing a turd in the Americans' punchbowl- it makes it harder to deal with Iran. It denies the US a part of a carefully constructed ring of willing partners. It jacks around with Turkey and NATO.
One thing that's obvious here- Russia wasn't "provoked" by Georgia, or set up by the US. Why is that obvious? Simple- Russia had all their assets lined up to do this WAY before Georgia made any moves. This operation by the Russians was going to go down one way or another no matter what Georgia did or did not do.
We didn't put Russian troops on Georgia's borders. Russia did.
We didn't cozy up to the Ossetians and have them fire rockets at our ally. Russia did.
We didn't make Russia invade Georgia. The Russians just did what Russians have a history of doing. Instead of winning hearts and minds, Russians jail great minds and put bullet holes in hearts. Instead of building themselves up, they tear everyone else down. Instead of competing, they prefer cheating.
A US presidential press conference, putting the Secretary of Defense on it, sending US military to "deliver humanitarian aid" and sending the Secretary of State to France to discuss it, for a conflict that left "175 Georgians dead"? Something is wrong with this picture!
Nothing's "wrong" with the picture. The move is what it appears to be - a US effort to shield Georgia by stepping between them and Russia and effectively daring Russia to pick on us. We are trying the "human shield" method because at the moment only the Russians, being the aggressors, are prepared to deal with this situation militarily. If we were trying to provoke the Russians from the get go- or had told the Georgians to provoke Russia- we'd have put all our assets in place first instead of the Russians getting to do that solo. The only option we have at the moment, since we were unprepared for this- was to play human shield, or just walk away. The latter we cannot afford to do- the repercussions would go on for decades, if not generations. Since we'd rather not have to kill any Russians and start a larger war, the human shield thing gives Russia a chance to back down gracefully.
There's nothing "wrong" with "dual-use" humanitarian efforts.
“I do think, given reality today, that the US must act to defend its own interests, which certainly include not allowing russia to simply take a former SSR and its pipeline and black sea port.”
I should add to the end of that, ‘to the degree we can without having to take on russian defensive positions to remove them first.’
If russia had or is able to occupy key strategic sites in georgia before the US can, then it certainly becomes that much more favorable for them.
I don’t know anything about what ports or port facilities are in play here that would be useful for the black sea fleet to really understand what russia needs to acquire or hold on to at this point.
Great post. bttt
Excellent move. The aircraft, troops, and ships performing this aid will also provide an effective military trip wire that the Russians dare not cross.
I’ve been looking for a link to the S. Ossetians shelling Georgia before all of this kicked off, do you happen to have one?
Check back on your own and find out so you're not just taking the word of one person you don't know. Get several accounts, they're all over the place including FR, and weigh for yourself which accounts you find more believable.
I have checked all over. I am not taking Russia's side, I am simply looking at the politics in the region and the certain inevitabilities. One certain inevitability was that if Georgia attacked S. Ossetia, Russia was going to pound her hard. As I said earlier, it's like a chihuahua going after a Rottweiler. Why in the hell would Georgia do that?
Yes there had been skirmishes back and forth prior to this, but even the most anti-Russian articles list Georgia as having "invaded S. Ossetia."
The simple fact is that Russia took the most aggressive move it has taken outside Russia proper in more then a couple of decades. Who could have possibly predicted that ?
Anyone who knows anything about Russia. Even all the Russian experts say that this was a predictable response from them, when something like this happens on their doorstep.
I don't think that's correct. The Dardanelles would be the narrowist part, and it's still a mile wide, and very deep. Carriers routinely port in places like Pearl Harbor which has a very narrow entrance.
Perhaps some FReeper sailor can chime in?
Because the West wanted to find out what Russias intentions were. Very few people thought Russia would risk everything for Georgia. After all, tiny country, a couple of pipelines. Now we know. Russia will go for broke over Georgia. Russia now also knows the US/Eastern Europe will go for broke for Georgia. The opening clash is coming in Tblishi. IMHO.
And you are "kind of overlooking the fact" that things were NOT going our way re Georgia and the Ukraine joining NATO. Or sure, Georgia wanted it, but France and Germany shot it down a couple months ago for exactly this reason -- they didn't want to have to go to war with Russia over a stupid border dispute in Georgia.
You do realize that had Georgia been a NATO member right now, we would be at war with Russia, don't you?
You can bitch about "old Europe having no guts" and you would be partially right. But it's also a matter of this being on their continent, not ours -- Europe would suffer the fallout far worse than we would from a war with Russia, including losing 40% of their oil supply, which is why they are staying out of this one as much as possible!
We have been pushing for a confrontation with Russia for a while now, bringing NATO almost to its doorstep, putting in a missile system in Poland and Czech Republic, etc. Now you can argue that this might be "good and necessary", etc to protect Europe from Russia. But let's not pretend that it is anything other than what it is -- cornering and threatening Russia in her own backyard.
I see your point, but I think MNJohnnie said it right - who else is going to do it, plus - I think that’s what allies should do for each other. It reminds me a little of news story a few months back - when someone got ran over during a hit and run, and people just walked by and didn’t do anything. It’s the humane thing to do, it’s just a shame that we tend to carry the load.
What gets me is how the rest of the world tends to overlook the generosity of the US.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.