Trouble in South Ossetia escalates

[Darth Hoth]

Has anyone addressed the claim that the Russian "citizens" have been blanket-issued passports for the very purpose of creating a separatist enclave that would give Russia "legitimate" reasons for their aggression? Going only by media, I cannot say how true it is, though given that it is the Russian Federation we are speaking of, I am inclined to go with it.

What right does Russia have to attack an independent nation? "Protecting citizens" is a very convenient colonial justification, but little more. Should China have gone to war when the Americans accidentally bombed their embassy in the Kosovo War? Such things do happen. And, of course, those Russian "peacekeepers" should not have been there in the first place; the war was internal Georgian affair. What would be the reason for their posting but Russian jingoism, geopolitics and neocolonialism in the former Soviet Empire? (Some people actually appear to believe that Great Russians care for Ossetians and want a peacekeeping mission for humanitarian purposes - Bwahahah!) They have no excuse. Is that source talking of thousands of civilian casualties Russian, by the way?

I have no doubt the Russophilics will flame me for perceived Russophobia, and no way to stop them. I shall just say, I have Russian relatives and am studying the Russian culture and language as a hobby (not that I am very good at it as yet, but I am interested and learning). I have absolutely nothing against the Russian people or culture as such. But that does not stop me from thinking that much every government they have ever had has been territorially greedy, politically dishonest, ideologically affronting, internally repressive and generally exceptionable. I have been living in Sweden for my entire life, close to the Soviet colossus, and the worst fear of my nightmares has been waking up and seeing the planes some of you cheer flying in over my town as they now do over the Georgians'. It does not matter much that the average Ivanov might be a nice guy when an oppressive government and uncontrolled military lands on you.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Has anyone addressed the claim that the Russian "citizens" have been blanket-issued passports for the very purpose of creating a separatist enclave that would give Russia "legitimate" reasons for their aggression? Going only by media, I cannot say how true it is, though given that it is the Russian Federation we are speaking of, I am inclined to go with it.

They WANTED Russian citizenship, however. They had to apply for it, and only 70% of the population of South Ossetia has, in fact, taken up that option. It was not blanket issued--all of them had to apply for it, and 70% of the South Ossetians did in fact choose to apply for it. So stuff that one, because obviously the people of South Ossetian want to be Russians, not fucking Georgians, or else they would not have sought Russian citizenship. And when 70% of the population of a distinct territorial entity wants to be Russian, and has gotten Russian citizenship to prove it, that territorial entity should in fact become Russian. How hard of a train of thought is that for you to internalize? The rest is quibbling; a decisive supermajority of South Ossetians want to be Russians. That is the objective fact. The rest of your post with all your bullshit about how the Russians don't have the best interest of the South Ossetians at heart is useless conjecture based on the idea that the citizenship is a Russian ploy they never participated in.

[Edi]

Money quote from the HS article:

Etelä-Ossetian konflikti muuttui täysimittaiseksi sodaksi, kun Venäjän joukot hyökkäsivät perjantaina panssarein ja pommikonein Etelä-Ossetian pääkaupunkiin.

Georgian ja siitä eroon pyrkivän Etelä-Ossetian joukot olivat kahakoineet keskenään päiviä ennen sodan leimahtamista.

Konfliktiin yritettiin ratkaisua tulitaukoesityksellä torstaina, mutta sopu ei kestänyt eikä rauhanneuvotteluja saatu käyntiin.

Perjantain vastaisena yönä Georgia hyökkäsi yllättäen pääkaupunkiin Tshinvaliin. Georgian mukaan sen oli pakko puolustautua osseettijoukkojen hyökkäyksiä vastaan.

Osapuolet syyttävät toisiaan väkivaltaisuuksista ja jo sovitun tulitauon rikkoutumisesta.

Myös toisella kapinallismaakunnalla, Abhasialla, on läheiset suhteet Venäjään. Maakunta onkin ensisijaisesti pyrkinyt liittymään osaksi Venäjää.

Translated, that would be

The South Ossetian conflict turned to full scale war on Friday when Russian troops supported by tanks and bombers attacked the South Ossetian capital.

Georgian troops and forces of its separatist region of South Ossetia had skirmished for days before the war erupted.

A resolution to the conflict was sought with a ceasefire proposal on Thursday, but it did not last and peace negotiations died before they could begin.[Editor's note: This paragraph is not word for word accurate due to the difficulty of translating the tone of the original Finnish, but it's close]

During the early hours of Friday Georgia suddenly attacked the South Ossetian capital of Tshinvali. According to Gerogia, it had to defend itself against attacks by Ossetian forces.

Both sides are blaming each other for the violence and breaking the previously agreed upon ceasefire.

Another separatist region, Abkhazia, also has close relations with Russia. The region has primarily tried to join Russia. [Editor's note: wrt separatism, i.e. not become fully independent, but join Russia instead, this is what the original article says, but it translates a bit oddly]

[fgalkin]

That, and as I've pointed out- most of their relatives are living in North Ossetia, which is a part of Russia. You don't want to apply for a visa to visit your parents/brother/sister/uncle living in, say, Massachusetts, and neither do they. Hence, the Russian citizenship.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[K. A. Pital]

The South Ossetian conflict turned to full scale war on Friday when Russian troops supported by tanks and bombers attacked the South Ossetian capital.

Wow. So why did the Russians attack a capital of a friendly unrecognized state? That's just wrong.

Georgian troops stormed Tskhinvali. That happened before any Russian troops did anything.

[fgalkin]

So yeah, the photo gave it away, it's biased rag.

Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin

[Darth Hoth]

They WANTED Russian citizenship, however. They had to apply for it, and only 70% of the population of South Ossetia has, in fact, taken up that option. It was not blanket issued--all of them had to apply for it, and 70% of the South Ossetians did in fact choose to apply for it. So stuff that one, because obviously the people of South Ossetian want to be Russians, not fucking Georgians, or else they would not have sought Russian citizenship. And when 70% of the population of a distinct territorial entity wants to be Russian, and has gotten Russian citizenship to prove it, that territorial entity should in fact become Russian. How hard of a train of thought is that for you to internalize?

Which is why you supported Chechnyan independence, I gather? Oh, wait, you do not. What do you think of Hitler's unilateral partition of Czechoslovakia, by the way? Because those Sudeten Germans certainly WANTED to join the Third Reich. Drummed-up nationalist feelings in separatist border regions do not give great powers the right to de facto annex parts of lesser neighbours and launch campaigns of military aggression. No Georgian military forces ever attacked Russian soil, they attacked rebels against the lawful national government and mistakenly hit Russian occupation forces as well.

The rest is quibbling; a decisive supermajority of South Ossetians want to be Russians. That is the objective fact. The rest of your post with all your bullshit about how the Russians don't have the best interest of the South Ossetians at heart is useless conjecture based on the idea that the citizenship is a Russian ploy they never participated in.

Oh yes, in the sunny Russian Federation every man and woman of the people feels strongly for the poor Ossetians and fully support unarmed mercy missions for them. It is purely a recognition of this small but loved people's national rights, since Caucasians are so very popular in Russia. Those forces were sent there strictly for ethical purposes, and were in no way intended to further secessionism and support a Russian puppet in the making.

As I said, Bwahahah!

But at least you did not call me a Russophobic racist, so I guess that is something.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Which is why you supported Chechnyan independence, I gather? Oh, wait, you do not.

Well, instituting Sharia law changes the morality of things substantially, don'tcha think? Ethics are not rigid sets of rules. Georgia is however an artificial creation of the Soviet state, where previously four ethnically Georgian principalities which were disunified had been brought into the Russian Empire and their rulers made Russian nobility (like the Bagration family). Ossetia and Abkhazia (and Ajaria) had every right to choose to leave it in that context, whereas Chechnya has been an integral part of Russia for 400 years and its government was so immoral as to invalidate their desires for independence.

What do you think of Hitler's unilateral partition of Czechoslovakia, by the way? Because those Sudeten Germans certainly WANTED to join the Third Reich. Drummed-up nationalist feelings in separatist border regions do not give great powers the right to de facto annex parts of lesser neighbours and launch campaigns of military aggression.

On the contrary, had I been ruler of Germany at the time I would have also annexed the Sudetenland. For that matter I would have annexed the rest of Bohemia and then made an offer to the Poles and Soviets to make a three-way annexation of the Baltics, with Germany getting Memelland and the Danzig Corridor, the Poles getting the rest of Lithuania and receiving Courland to provide a new seaport, and the Soviets getting Estonia and the other half of Latvia (to sweeten the deal for the Poles, I'd offer them about half of Slovakia with the other half and Transcarpathian Ruthenia going to Hungary). This would have nicely settled the borders of Germany without a major war, and hostilities over the annexations would have died down in a decade or two. Nazi Germany's problems started with the whole Jew-killing thing and the invasion of Poland, which sort of like with the Chechens being Islamic fundamentalists invalidated the territorial claims of the state by making the state unethical. Hmm, it seems I am pretty consistent, and NOT a hypocrite after all.

No Georgian military forces ever attacked Russian soil, they attacked rebels against the lawful national government and mistakenly hit Russian occupation forces as well.

They are peacekeepers, not occupation forces, and South Ossetia is an independent state which the malevolence of the United States and western Europe has prevented from being recognized, and that attack consisted of the slaughtering of Russian citizens in South Ossetia by massed artillery being indescriminately fired on hospitals, universities, and civilian residential blocks, you lying little fuckhead.

Oh yes, in the sunny Russian Federation every man and woman of the people feels strongly for the poor Ossetians and fully support unarmed mercy missions for them. It is purely a recognition of this small but loved people's national rights, since Caucasians are so very popular in Russia. Those forces were sent there strictly for ethical purposes, and were in no way intended to further secessionism and support a Russian puppet in the making.

As I said, Bwahahah! :lol:

But at least you did not call me a Russophobic racist, so I guess that is something.

Oh you stupid little fuck, do you seriously think that ethics and national interest are always compatible? In this case they happen to coincide. And you're too stupid to be a racist.

[[R_H]]

Peace bid as Ossetia crisis rages (BBC)

A delegation of European and US envoys is heading to Georgia as its conflict with Russia over the breakaway South Ossetia region deepens.

The envoys hope to broker a truce after three days of fighting which are said to have killed or injured hundreds, and sent thousands fleeing.

Russian jets have bombed several towns, including Gori in central Georgia.

Russia says it wants Georgian forces to withdraw to the positions they held outside South Ossetia before Thursday.

In the absence of independent verification, there are conflicting figures about the casualties suffered on both sides but the numbers appeared to rise sharply on Saturday.

Based on Russian and South Ossetian estimates, the death toll on the South Ossetian side was at least 1,400. According to Moscow, all but a few of the dead were civilians.

Georgian casualty figures ranged from 82 dead, including 37 civilians, to a figure of around 130 dead.

A Russian air strike on Gori, a Georgian town near South Ossetia, left 60 people dead, many of them civilians, Georgia says.

Based on information supplied by both sides, the UN refugee agency believes that about 2,400 people have fled South Ossetia to other parts of Georgia while between 4,000 and 5,000 have crossed the border into Russia.

ussian President Dmitry Medvedev has said his country is seeking "to force the Georgian side to peace".

Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili accused Russia of seeking to "destroy" his country.

Meanwhile, separatists in Abkhazia - Georgia's other breakaway region - say they have launched air and artillery strikes on Georgian forces in the Kodori Gorge.

'Broadening' conflict

The joint delegation of the US, EU and the Organisation of Security and Co-operation in Europe is due to visit Georgia on Saturday evening.

UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband said the fighting risked incurring "civilian losses on a large scale".

Emissaries from the US and Europe, all of them Nato members, are hardly likely to be seen as honest brokers by the Kremlin, when it comes to Georgia, BBC's diplomatic correspondent Bridget Kendall says.

The danger now is that Russia will not only use this crisis to demonstrate its military power in the region, but argue it is time to redraw the map, she adds.

Russian PM Vladimir Putin arrived in Russia's North Ossetia region on his return from the Olympics on Saturday.

He described the violence as "genocide", Russian media report.

Earlier, Mr Putin said it was unlikely now that South Ossetia would reintegrate with the rest of Georgia.

This, our diplomatic correspondent says, is precisely the outcome Georgia was trying to avoid.

Russia's ambassador to Nato, Dmitry Rogozin, said there could be no "consultations" with Georgia until Georgian forces returned to their positions and re-established "the status quo".

The crisis began spiralling when Georgian forces launched a surprise attack on Thursday night to regain control of South Ossetia, which has had de facto independence since the end of a civil war in 1992.

The move followed days of exchanges of heavy fire with the Russian-backed separatists, led by Eduard Kokoity.

In response to the Georgian crackdown, Moscow sent armoured units across the border into South Ossetia.

Tskhinvali 'destroyed'

Fighting continued around Tskhinvali overnight and into Saturday morning, although not at the same intensity as on Friday, Russian media reported.

Russia said it had taken control of the town, ejecting Georgian forces, while Tbilisi insisted its troops still held their ground.

Russia's ambassador to Georgia, Vyacheslav Kovalenko, was quoted by the Russian news agency Interfax as saying Tskhinvali had been "destroyed" by the Georgian military.

"The city of Tskhinvali no longer exists," he said. "It is gone."

The International Red Cross (ICRC) said it had received reports that hospitals in the city were "overflowing" with casualties.

In Gori, Russian aircraft bombed mostly military targets, where Georgian troops had been massing to support their forces engaged in South Ossetia.

The BBC's Richard Galpin in Gori heard loud explosions and saw large plumes of smoke rising into the sky; soldiers and civilians were seen running through the streets.

Injured civilians were being pulled from the buildings, which were on fire.

Georgian TV has shown pictures of damage to the Black Sea port of Poti, the site of a major oil shipment facility, after a reported Russian air strike.

Meanwhile Georgian TV reported that the Georgian-controlled section of the Kodori Gorge in Abkhazia was under fire, blaming the bombardment on Russian forces.

The foreign minister in Abkhazia's self-declared government, Sergei Shamba, said Abkhaz forces had launched an attack aimed at driving Georgian forces out of the gorge.

The Georgian parliament has approved a presidential decree declaring that the country is in a state of war for 15 days.

President Saakashvili told the BBC on Saturday that Russia meant to "destroy" Georgia, comparing its actions to the Soviet invasions of Finland and Afghanistan.

He said Moscow wanted to take control of energy routes to Europe and accused it of "war crimes" against civilians.

[CaptainChewbacca]

I'm so frigging lost. Did Georgia attack the capital of SO, or did Russia? The aggressor in this conflict seems to depend on who you ask.

[Coyote]

Either way, how long before the Republican Spin Machine uses this as a "good example why John McCain's experience is needed in the White House"?

[nickolay1]

I'm so frigging lost. Did Georgia attack the capital of SO, or did Russia? The aggressor in this conflict seems to depend on who you ask.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7551595.stm

On 08/07, Georgia agreed to a ceasefire. On that same evening, they launched a surprise attack.

[Darth Hoth]

Well, instituting Sharia law changes the morality of things substantially, don'tcha think? Ethics are not rigid sets of rules. Georgia is however an artificial creation of the Soviet state, where previously four ethnically Georgian principalities which were disunified had been brought into the Russian Empire and their rulers made Russian nobility (like the Bagration family). Ossetia and Abkhazia (and Ajaria) had every right to choose to leave it in that context, whereas Chechnya has been an integral part of Russia for 400 years and its government was so immoral as to invalidate their desires for independence.

So in other words, it is not nationality that should make for self-determination, but also that the government a country chooses should be acceptable to the great powers? I am most assuredly no fan of Islamic rule - at all - but if they necessarily want to be backwards arseholes, why stop them? It is still an internal matter. Now, if they really did go gunning over the border as the Federation claimed (I cannot check objectively, given that my information is limited to media coverage and the net, but I am very sceptical of Russian sources on anything that Russia is involved in) I would support a smack-down - no sovereign country should have to stand that - but else, I would leave well enough alone. Especially as the current puppet warlord appears to be every bit as bad. I am sorry, but anyone thinking that Russia is in Chechnya for its people's sake has a serious disconnect.

And what about the driving out of the ethnic Georgians from Abkhazia? Is that moral? Or did it never happen, being a mere figment of paranoid, anti-Russian Western media?

On the contrary, had I been ruler of Germany at the time I would have also annexed the Sudetenland. For that matter I would have annexed the rest of Bohemia and then made an offer to the Poles and Soviets to make a three-way annexation of the Baltics, with Germany getting Memelland and the Danzig Corridor, the Poles getting the rest of Lithuania and receiving Courland to provide a new seaport, and the Soviets getting Estonia and the other half of Latvia (to sweeten the deal for the Poles, I'd offer them about half of Slovakia with the other half and Transcarpathian Ruthenia going to Hungary). This would have nicely settled the borders of Germany without a major war, and hostilities over the annexations would have died down in a decade or two. Nazi Germany's problems started with the whole Jew-killing thing and the invasion of Poland, which sort of like with the Chechens being Islamic fundamentalists invalidated the territorial claims of the state by making the state unethical. Hmm, it seems I am pretty consistent, and NOT a hypocrite after all.

No, just a "pragmatic" giving fuck all about the rights of smaller nations. You honestly do not see how violent aggression and cynical partition of independent countries might "make a state unethical"? If you had your way, would I be living in the Soviet Union right now, or are there few enough territorial claims on Sweden to let us survive as a relatively independent satellite?

Though on second thought, if you ascribe to the "Great Powers do what they like, tough shit" school, you should not cloak it in nationalist rhetoric. Your take on the interwar situation, caring nothing for the nation-state, is quite at odds with your moving concern for the Ossetians' national rights; how the hell would, say, the Czechs' national independence be worth less than the Ossetians' subsuming into Russia? I guess it is the "Anything that works for Russia" approach that fits better. So yes, you ARE a hypocrite.

They are peacekeepers, not occupation forces, and South Ossetia is an independent state which the malevolence of the United States and western Europe has prevented from being recognized, and that attack consisted of the slaughtering of Russian citizens in South Ossetia by massed artillery being indescriminately fired on hospitals, universities, and civilian residential blocks, you lying little fuckhead.

Oh yes, peacekeepers. The Georgian government invited them to keep the peace on their sovereign soil. Wait . . .

Those Russian citizens still live in Georgia, and are thus subject to its laws. South Ossetia is neither independent country nor Russian satrapy de jure, even if it is both de facto. Russia has absolutely no right to attack a sovereign country, on any pretext (and it is not like there is some genocide going on, either). Till I see independent evidence otherwise, I will not accept its own army's counter-terrorist actions as a justification for foreign invasion.

Sources for thousands of casualties to indiscriminate Georgian slaughter-attacks? They would not happen to be Russian, would they? Do you wish me to dig up Reich broadcasts to "prove" that the Poles attacked first and were genociding Germans? Anything that comes from their military or media should be treated as suspect at best.

Oh you stupid little fuck, do you seriously think that ethics and national interest are always compatible? In this case they happen to coincide. And you're too stupid to be a racist.

Ehm, no; did I ever say so? But when has Russia ever given a damn about ethics? It is all about power and intimidation, ever and always.

[Duckie]

I'm so frigging lost. Did Georgia attack the capital of SO, or did Russia? The aggressor in this conflict seems to depend on who you ask.

Only if you ask propaganda rags in Finland.

Georgia attacked the SO capital, a nation that has been independent for 20 years and peaceful for over 10 now, by bomarding it indiscriminately with rockets from Katyushas.

Why? Nobody knows, it's possibly the stupidest gesture ever. The Georgians apparently wanted to seize the half of South Ossetia they weren't occupying in a quick strike and negotiate with Russia from that advantage, using their western training and the fact that they've been sucking up to the USA in preparation for this gambit for a while now.

However, they underestimated or were willfully blind to the fact that not only could Russia defeat them, but that Abkhazia and South Ossetia had already defeated them in the 90s during their independence war. They basically, from what I understand, underestimated the speed of the Russian response and how pissed Russia would be at an attack on its citizens (because South Ossetians, like North Ossetians, are Russian citizens and wish to be so, but for historically strange reasons South Ossetia ended up in Georgia officially despite the Ossetians' desires).

Calling it "Georgia attacking South Ossetian Rebels" is like saying the War of 1812 was "American Rebels defending against an attempt by Britain to reclaim its territory".

In the process, they killed hundreds of civilians, destroyed hospitals, schools, and the Russian Peacekeepers HQ.

Russia was understandably pissed, and has decided to stop letting Georgia pretend it still owns Abkhazia and SO, two nations that seceded years ago and wish to ultimately join the Russian Federation, like North Ossetia.

Does that clear it up?

The only people who claim Russia attacked South Ossetia are those that claim it is a part of Georgia, which is both patently ludicrous and distorting the facts.

But some people would find a way to malign Russia for passing out food and blankets to the homeless, let alone defending another nation who is its ally from an attempt to re-annex it.

[Darth Wong]

Either way, how long before the Republican Spin Machine uses this as a "good example why John McCain's experience is needed in the White House"?

As well they should, because the last time McCain got involved in a war of unification between the north and south halves of a region, it was such a roaring success

[Broomstick]

I'll also admit to being raised with a deep and abiding love for the Russian Empire inoculated in the usual ways by exile families

Please do NOT presume to speak for all "exile" families - you certainly don't for mine!

Fact is, while life was often reasonable for those in the upper classes (which, apparently, your family was) for the average peasant (which my family was) life sucked, sucked, sucked under the Tsars - which had a LOT to do with why the Revolution occurred!

Abiding love for the Russian Empire? Fuck that noise - when my grandparents fled for their lives to a country halfway around the world most of the "love" of the empire had already been burned from them, and when they realized how much better life was in the US, despite language barriers, discrimination, and being shit poor, they never looked back. They even stopped speaking Russian in their homes, they wanted no part of either Tsarist or Communist Russia. To hell with all of them!

Of course, we see this reflected in your love of authoritarian government, Marina - you always fancy yourself on top, among the elite. It never crosses your mind that you would be far more likely to end up under the wheels of the state, being ground to dust for the benefit of those above you. Such is usually the lot of peasants and misfits in the authoritarian state.

(I am, of course, ethnically German, but we were upper-class in Russia at the time so it didn't matter back then). For all that I dislike my family I still feel every cultural impulse that Fima would toward Russia--the land and its customs, I do love.

Well, bravo for you - as it happens my family was ethnically Russian and it did jack shit for us. While there are some things I do admire about Russia, both historically and culturally, and I usually get along quite well with Russians I meet, neither the Tsars nor the Communists are governments I would have wanted to live under

Frankly I think the ideal end to this solution would be for Russia to annex Abkhazia and South Ossetia and then cast off Georgia. Who needs them, anyway? The Georgians can, after losing those regions, join NATO with wild abandon and enter the EU process. And why not?

How about the fear that if they do they their remaining territory will be nibbled away through subversive tactics of various sorts?

As a general rule, sovereign nations do not willingly yield territory.

I'd propose offering that to them as a quid-pro-quo, even; the Russians get the breakaway territories without dispute, Georgia enters a European orbit.

What if Europe doesn't want Georgia? That leaves them in the shitter, doesn't it?

[Broomstick]

I'm curious to ask people who think Russia orchestrated a conflict with Georgia - what is the gain from such a conflict? Which resources does Georgia have? South Ossetia? Shit-poor nations who managed to collectively ruin even their centralized electricity supply system which was inherited from Soviet days?

You are saying Russia has "gain" from the war? But what is it?

Understand that Russia doesn't have much in the way of natural barriers between them and other people. Every time the Mongols or some other Asian group wanted to invade Europe they went through Russia first. There is some basis for them being just a bit paranoid, even if in the 20th Century they gained superpower status.

In a very simplified way: Russia has historically sought to add to its territory, either through conquest or through satellite states, to provide a buffer between the outside world and the heart of Russia. This tends to exhaust an invading army, draw out supply lines, and leave invaders vulnerable to winter, when the Russians tend to have the advantage. It worked against Napoleon, and against the Nazis (although, of course, that was not the whole of Russia victories in either situation.

So... what does Russia gain from South Ossetia and/or Georgia? A buffer. If nothing else, a buffer between them and other nations. If there are other goodies to be had, so much the better.

[TheMuffinKing]

Either way, how long before the Republican Spin Machine uses this as a "good example why John McCain's experience is needed in the White House"?

As well they should, because the last time McCain got involved in a war of unification between the north and south halves of a region, it was such a roaring success

You mean when he was fighting the Confederates? I knew he was old, but I didn't think helping to abolish slavery was an accomplishment of his.

[Broomstick]

And when 70% of the population of a distinct territorial entity wants to be Russian, and has gotten Russian citizenship to prove it, that territorial entity should in fact become Russian. How hard of a train of thought is that for you to internalize?

So... by that reasoning the US should give back a substantial portion of Texas and Arizona to Mexico (probably California and New Mexico as well), and Quebec should be an independent nation.

And, oh yes, let's reinstate the Confederate States of America immediately.

And Tibet really is Chinese because, you know, it doesn't matter that China encouraged large numbers of Chinese to move there - right now there are parts of Tibet majority Chinese so that "territorial entity" should just shut the fuck up and comply with their Chinese overlords.

Now, to be honest, I haven't a pony in this race - for all I know in a perfect world South Ossetia should be Russian. Or maybe Georgian. Or, I don't know, a protectorate of Proxima Centauri. The fact is, there world is littered with ethnic enclaves of people who "should" be part of a different nation than the one they're in (Africa in particular is bad for this) and redrawing all the borders is impractical for pragmatic reasons.

I suspect that, as in most such conflicts, both sides have dirty hands.

But, on a less logical note - Marina, will you stop sucking Russian cock quite so hard? We know you love authoritarian regimes, but give it a break.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

And Tibet really is Chinese because, you know, it doesn't matter that China encouraged large numbers of Chinese to move there - right now there are parts of Tibet majority Chinese so that "territorial entity" should just shut the fuck up and comply with their Chinese overlords.

Well, the majority of people in that region are Russian ethnically, and they happen to have Russian citizenship to back that up.


That, and the ruling government of that region refuses to be part of Georgia, since the collapse of the Soviet Union. I wonder why that has slipped past many people's heads.

[Fingolfin_Noldor]

Those Russian citizens still live in Georgia, and are thus subject to its laws. South Ossetia is neither independent country nor Russian satrapy de jure, even if it is both de facto. Russia has absolutely no right to attack a sovereign country, on any pretext (and it is not like there is some genocide going on, either). Till I see independent evidence otherwise, I will not accept its own army's counter-terrorist actions as a justification for foreign invasion.

Again, if the local government does not recognise the sovereignty the Georgian Government, for the last fucking 17 years, much less their fucking laws, with a majority of people refusing to be Georgian citizens, doesn't this change the situation of who actually owns that piece of land?

[Broomstick]

Earlier in the day, Georgian troops scattered along the frontline seemed convinced that victory was within their grasp.

What the fuck made them think they could take on Russia and win? Oh, right, they thought they could attack South Ossetia with no consequences.

This, after all, was not the ragtag army that was forced to retreat in humiliation by Ossetian irregulars in 1992, but the well-equipped military force trained by the United States and blooded in Iraq.

Well, the US might have equipped and trained them, but we don't give away all the goodies to our allies. Also, there is a sharp difference between the resources of a small nation such as Georgia and the superpower-level military such as the US or Russia.

With heavy artillery and Grad rockets, Georgian forces pounded Tskhinvali through the hours of darkness before ground troops entered the town and engaged in intense hand-to-hand fighting.

Hmm... sounds like an attack to me...

But as the day wore on it became apparent that Georgian president Mikheil Saakashvili's gamble of Russian non-intervention had backfired.

Whoops. Don't poke the angry bear with a sharp stick, and if you do, don't bitch if the bear gets pissed and rips your face off.

Suddenly two European nations, one a key ally of the United States and Nato aspirant, were in a state of war.

Georgia a "key ally"? Since when? The UK is a "key ally". Georgia is... well, we might like them more than Russia at times, but "key ally" is a SERIOUS overestimation of Georgia's worth to the US.

Fact is, it's in the self-interest of the US to maintain cordial relations with Russia. Just like it's in our self-interest to remain cordial with China. Neither of those two nations could be properly described as a US "ally", but they are formidable enough that all three of them have a vested interest in not rocking the boat amongst that trio. Failure to recognize that fact was a serious miscalculation on Georgia's part. Fact is, if it's in the best interest of the US, the US will happily throw Georgia under the wheels of the Russian bus.

"It's not South Ossetia we are at war with, it's Russia," the company's commander said, shaking his head at the magnitude of his statement.

Sucks to be you, then.

Deeply angry with Georgia's pro-western policies since the Rose Revolution of 2003, Moscow's fury has grown as its neighbour made a concerted push towards Nato membership. This was an explosive message of intent that Georgia, long decried in Moscow as a terrorist state, would be punished - even flattened if need be.

You know, if the Evil Russians(TM) had really wanted South Ossetia they could have simply taken it at any time - after all, the USSR had more or less done that post-WWII. But they didn't. They put up with the prior status quo, although they clearly weren't pleased with it, without starting a shooting war. The Georgians started the shooting, near as I can see here. There were, of course, provocations, but that won't necessarily justify either side here.

"The fighting has been hard and it will get harder yet," one young corporal said. "We will win though, just like David slew Goliath."

Sorry, in a Georgia vs. Russia conflict my money is on Russia.

[Broomstick]

And Tibet really is Chinese because, you know, it doesn't matter that China encouraged large numbers of Chinese to move there - right now there are parts of Tibet majority Chinese so that "territorial entity" should just shut the fuck up and comply with their Chinese overlords.

Well, the majority of people in that region are Russian ethnically, and they happen to have Russian citizenship to back that up.

The thing is, that whole region is a mish-mash of ethnicities - there are families who have, say, lived in Moscow for generations but still self-identify as "German". There is no way to neatly draw up borders between ethnicities in that part of the world due to mass migrations (both voluntary and forced), people retaining one ethnic identity while living elsewhere for generations, and conflicting territorial claims. No matter where you draw a border someone is going to be unhappy.

Thus, in the real world compromises that satisfy no one must be made. The world can't afford to go to war every other week over these issues.

[Axis Kast]

They WANTED Russian citizenship, however. They had to apply for it, and only 70% of the population of South Ossetia has, in fact, taken up that option.

What business has Russia, catering to the wants and desires of citizens of Georgia?

So stuff that one, because obviously the people of South Ossetian want to be Russians, not fucking Georgians, or else they would not have sought Russian citizenship. And when 70% of the population of a distinct territorial entity wants to be Russian, and has gotten Russian citizenship to prove it, that territorial entity should in fact become Russian.

By this logic, Washington, D.C. had no right whatsoever to oppose the secession of the southern states of the Union in 1861.

Also by this logic, Western intervention on behalf of non-Serbian ethnics in both Bosnia and Kosovo is perfectly justified. Let us all remember that these are actions you have spoken out against as evidence of Slavophobia – because huge “supermajorities,” as you put them, of Kosovar Albanians don’t count; only blessed Serbians.

The rest of your post with all your bullshit about how the Russians don't have the best interest of the South Ossetians at heart is useless conjecture based on the idea that the citizenship is a Russian ploy they never participated in.

Popular participation of the South Ossetian population is irrelevant. The Russian government’s issuing those passports and assuming responsibility for those individuals identical to those undertaken on behalf of its own citizens was a violation of the principle of Georgian sovereignty.

That, and as I've pointed out- most of their relatives are living in North Ossetia, which is a part of Russia. You don't want to apply for a visa to visit your parents/brother/sister/uncle living in, say, Massachusetts, and neither do they. Hence, the Russian citizenship.

This is horrible logic. According to your proposition, everyone with relatives in another country ought to become a citizen of that country, for the sake of convenience.

Well, instituting Sharia law changes the morality of things substantially, don'tcha think? Ethics are not rigid sets of rules.

How about Putin’s law?

And I'm just waiting to hear you try and play balance-the-scales in the Balkans as you calculate which ethnic group has committed the least atrocities, and is therefore, by some ridiculous philosophy only you can understand, eligible to hold sway over all others for their moral betterment or some such (which is really the only thing I can assume would justify their continued subjugation -- and that's really what it was, under Serbian government).

Georgia is however an artificial creation of the Soviet state, where previously four ethnically Georgian principalities which were disunified had been brought into the Russian Empire and their rulers made Russian nobility (like the Bagration family).

Hm… A polyglot nation… now where could I find another such example of peoples amalgamated largely by circumstance. Could it be… in Russia, perhaps?

Hmm, it seems I am pretty consistent, and NOT a hypocrite after all.

Not really. You’re just able to do a lot of embarrassing mental gymnastics, to your own great discredit.

[Adrian Laguna]

[quote="Broomstick]

Suddenly two European nations, one a key ally of the United States and NATO aspirant, were in a state of war.

Georgia a "key ally"? Since when? The UK is a "key ally". Georgia is... well, we might like them more than Russia at times, but "key ally" is a SERIOUS overestimation of Georgia's worth to the US.[/quote]
Read that again, and ask yourself how many times Russia has tried to join NATO. The key ally they reffer to is the Bear.