Meanwhile, over in Georgia

http://www.exile.ru/178/178010101.html

As for why I'm reading this thread...none of your fucking business. Or, more succinctly, because I am curious. Perhaps that doens't meet your distinguished qualifications (or am I supposed to brag about my neighbor who goes to Georgia 3-4 times a year for work) but then again, I don't feel the need to be a) interesting enough to gain your subjective approval or b) care if you care.

And while I enjoy Ed's intellect (and he's a Mac dude so he starts off a lot higher in the ranking than mose) from time to time, I don't blindly follow his pontifications every which way. He's right sometimes and he's wrong others. Same with Blount. I realize you want to blanket Ed with authority on this issue but unfortunately, some of us will be happy to watch the issue actually unfold. Can't you find some other thread to shit on?

If there is a news topic I feel it important to cite a connection or personal stake in something as a matter of 'declared interest' - if you think that's a brag you're insecure, so please don't take it out on me. Although he's my boyfriend, Ed has actually earned my respect for his knowledge in this area - I don't 'blindly follow his pontifications every which way'.

As for this inane series of posts, I only care enough to yank your chain. Which was so unimpressively easy that I have to say it is now...boring. See ya 'round, Suzy.

(Back to tonight's action in Tblisi for y'all and bed for me)

A TV producer in Tbilisi reports on the situation

Anybody as creeped out by the whole South Ossetia thing as I am?

The South Ossetians, presumably

Uh, okay...

Serious answer: it's pretty disturbing. Things could get really ugly, really fast, and much as one hopes the powers that be will let their economic interests trump their sabre-rattling, sometimes shit gets out of hand.

xpost

I'm not sympathetic to either side, here.

If anything, Georgia's behavior seems to be the more questionable of the two, but that all depends on whether Han Russia shot first.

yeah, bad behavior all around. timing it during the Olympics is such a classic shitbag move ("no one's looking! let's kill some people!")

I tend to agree but they're both behaving like swine.

Interestingly, the Ossetians' ancestors, the Alans (who accompanied the Vandals into Gaul and settled in Portugal) are also ancestors of the Serbs.

I'm no apologist for Russia, but the more I think about it, the more likely it seems to me that Georgia struck first. Given that Russia has extended citizenship to most of South Ossetia, I'd imagine they see themselves as legally obliged to defend the area. (Whether or not that's also a handy prextext in realpolitik terms is, of course, another thing entirely.)

Georgian Foreign Ministry website's been amusingly hacked: http://www.mfa.gov.ge

A terrible situation, but not all surprising ... on the upside, for the West it is useful as it bodes well for perhaps strengthening or locking down HEU. Georgia has always been the weakest link in nuclear proliferation due to geography and political climate (i.e. Georgia currently is a 2.x on CPI) and both the United States and Russia have been at loss about what to due about the northern border (including South Ossetia), so in the least it offers a opportunity for greater global security if annexation occurs.

I don’t want to say too much (to save myself from looking like an ass) but while contemporary politics would suggest this is about annexation I believe this is political maneuvering on Russia’s part to put Saakashvili in the spotlight (which is obviously not in his best interest). It should be said, Saakashvili has fewer friends in the West than Putin and if an overthrow is intended this was the way to do it (at least from a strategic POV).

I live in georegia but i dont see rusia no where not even sound but they says theres tanks should i be worrie

"Nø need to fear the Russians. The Havarti Quesadilla Revolutionary Årmy is the real menace. The south will be reclaimed. Long live the Dano-Mex revølution. Long Live Knud Gonzales, the river to his people."

haha jon

might be a troll but stil a+

might be a troll

You think?

yeah, bad behavior all around. timing it during the Olympics is such a classic shitbag move ("no one's looking! let's kill some people!")

-- Shakey Mo Collier, Friday, 8 August 2008 18:54 (2 hours ago) Link

It's never a good time.

Quite a good article in tomorrow's Times. There doesn't seem to be much doubt that this is the big one.

I was in Georgia a month ago and read about the South Ossetia / Abkhazia situations. I remember thinking to myself "see, there are always a million potential flashpoints that seem really serious but never really go off" and smugly imagined myself as thinking like a seasoned diplomat.

Oops.

Richard Holbrooke, the former American ambassador to the United Nations, said that Russia’s aims in the escalating conflict were clear. “They have two goals,” he said. “To do a creeping annexation of South Ossetia and Abkhazia and, secondly, to overthrow Saakashvili, who is a tremendous thorn in their side.”

this is fucking awful.

and it can grow worse still, much worse...

...and not only in georgia.

Good article by Edward Lucas there

I'll tell you what I find weird - the hordes of readers' comments that pour in under any article even mildly critical of Russia or the causes that the Russian government supports. Assuming these aren't all written from the Kremlin (and that's quite a big assumption), it's striking how they uniformly take the party line. Russian people seem to think of their government not like we relate to ours, but rather like we support our national football teams. Putin is Wayne Rooney in an England shirt.

1,500 Reported Killed in Georgia Battle

- and attacks might increase today. This is fucked up.

this:
"But on top of that is a vital Western interest. The biggest threat Russia poses to Europe is the Kremlin's monopoly on energy export routes to the West from the former Soviet Union. The one breach in that is the oil and gas pipeline that leads from energy-rich Azerbaijan to Turkey, across Georgia. If Georgia falls, Europe's hopes of energy independence from Russia fall too."

Michael Klare is surely biting his nails.

http://www.doubledogmusic.com/images/2005/AzPipeMap.gif

That BTC pipeline bordering Georgia could end up costing thousands of lives to protect.

I am just sharing this from somewhere else because I think it's notable: Tom Clancy actually almost got this right with the PC game Ghost Recon (the Original). Here is a quick Synopsis:

Ghost Recon begins in 2008, with civil unrest in Russia. Ultra-nationalists have seized power in Russia, with plans to rebuild the government. Their first step is clandestine support of rebel factions in Georgia and the Baltic States. This is where the Ghosts come in: to silence the invasion. Armed with some of the most advanced weaponry in the world, the soldiers of the Ghost Recon force are covertly inserted into area of operations and given specific missions to curtail the rebel actions and overthrow their benefactors.

Someone call the green berets quick, Tom Clancy needs them!

Analysis that correctly identifies Georgia's president as the initiator and aggressor in all this, other media outlets be damned (though MSNBC'S pithy, 7-word "Russia retaliates as Georgia attacks breakaway province" scrolling on the screen should be highly commended)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/08/russia.georgia1

Tom de Waal, of the Institute for War and Peace Reporting and an expert on the region, said: "Clearly there have been incidents on both sides, but this is obviously a planned Georgian operation, a contingency plan they have had for some time, to retake [the South Ossetian capital] Tskhinvali.

"Possibly the Georgians calculated that, with Putin in Beijing, they could recapture the capital in two days and then defend it over the next two months, because the Russians won't take this lying down."

If Georgia calculated that Russia would be inhibited by Putin's presence at the Olympics, that soon backfired.

Mr Saakashvili, the Georgian president, was launching into a long rant - running 7 minutes overtime until 9:07 AM PST - on CNN just recently. Talking about Russian genocide, talking about how they had planned this by amassing troops on the border for months (troops Putin calls "peacekeepers"_)...hm. Poor TJ or whats-anchor's-name had to apologize to Frederika for stepping onto her airtime

"Russia attacks after Georgia attacks breakaway province of Georgia" might be better

Perhaps but the problem is South Ossetians surely don't consider themselves a "province of Georgia," they want to unite with North Ossetia

I can't remember whether Russia applied similar logic to Chechnya

I can't comment whether the Ossetian situation is similar to Chechnya's and I surely do not support the Russian stance regarding the latter.

And yes, Russian immigrants frequently populate non-Russian former areas of the USSR, and subsequently try to use the pretext of "supporting Russian minorities" in their aggression afterwards.

And yes, as mentioned elsewhere (notably here http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0809/p25s28-woeu.html) perhaps this is further proof that Russia is violently reacting to Georgia's implicit decision to join NATO, and it was timed with that in mind (to the chagrin of the United States, especially with its concern for the energy supplies in that region).

B-b-but you still can't deny the fact that the Georgian leader miscalculated here in his decision to attack the separatist forces at Tskhinvali. I don't know if an analogy to Chechnya is therefore even accurate or an oversimplification

I should rather say Georgia's *desire* to join NATO, not decision, since it of course hasn't happened (yet?)

Ever? is a better question now

I don't think it's like Chechnya really, I was just making an oblique point. Namely that the argument in Russia seems to be that what happened in Kosovo justifies division of countries with an identifiable Russian minority - but it's inconceivable that Russia could be divided in the same way. Not many people argue for uniting the Ossetians under Georgian sovereignty.

Whether or not it was wise for Georgia to attack now is another question. It appears not. However, there isn't much doubt that the separatists are funded and encouraged by Russia, and that they have been attacking the rest of Georgia recently. So what are they supposed to do, just wait and hope it gets better?

These are all questions that go back to 1992 (when the uneasy peace between the Ossetians and Georgians was first regulated by "Russian peacekeepers,") from my understanding, and there do not seem to be any easy answers

Yet what makes it more problematic now is the factor of those pipelines in the region. Just what we needed in this era of oil speculation

There's no possible justification for Russia to go anywhere near that pipeline.

Also most troubling is how Georgia is just one hop-skip-jump nation (Armenia or Azerbaijan, take your pick) over from Iran, and the non-covert, growing Russian/Iranian relationship in direct opposition to the West (despite all the surface talk of supporting sanctions). Is this all some sort of proxy war playing out (in addition to the ethnic issues at hand) in regards to preemptively preventing the expansion of NATO and a US invasion of Iran? If this gets worse, now would he perfect time to enforce the stranglehold on oil these two have over the West, and witness direct financial turmoil on our end. Yet I don't think that necessarily serves anyone's interests at this moment, despite how Iran has repeatedly gone on record saying they'd like their new oil bourse to weaken the dollar

It seems like a lot of mental chess is being played out, and the timing of this is too bad to be true.

Oh well, maybe we should all turn to Ghost Recon for some insight

Just to lighten the mood, but gazing up there - THIS is my favorite sentence in this thread. Maybe any thread. When you find that quarter under the dust and hair wedged in the cushions of your sofa, please use it to buy a clue if you haven't earmarked it for the pizza guy.

Georgia pulls out. Seems like the best that can be hoped for in the circumstances (if Russia stops as well). Wildly different casualty figures too.

cheney says russian aggression "will not go unanswered" wtf does that mean? is the us really gearing up for military conflict with russia?

It means "strongly worded letter to follow."

seriously tho, shit is scary.

anyone really think the us is going to get involved militarily?

after hearing bush talk about it, not really. seems like the most they're gonna do is help georgian troops get back home from iraq to help out.

The U.S. can't get involved militarily with Russia, not that it would be advisable in any form. The logistics of our troops in Iraq+Afghanistan are hardly sustainable as is.

god, i hope so.

So as the situation worsens with fighting spreading to Abkhazia and Russia's naval presence storms the Black Sea... at the Security Council mtg Russia was launches into a litany of grievances held over from the past 4-6 years against the US when told it must pull out immediately.

Fucking great. Thanks for setting the precedent Cheney.

Isn't this also what this admin was warned against regarding preemption in 2002?

http://www.rferl.org/content/Heated_Words_But_No_Action_On_UN_Security_Council/1189975.html

Khalilzad's angered Russian counterpart, Vitaly Churkin, fired back that accusing Russia of terrorizing the civil population is "absolutely unacceptable."

"Now, let me say about Mr. Khalilzad's statement regarding 'terror' against the civil population," he began. "Such a statement, honorable Mr. Khalilzad, is absolutely unacceptable; moreover when it comes from a representative of a country whose actions with regard to the civil population are well known in Iraq, in Afghanistan, even in Serbia."

They can - and will - use Iraq to justify anything.

Georgia's hopes of joining NATO are comatose; its sovereignty on life support

Sorry for lack of editing in that post and all my posts for the last 7 years; pulling an all-nighter again here, and don't care to self-edit. Oh, ILX, how I explain myself to thee

>>anyone really think the us is going to get involved militarily?

-- jeremy waters, Sunday, August 10, 2008 9:04 PM<<

No but considering McCain was saying talking about expelling Russia from G8 *last* week this whole thing couldn't get more serious on a diplomatic front.

http://www.voanews.com/english/2008-07-29-voa68.cfm

Richardson calling McCain out yesterday lol - http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=66226§ionid=3510203

Good commentary from Moscow Times:

http://www.themoscowtimes.com/article/1016/42/369524.htm

The G8 expulsion could once again divide the world order into pro-U.S. and pro-Russian domains. The world's rogue states would eagerly join a pro-Moscow bloc, and this would make it difficult for the United States to fulfill its key foreign policy objectives. At a time when Washington intends to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions, secure loose nuclear materials, stabilize Iraq and achieve resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it cannot afford to instigate a Cold Peace in U.S.-Russian relations.

Hell, even quintessential hawk Bolton opposed McCain's expulsion idea - as of last week :
http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2008/07/29/john-bolton-questions-mccains-foreign-policy-proposals/?mod=googlenews_wsj

Been trying to think who Saakashvili reminds me of, I think it's Rupert Pupkin in "The King of Comedy".

^

The totally underrated Institute for War and Peace Reporting has had reporters in the Caucasus writing regularly for the past several years -

http://www.iwpr.net/?p=crs&s=p&o=-&apc_state=henh

I've been quite surprised by how one-sided the reporting of this conflict has been on the Beeb and elsewhere

But all down to rolling news tho, innit? We have film and lots of juicy photos of Georgian civilians suffering and dying in Gori but we don't have anything from South Ossetia; we have the Georgian President, who speaks good English and likes to put on a performance for the cameras while the Russians aren't saying much and they're all a bit faceless and grey anyway.

Check out 'background'.

http://indepth.news.sky.com/InDepth/topic/Georgia

People actually *watch* the news to see dying and suffering civilians -- nobody gives a crap about background or context. Explaining complicated and sensitive political issues that require one's concentration = boring. Dead people = ratings.

i read ilx for the challops

They can - and will - use Iraq anything to justify anything

They can has anything

nobody gives a crap about background or context.

Speak for yourself.

In the middle of South Ossetia, the formerly quiet village of Kheiti is now a hive of activity.

A newly-built red-roofed block of flats sits in an empty swathe of land. The site around the building, all mountains of sand and cement, is swarming with trucks, cranes and other heavy machinery, all of them busy constructing new apartment blocks here.

The red-roofed building is home to 30 Ossetian families, who were moved here by (the pro-Georgian “provisional administration” of South Ossetia, led by Dmitry) Sanakoyev... in early November.

...

This ... administration of South Ossetia has provided each of the 30 families with a flat equipped with new household equipment and furniture, as well as with the sum of 6,000 laris (around 3,800 dollars).

In addition, one member from each family has been given a job in the temporary administration and receives a monthly salary worth 500 US dollars, which is paid onto a plastic card and can be drawn at a bank near the block of flats.

One Kheiti resident, who wished not to be named, told IWPR that the work was a pure formality, and the new employees were receiving the money for doing nothing.

“In actual fact, they do no work”, he said. “They are simply registered as employed and get wages.”

The apartment block has a central heating system, and is served by guards, cooks and maids round the clock, all free of charge. This prosperity is causing resentment among other locals.

Life is tough in the Georgian villages a short distance from Kheiti, and the locals do not conceal their anger at the luxuries being enjoyed by the Ossetian arrivals.

“We are nearly starving,” said Robinzon Babutsidze, 51, who is unemployed and lives in the village of Kvemo Anchabeti. “We can’t find jobs. We used to make a living by selling apples. But the Tskhinvali road has been closed for a long time, and taking apples to the market by the detour road is too expensive.

“Instead of helping us, they brought in Ossetians to Kheiti, who live there as if they were presidents. Is this what we fought for in the Nineties?”

Georgia’s Showcase in South Ossetia
http://www.iwpr.net/?p=crs&s=f&o=342149&apc_state=henfcrs342276

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2008/08/war_in_south_ossetia.html

Beautiful pictures, though taking pleasure from them does make me feel a bit guilty. I wonder how distant a war needs to be before aesthetics win over compassion?

Looks like Russia isn't backing off any time soon. I'm guessing this will end with regime change in Tbilisi, and yet more bleating about Western hypocrisy in protesting this when it's just the same as Milosevic in the Hague. I wouldn't fancy being Saakashvili right now. He either flees exposing him for a western stooge (cue more bleating) or, what? What happens to renegades sent to answer to Moscow these days?

On the other hand, Ivanov is on telly just now absolutely denying that Russian troops will cross into Georgia-proper. It's like Schrödinger's Cat in there.

For someone who gives a crap about background and context: http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200011/kaplan-georgia

Good historical info arguing that this Caucasus region was never wholly "Western"... before getting more recent

belgravia comes out of retirement for this:

http://www.belgraviadispatch.com/2008/08/georgia_on_my_mind.html

Noticed that as well. (And have been tartly dealing with a commenter who is resolutely missing the point.)

That Atlantic article is fantastic

Surprisingly informative Dealbreaker forum on the conflict in 2 parts:

http://dealbreaker.com/2008/08/qa_on_wtf_is_going_on_with_rus.php
http://dealbreaker.com/2008/08/qa_on_wtf_is_going_on_with_rus_1.php

so what is russia actually trying to do here?

assert territorial hegemony

is western military involvement still unlikely?

hell yes.

no one in the west is sending their army over there no way in hell

although it's funny that we gotta give up some of our fighting buddies in iraq.

Khalilzad indicating US is gonna play the Hezbollah-style cleanup role here. There are some noises about G-8 action, but it seems dependent on what Russia does now (i.e. on Abkhazia?) and not all that likely.

Good job by former NY corporate lawyer (and Columbia Law grad) Saakashvili, but it's not like Putin isn't being a dick and taking full advantage

So from the little I've read it seems as if Georgia were totally banking on the US/NATO coming in to boost their numbers when they started this off. And of course that hasnt happened (did they forget Iraq was going on or something?), and Russia have issued smackdown and I just read an article quoting some Georgian soldiers saying "we have democracy and this is how the US repays us, by spitting on us, where are they?".

I am finding this all a little confusing but I'm sure I'm not the only one.

More context: Greenwald interviews Pro. Charles King.

"Mr Saakashvilli may also have banked on support from his closest ally, US president George W Bush, whose administration is said to have given tacit support for a Georgian assault on South Ossetia in the believe that the territory could be recaptured within 48 hours. "

from http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/georgia/2529986/Georgia-conflict-Screams-of-the-injured-rise-from-residential-streets.html

so who really knows.

If its true BushCo quietly said "go git em, it'll be a pushover and we'll back you up" and are now standing back and ignoring the whole thing, thats pretty damn cunty.

ya, not like him at all.

LOL well, I certainly wasn't suggesting it was a suprise.

I spent most of yesterday telling people here (Moscow) that I found it absolutely unimaginable that what everyone here believes -- that Saakashvili would've never ordered an attack without the full and explicit support of Washington -- was simply unimaginable. That Bush, given everything else he has going on in the world, plus his abysmal approval ratings, would approve military action by an unstable government in a tiny country that would be *guaranteed* to enrage the Kremlin (and, in the height of bad taste, do it just as the Olympics were beginning). No sale.

The front page article on one of the business papers here yesterday called on the government to raze Georgia's infrastructure and throw the country into chaos, otherwise the world community would never give Russia the respect it deserves (and virtually in that language). Admittedly you didn't read that everywhere, but that's a publication focused on business news.

From the beloved Daily Mail: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...easefire.html#

One pro-government tabloid, Tvoi Den, claimed that President Saakashvili made a suicide attempt because he realised the war was lost.

'His bodyguard knocked the gun out of his hand at the very last moment,' said the paper, which also claimed the 40-yearold president was mentally ill and spiced its report with lurid allegations about his sex life.

Thanks for committing nationalistic suicide first! If the Larson post that Belgravia linked to is accurate - most def. worth reading here - http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2008/08/09/georgia-and-russia/ - then Mr. Saakashvili has been anticipating this for a hell of a long time:

Soon after taking office, he succeeded in regaining Georgian control over the southwestern province of Ajara. Then, in the summer of 2004, citing growing banditry and chaos, he sent Interior Ministry troops into South Ossetia. After a series of inconclusive clashes, the troops were forced to make a humiliating withdrawal.

Not to mention the April 21st phone call Belgravia claims in which Putin explicitly warned Saaky to knock it off or else. I can't sympathize much for Saaky or his WSJ op-eds asking for Western intervention now - only with the Georgian people

Unless, of course, the rumors of an American bait-&-switch re: NATO are actually true. Then I can sympathize with Saaky. Still not advisable to go around kicking waking bears though, is it?

That Belgravia post again, which is excellent: http://www.belgraviadispatch.com/2008/08/georgia_on_my_mind.html

Man, I just hope we're not in the early days of some Threads-like situation.

From the Greenwald inteview with Charles King to which I linked above:

GG: One of the things that's a little difficult to understand is this idea that Georgia miscalculated what would be Russia's response. I mean, hasn't Russia been fairly unequivocal in the past, including the recent past, about that fact that they did intend to defend those provinces from incursions by Georgia, or an attempt to sort of take away their semi-autonomous status. It is really a surprise that Russia reacted the way that it did?

CK: Well, it's not a terrible surprise, but I think you also have to look at things from the Georgian perspective. Over the last several years, Georgia has become increasingly convinced that it's a real partner of the United States, that the US would defend Georgia - practically regardless of what Georgia did - that Georgia was simply reasserting control over bits of territory that are still internationally recognized as Georgia's own.
--------------------

Given the US's precarious condition militarily - where we're occupying two countries, fighting two wars - versus Russia's strength, and then you look at the aspect of soft power or moral credibility, there's that exchange in the UN where the US ambassador to the UN said that Russia had intended 'regime change' in Georgia, to which the Russian ambassador replied that that was an American concept, obviously referencing Iraq. Even if the US were inclined to do more, and Georgia's expectations of what we would do had been accurate, what would really our options be to intervene in any meaningful way in this conflict in a way that would influence Russia?

CK: Well, it would be absolutely impossible, I think. A great deal at this stage, in strict technical terms, not to mention the possibility of escalating what is really a very, a rather small and localized, however tragic, conflict into a confrontation between two major world nuclear powers. I mean, one can't imagine that scenario unless Russia pushes things much farther forward. I do think at the stage the ball is really in Russia's court.

From the US perspective, this is of course an illegal operation, it wasn't sanctioned by the United Nations, it doesn't fall under any kind of UN Security Council mandate, but so far, in fact the Russians have exercised a degree of restraint - that is to say, you haven't see, at least as of this morning, bombing of major Georgian cities. A few pieces of munitions seem to have gone astray, the city of Gori was hit, there may be some indications the city of Zugdidi, which is near the border with another secessionist entity, may have been hit. But these are cities are very near the zone of conflict.

yeah we don't have much of a leg to stand on here. Thanks, dubya.

administration is said to have given tacit support for a Georgian assault on South Ossetia in the believe that the territory could be recaptured within 48 hours.

i have no idea if that's true, but it would obviously fit the bush administration pattern: giving thumbs-up to israel to go into lebanon, encouraging abbas to crack down on hamas. the fact that these things keep turning out badly doesn't seem to prevent the next one from being tried. (it's like they've absorbed the seinfeld mantra: no learning!)

and of course, everybody is always hitler. you'd think if you were looking for a historical analogy to russia invading georgia you'd start with russia invading georgia. but hitler's more fun. appeasing appeasers and the appeasers who appease them.

nobody gives a crap about background or context.

Speak for yourself.

I'm speaking for the 99.9% of the people who watch CNN or BBC who have very little interest in hearing about anything other than the body count. (I am in the other 0.1%, or couldn't you tell)

It's fairly obvious why the news coverage is one-sided -- Combatant A kills more people than Combatant B, so cue pictures of dead bodies and accusations of a "disproportionate response" (the catchphrase that gets trotted out in all the armed conflicts these days) on the part of Combatant A. I'm not taking sides here or saying that the fighting is justified, but picking sides solely based on the body count is stupid and meaningless. But of course, if news broadcasts aren't going to bother with background and context, then there's not much else to go on when they decide to pick sides.

From the two-part dealbreaker link above:

13. Since Americans of all political stripes like to think of themselves as the center of the world, is this something Bush caused?
"Amazingly, it isn't. How nice to be able to blame Stalin instead of Bush for once!"

Worth bearing in mind. Saakashvili shouldn't have been expecting the western cavalry to ride to the rescue:
1. There was no US fleet stationed off the Georgian coast
2. The US army is otherwise engaged in Iraq and elsewhere
3. It's the Russkis, for goodness' sake
No, it was a gamble on a quick knockout blow, with a backup of swift withdrawal to the moral high ground. So far, all going to plan (plan B, anyway)

The leftish parts of the UK press are as usual disgracing themselves by pinning all the blame on Bush/the West. Honestly, that 'me, me, me' attitude bugs me beyond belief. I'm embarrassed by these people - it's one of the most racist things I can think of, to always deny other people the right to be autonomous actors.

which is the most up to date news source online that people are using? reuters? the poxy guardian seems to only want to update itself once every 5 hours while bbc news seems more concerned with the olympics.

I'm speaking for the 99.9% of the people who watch CNN or BBC who have very little interest in hearing about anything other than the body count. (I am in the other 0.1%, or couldn't you tell)

please go fuck yourself into a flooded ditch and lie there for a week or two.

I know I work with a bunch of exceptionally BRAINY UPPER CRUST high school graduates and such but when the dallas cowboys fan from gettysburg pennsylvania next to me schools me on a nation's natural resources I have a sneaky suspicion that for once in the history of man your really lovely assumptions about what the rest of a language's speakers know and care about might be a little bit, ahem, OFF

which is the most up to date news source online that people are using? reuters? the poxy guardian seems to only want to update itself once every 5 hours while bbc news seems more concerned with the olympics.

This throws up good links every so often.

danger room over @ wired is doing a bang-up job, and balloon juice has some good commentary (for us idiots who don't care about anything besides tv dinners and ufc pay-per-view)

Somebody in Georgia has to get hold of Saakashvili and stop him appearing on television every five minutes, he appears to have lost his marbles. I got in late last night to see Saakashvili, the president of a sovereign state, sitting in what appeared to be storage room, with some minor BBC guy, stabbing at a tiny map of Georgia with a fountain pen while rambling away some nonsense that contradicted what he'd just said half-an-hour earlier.

5 minutes later, switch over to Sky and who do I see but Saakashvili again, talking to some slip of a girl who'd obv. never interviewed anyone more important than a member of some boyband on the red carpet outside a film premiere in Leicester Square

yes, somebody tell the leader of a tiny, war-torn and apparently all of a sudden completely insignificant state (lol oil pipelines amirite) he needs to behave himself on british television

PS fuck putin btw I hope castro outlives him

Pupkin vs. Putin fite

finally get some good links and the whole thing suddenly finishes.

thanks for the links though chaps.

Wow, Tom, you have smart co-workers, give yourself a pat on the back. Of course that has nothing to do with the point I made, which (rephased) is this: the news broadcasts would show something other than explosions and body counts if that's what a majority of their viewership wanted to see. Which is why everyone is going out of their way on this thread to link to commentaries and reports that go beyond the basic "X number of people have died, fighting is bad" three-minute nuggets wedged between updates on the Olympics.

that's a criticism of network news, then, and not the general populace, where the comment you made is pretty explicitly against the general populace, as opposed to you, possibly the seventeenth smartest man alive

I mean if you're going to belong to some elite hundred thousandth of the public you might as well think a little about how you phrase things

Last I checked, the general populace are the people who watch the network news. If more people had the tolerance or the desire to hear something more than the most superficial coverage of a conflict like this, then that's what TV would provide them with.

ok well whatever I said ten minutes before whatever you said, I'm right and you're a prick

I mean, the difference between Saakashvili and Putin/Medvedev (generalizing again) is that Saakashvili knows that impassioned pleas for peace and justice are what flies on Western TV, and that many people will be quick to dismiss his own wrongs (or not even bother to consider them) if they could only catch a glimpse of him on TV and see what a swell guy he is. Putin couldn't give a flying fuck about any of that.

I'm speaking for the 99.9% of the people who watch CNN or BBC who have very little interest in hearing about anything other than the body count.

I know you are! Stop it!

By the way, the idea that television is some kind of accurate reflection of the totality of a nation's desires for entertainment and information has been disproven over and over.

Heh! I've just spent half an hour typing a very long email to a pal setting out how I think this whole thing will pan out (regime change and a proxy russian finger hovering over the pipeline tap, I can exclusively reveal), then I refresh here and find that, uh, I got it a bit wrong. Thankfully I concluded with that Churchill quote about 'a riddle wrapped in a mystery, inside an enigma'

Note to self: always caveat everything (if appropriate)

Well to be fair that could still happen. Russia doesn't mind playing a long game.

Russia says it's concluded operations:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7555858.stm

but Lavrov is calling on Saakashvili to step down, among other things

The Russian airforce attacked a key oil pipeline running through Georgia on Tuesday but there was no word yet on whether it had been damaged, the secretary of Georgia's National Security Council told AFP.

"Russians bombed the BTC pipeline south of the city of Rustavi," said Alexander Lomaia.

"We don't know yet whether it was damaged. It's a second attempt to bomb this pipeline since August 10."

A spokesman for British energy giant BP, which operates the pipeline, said the company was unaware that it had been attacked.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jkO1FVRBFvudN6Oll6x_LRTRQ3LQ

but Lavrov is calling on Saakashvili to step down, among other things

That's hardly surprising. The Georgians do seem to be telling an awful lot of porkies.

If Georgian politics were anything like ours, it'd be hard to see Saakashvili not stepping down, given that it was his outrageous gamble that failed so quickly and so spectacularly. But it's not Lavrov's call to make

The point of view here (Moscow) is that this was all an elaborate gamble by Washington.

1. The Russian response to Georgia's actions was 100% certain.
2. Saakashvili would never have provoked Russia to that extent without, at the very least, the explicit agreement from someone in Washington.
3. Given the way the situation exploded, one side or the other must now "win" - there will be no settling back into the stalemate we've seen for the last 12 (?) years.
4. Georgia, and now probably most of the West, will insist on UN/EU/NATO peacekeepers replacing Russian ones as part of any peace settlement.
5. This means that Russian troops will leave South Ossetia, which will ultimately be seen as a defeat. And Saakashvili's real objective was to get the Russian troops out, anyway.
6. Washington wins because Russia "loses," although one consequence may very well be that Saakhashvili loses US support somewhere down the road (covert trade-off to Russia for leaving South Ossetia).

I don't think we'll be seeing Georgia in NATO or the EU any time soon

Esp. not if Saakashvili is still in charge

Eh, that was totally unrealistic even before this

Was it?

I think so. Georgia has a history of political instability, sits in the middle of a flashpoint with ties into Russia's own Caucasus issues. Far too much of an obligation for NATO to take on.

I think Saakashvili can stop constantly being photographed in front of the Georgian and EU flags because that's not going to work either.

So I guess the Russians basically made Sarkozy look like a dope for flying all the way to Moscow only to have the war end just a few minutes before he arrived? Of course, that's exactly how Russia wanted it -- "thanks but no thanks, we've got our business under control and we don't particularly need your input."

Anything that makes Sarkozy look like a dope is fine by me

anyone post Fred Kaplan's article?

The second half of the article is good, but I don't like this:

It's heartbreaking, but even more infuriating, to read so many Georgians quoted in the New York Times—officials, soldiers, and citizens—wondering when the United States is coming to their rescue. It's infuriating because it's clear that Bush did everything to encourage them to believe that he would

No it's not, it's infuriating because it paints the Georgians as naive, vulnerable idiots. I don't for a minute think they were banking on the Americans wading in - they were banking on making the Russians retreat with one blow - but if they were, they had no grounds to do so. Grounds for believing Bush wishes them well and will support them to an extent, but come on

I wish I shared your certainty that Sakaashvili is not an idiot

The eXile has it's own take

Saakashvili just didn’t think it through. One reason he overplayed his hand is that he got lucky the last time he had to deal with a breakaway region: Ajara, a tiny little strip of Black Sea coast in southern Georgia. This is a place smaller than some incorporated Central Valley towns, but it declared itself an “autonomous” republic, preserving its sacred basket-weaving traditions or whatever. You just have to accept that people in the Caucasus are insane that way; they’d die to keep from saying hello to the people over the next hill, and they’re never going to change. The Ajarans aren’t even ethnically different from Georgians; they’re Georgian too. But they’re Muslims, which means they have to have their own Lego parliament and Tonka-Toy army and all the rest of that Victorian crap, and their leader, a wack job named Abashidze (Goddamn Georgian names!) volunteered them to fight to the death for their worthless independence. Except he was such a nut, and so corrupt, and the Ajarans were so similar to the Georgians, and their little “country” was so tiny and ridiculous, that for once sanity prevailed and the Ajarans refused to fight, let themselves get reabsorbed by that Colussus to the North, mighty Georgia.

Well, like I’ve said before, there’s nothing as dangerous as victory. Makes people crazy. Saakashvili started thinking he could gobble up any secessionist region—like, say, South Ossetia. But there are big differences he was forgetting—like the fact that South Ossetia isn’t Georgian, has a border with Russia, and is linked up with North Ossetia just across that border. The road from Russia to South Ossetia is pretty fragile as a line of supply; it goes through the Roki Tunnel, a mountain tunnel at an altitude of 10,000 feet. I have to wonder why the Georgian air force—and it’s a good one by all accounts—didn’t have as its first mission in the war the total zapping of the South Ossetian exit of that tunnel. Or if you don’t trust the flyboys, send in your special forces with a few backpacks full of HE. There are a lot of ways to cripple a tunnel. Hell, do it low-tech: drive a fuel truck in there, with a car following, jackknife the truck halfway through with a remote control or timing fuse—truck driver gets out and strolls to the car, one fast U-turn and you’re out and back in Georgia, just in time to see a ball of flame erupt from the tunnel exit. And rebuilding a tunnel way up in the mountains is not an easy or a fast job. Sure, the Russians could resupply by air, but that’s a much, much tougher job and would at least slow down the inevitable. Weird, then, that as far as I know the Georgians didn’t even try to blast that tunnel. I don’t go in for this kind of long-distance micromanaging of warfare, because there’s usually a good reason on the ground for tactical decisions; it’s the strategic decisions that are really crazy most of the time. But this one I just don’t get.

Sure, the Russians could resupply by air, but that’s a much, much tougher job and would at least slow down the inevitable.

Even if Georgia had intended for this to blossom into war between Russia and Georgia, which I doubt, I don't think it would have been in their interest to prolong the conflict once it started.

perhaps Sarko's flying to Russia caused them to hold up a bit?

Saakashvili would never have provoked Russia to that extent without, at the very least, the explicit agreement from someone in Washington.

o rly?

I wish I shared your certainty that Sakaashvili is not an idiot

-- Tom D., Tuesday, August 12, 2008 6:56 AM (3 hours ago) Bookmark Link

OTM. A very camera-savvy, media-ready idiot, with strong friendships with American conservatives aside from McCain going back to before he was even elected

How does such rubbish, advocating active US military involvement, get published in the lol "liberal media" ?

http://www.newsweek.com/id/152012

Even the National fucking Review's goddamned slanderous editorial (omitting any of Saaky's provocations) didn't espouse that

Ah I forgot tipsy mothra already linked to that, but still. It's kind of infuriating.

It's a pretty amazing article.

I think Paul Krugman's definition of "know-nothingism" is apt:

know-nothingism — the insistence that there are simple, brute-force, instant-gratification answers to every problem, and that there’s something effeminate and weak about anyone who suggests otherwise

I guess the reports of the death of neo-conservative hawkishness were somewhat premature. Soon "realist" will be as much of a dirty word in foreign policy debate as "liberal" has become in domestic politics.

Obama, naturally, is going the pragmatic route, calling for UN intervention, a review of Russia's global status, and most telling of all, "deepening relations between Georgia and transatlantic institutions, including a Membership Action Plan for NATO."

The President-In-Waiting clearly understands what his upcoming gig demands. NATO expansion is but one of many tasks on the docket. The only "change" we can believe in is how Obama will polish the same old bullshit using fresh, uplifting rhetoric. Yet I suspect in the short-run, when shoved and slimed by a desperate McCain, Obama may very well dispense with the niceties that have endeared him to so many hopeful consumers, and show that he too can growl and promise sadistic punishment for our many enemies. Not that his liberal followers will mind all that much....

http://dennisperrin.blogspot.com/2008/08/another-chokehold-routine.html

know-nothingism — the insistence that there are simple, brute-force, instant-gratification answers to every problem, and that there’s something effeminate and weak about anyone who suggests otherwise

that Perrin post is pretty nonsensical. "UN intervention, a review of Russia's global status, and most telling of all, "deepening relations between Georgia and transatlantic institutions, including a Membership Action Plan for NATO" = "Sadistic punishment of our enemies"? uh yeah, okay buddy.

I don't think I've seen a Perrin post that wasn't nonsensical.

(Granted the only ones I've seen are the ones Morbius posts.)

Obama's working on a McCain-style League of Democracies (ie, a better rubber stamp than the UN) too.

the nerve of that guy, trying to get people to cooperate and talk to each other

no, to agree to sanctify our holy bombings, Mo.

Don't you ever get bored of being the most one-note poster on the political threads?

do you have a link for that? this is all i could find:

[foreign policy advisor Anthony] Lake was sympathetic to aspects of Mr McCain’s idea of a League of Democracies, one of the centrepieces of the Republican’s foreign policy plans.

Stressing that he had not spoken to Mr Obama about it, he backed the general idea of a grouping that was “not an anti-Russian device but an effort to find ways for the democracies to act together on issues of defence of our common values . . . specifically on issues when the UN can’t act”.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/039d5b8a-47b2-11dd-93ca-000077b07658,dwp_uuid=729ab242-9cb1-11db-8ec6-0000779e2340,print=yes.html

I think drawing that conclusion is a bit premature

x-post

Painting Obama as a bloodthirsty war-crazed holy bomber is a little uhhhh

goole, see Prez thread

everything's relative, Shakey. But he does want to be the American President.

"find ways for the democracies to act together on issues of defence of our common values . . . specifically on issues when the UN can’t act won't suck our dick with the precise pressure and speed we demand”.

so you think we should just limit our foreign policy to what the UN approves

this event is a interesting (funny? sad? gross?) test-case of media coverage and diffusion of just basic knowledge of the situation. coverage on center-left blogs and media like slate has been pretty good (and on ilx lol), on the right it has been disgusting, the center-mainstream-cable is been just moronic, what i've been able to watch of it anyway.

it's clear that, if john mccain's ideas about foreign policy were followed, we'd be in a nuclear standoff with russia by now. and even now he still wants to bring georgia into NATO, effectively dragging the rest of the west into georgia. i haven't turned on a tv in about three days, but, you think that would be a problem for him...

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/Pictures/336xAny/p/a/i/Gordon_Brown_4_ready.jpg+http://www.liveyp2008.org/web/images/patrons/david_milliband.jpg=http://www.geotimes.ge/uploads_script/news/8e86bf9d2b38eb6.jpg

Derbyshire, making sense:

Either you believe the U.S.A. ought to commit — in writing — that we shall go to war on behalf of Georgia (Estonia, the Ukraine, etc.), or you believe we ought not.

If you do believe it, as our President does (or else what were all those efforts to get Georgia and Ukraine into NATO about?) then you ought honestly to admit the nonzero probability that Putin, or some future Putin, will call our bluff. Then we shall be at war with Russia. On behalf of Georgia. ("The U.S.A. should commit to go to war against Russia on behalf of Georgia" — anyone care to estimate how that would poll among the U.S. population?)

George Will's line — "If we had succeeded in getting those countries into NATO, then Putin wouldn't have dared, because no NATO country ever had its territory invaded … well, all right, only the one …" — is just wishful thinking. Conservatives are the people who believe in the meaning of words. If we are not willing to go to war with Russia over Georgia, let's not commit ourselves to it. If we are, then of course we should commit … but I'd like to see those poll results first.

At this moment, Putin & his pals are rolling around the Kremlin floor laughing helplessly at our stupidity and gullibility. As a patriotic American, I don't like to contemplate that. What could we do to wipe the smiles off their faces, though? Bomb Moscow? They know we're not going to do that. That's why they're still laughing. Game, set, and match to Putin.

As for the reader who raised my many indignant remarks about Chinese aggression against, and occupation of, Tibet and Eastern Turkesan: unless something happened while I was walking my dog just now, we have not gone to war on behalf of those countries. Nor should we. Nor have I ever advocated doing so, or committing ourselves to do so. Indignant protestations are what free people utter when their sense of justice is outraged. Going to war is what nations do when they believe their interests are gravely threatened. Two different things.

woah, that is frighteningly sane

Are you sure that's the same Derbyshire?

lolz O RLY

"that great little nation"

wtf 90% of the American population probably completely ignorant of Georgia prior to last Friday

Are you sure that's the same Derbyshire?

It's very Derbyshire. He's pretty much been saying Iraq was a stupid blunder for years.

(xp) They knew about the Braves and "Designing Women"...

i hope ethan and curtis are ok

Derbyshire is a classic paleo-con whose distemper is often funny, except when he talks about queers.

Who am I confusing him with, then? Podhoretz?

Podheretz is a total cockfarmer.

so, yeah, probably

Podhoretz is probably writing something right now about how it's a shame we haven't got troops in the Kremlin this very second.

"We should have finished what Patton started."

Meanwhile, the Stratfor elves sum it up this way:

...the United States has a problem — it either must reorient its strategy away from the Middle East and toward the Caucasus, or it has to seriously limit its response to Georgia to avoid a Russian counter in Iran. Even if the United States had an appetite for another war in Georgia at this time, it would have to calculate the Russian response in Iran — and possibly in Afghanistan (even though Moscow’s interests there are currently aligned with those of Washington).

In other words, the Russians have backed the Americans into a corner. The Europeans, who for the most part lack expeditionary militaries and are dependent upon Russian energy exports, have even fewer options. If nothing else happens, the Russians will have demonstrated that they have resumed their role as a regional power. Russia is not a global power by any means, but a significant regional power with lots of nuclear weapons and an economy that isn’t all too shabby at the moment. It has also compelled every state on the Russian periphery to re-evaluate its position relative to Moscow. As for Georgia, the Russians appear ready to demand the resignation of President Mikhail Saakashvili. Militarily, that is their option. That is all they wanted to demonstrate, and they have demonstrated it.

The war in Georgia, therefore, is Russia’s public return to great power status. This is not something that just happened — it has been unfolding ever since Putin took power, and with growing intensity in the past five years. Part of it has to do with the increase of Russian power, but a great deal of it has to do with the fact that the Middle Eastern wars have left the United States off-balance and short on resources. As we have written, this conflict created a window of opportunity. The Russian goal is to use that window to assert a new reality throughout the region while the Americans are tied down elsewhere and dependent on the Russians. The war was far from a surprise; it has been building for months. But the geopolitical foundations of the war have been building since 1992. Russia has been an empire for centuries. The last 15 years or so were not the new reality, but simply an aberration that would be rectified. And now it is being rectified.

Russia has been an empire for centuries. The last 15 years or so were not the new reality, but simply an aberration that would be rectified. And now it is being rectified.

truthbomb

It's not directly about Russia vis-a-vis Georgia -- though it's a strong part of it -- but I highly recommend everyone read Lesley Blanch's The Sabres of Paradise. (That links to the old edition but there's a new one that came out in 2004.)

hell, Tolstoy's Hadji Murad says everything you need to know about Moscow's attitude towards conquered territories.

My favourite conspiracy theory of the day - this was Russia moving to secure its borders in anticipation of an 'October surprise' US-led invasion of Iran.

Considering that he wanted to kick Russia out of the G-8 A WEEK AND A HALF AGO...a vote for John McCain is an immediate and unambiguous vote now to enmesh the United States into another Cold War, albeit one that's a shade hotter than the previous one, and with the US in one of its lowest economic and militaristic slumps in the past century.

If only the Democratic party could utter this simple truth...but never overestimate the intelligence of the American people, the conservative stranglehold on the media during Bush II, or the amount of spin the Republicans will use now that they have a swiftboatin' chance infinitely better than Paris Hilton.

The rah-rah, "we're a MORAL champion of progressive 'democracies,' like Georgia (like teh one that houses our own Atlanta YEEHAW!) against teh EVIL EMPIRE," canard will be played to no end. Coupled with the "Nobama is an unsafe non-American (Hawaiian! as per Cokie Roberts, which isn't pedestrian enough to be American) Muslim terrorist-fist-jabbing Rusophile who went to Berlin and spoke to citizens of TEH WORLD, he = IMMORAL, WEAK, INCAPABLE OF PROTECTING DEMOCRACY" attacks, and...

...John McCain's chances on November 4th now look even better than Dubya's in August '04. He's probably going to win-steal the election

Or maybe Shakey's latest link is just making me feel pessimistic. This whole thing is depressing.

During the Olympics too, it wasn't "unplanned" at all

I think Derbyshire's point about this being an electoral factor -- ie, that it won't be, in practical terms -- holds.

Podhoretz had the nerve to spit on Ingmar Bergman's grave last year and I hope he gets prostrate cancer and is bound to a bronze-colored catheter for the rest of his days. Even seeing his name in print makes me feel nauseous

>>I think Derbyshire's point about this being an electoral factor -- ie, that it won't be, in practical terms -- holds.

-- Ned Raggett, Tuesday, August 12, 2008 3:20 PM (1 minute ago) Bookmark Link <<

Id like to think so, but I don't think anything within 90 days of the election can be ruled out as an electoral factor, with the spin machines brewing and especially with the 9-11% of "undecideds" in the most recent polls

Also - vocal recordings be damned - the day that Ned Raggett is agreeing with John fucking Derrbyshire on *anything* is enough to color my daily black cloud even darker

Sigh

I think the fact that most Americans have no idea who/what/where Georgia is will mitigate this invasion's role in the election, particularly if the fighting stops after less than a week.

*shrug* I think the appetite for 'going to war' among the general voting populace is rather different now than it was in 2003 -- which I rather think is Derbyshire's point as well, if implicitly. He thinks it won't sell as a voting point if push came to shove, which strikes me as accurate.

John McCain isn't going to run on "going to war," he's going to run on "keeping democracy safe," and "keeping us safe, the way Republicans have successfully, since 2001!" ...the latter which Bush ran and won on in 2004

+ add in all the "do you think this frosh celebrity senator is ready to deal with X, Y, & Z" attacks won't help

wait, you aren't American, are you

lol

he's going to run on "keeping democracy safe," and "keeping us safe, the way Republicans have successfully, since 2001!" ...the latter which Bush ran and won on in 2004

Russia not being al-Qaeda, or being seen as behind 9/11, I don't think this'll fly either. Shakey Mo's next-to-last post OTM, really.

about as American as you. Maybe more self-conscious of being identified as "non-America" due to appearance

How is it OTM ?

+ add all these "the Iraq war has been won, BOOYA, da surge worked!, Go Republicans!" sloganeering

like here, which is published within an admittedly right-leaning editorial board: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121850093104731719.html?mod=opinion_main_commentaries

And even more irksome in the MSM are stories like this, which completely baffle me http://www.newsweek.com/id/151731 - until I remember that Zakaria supported the Iraq war

Wow. Condi Rice is on ABC World News now, and she actually said, "This is not 1968." Maybe she gets it.

Ah scratch that, you said Shakey's next to last post, not his last.

His last post is assuming I'm, what..Hawaiian ?

Condi's speciality was Russia, wasn't it ?

Anyhoo, I hope Ned is correct. If he is in November I will FAP with him again, after may a day (years now) of not-FAPing

yeah I just don't see conflating American interests with Georgia as working - we aren't afraid of Russia anymore, after all they LOST the cold war, remember? (lolz I am over-simplifying America's incapacity for grasping geopolitical nuance but you get my drift)

I think America is tired of being paranoid and being at war, and Obama's optimism is gonna resonate more strongly than whatever slapdash "I R A HARDMAN" crap McCain can come up with, which, so far has been pathetically grasping at any single-issue headline-grabbing position that pops up in the rightwing blogosphere and trying to attach himself to it. otherwise his foreign and economic policies are alternately incoherent and ridiculously out-of-step with what most Americans actually say they want, so unless he can align himself to a really powerful narrative that the majority of the country can get behind (preferably something a little stronger than "("old white man is old and white, unlike his opponent"), I think he's totally screwed.

sorry I genuinely thought you were British Vichitraya, my mistake.

x-post

I hope Ned is correct

I predict nothing about this election, though I have my hopes, and they're not hopes for McCain. But I do not think a McCain victory goes through hundreds of dead in Georgia.

I think this major blunder by Georgia (perhaps with U.S. assurances) will make a lot of people think twice. It's one thing to back a democracy against the evil ruskies, but when it's a batshit insane democracy that picks bad fights with its bigger neighbor, do you really want them in NATO? It's typical McCain brgadaccio parading as principle but it would pretty easy for a skilled rhetoritician to skewer him on that poit in a way the average American would get.

No worries Shakey, I'll actually take that as a compliment!

I just feel pessimistic since I also read some crazy article today about the ex-Hilaryites group the Puma - http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/08/09/puma-gets-scary/ - which is perhaps partially explaining why Obama's #s aren't higher. I don't know. It made me wonder just how many angry people were left over from the primary. Note that I'm not advocating here that O pick H as VP, I'm just...taken aback by the *depth* of anger

The election just shouldn't be as close as it is. I'm looking forward to the televised debates, when McCain will start stuttering

MW: the amount of headlines stating that "Russia invades Georgia," while omitting Saaky's blunderous miscalculations haven't been helpful so far. When this news cycle passes, I hope it's not just remembered as "When Russia attacked that other place called Georgia during the Olympics"

I think this articulates my anxiety:

http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1831761,00.html

The crisis has played mostly to McCain's advantage. McCain and his advisers have long pushed for the U.S. to respond more aggressively to Putin's threats against pro-Western neighbors like Georgia and Ukraine by kicking it out of the G-8 and limiting its contact with NATO. The campaign wasted no time calling this position "prescient," and it called for a more thorough application of diplomatic pressure than did either the Administration or the Obama campaign — including an emergency session of the NATO council to consider a peacekeeping force, to reassess relations with Russia and to reconsider offering a membership plan to Georgia.

Obama's campaign made two early missteps. First, in its initial statement, it called for restraint from both Russia and Georgia. "Generally, when a country is being invaded, you don't call on it to show restraint," a senior McCain foreign policy adviser responded. (The adviser declined to be identified, aware that the criticism could also apply to the Administration, which called for restraint as well.) Then Obama's campaign released a statement questioning McCain's objectivity in the crisis, since a top McCain aide, Randy Scheunemann, had lobbied for the Georgians. When the Kremlin's own lobbyists made the same point, McCain's campaign fired back. "The reaction of the Obama campaign to this crisis, so at odds with our democratic allies and yet so bizarrely in sync with Moscow, doesn't merely raise questions about Senator Obama's judgment — it answers them," McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds said in a statement Saturday.

the crisis only plays to mccain's advantage only because time articles exist saying it does!

only!

TIME magazine likes grandpa-in-uniform porn, film at 11

nobody in America actually cares about Georgia. or Russia, really.

which is why I was lolling at McCain "speaking for all Americans" upthread... if he was speaking for all Americans he'd be asking how the fuck a washed up loser like him got nominated.

honestly all this handwringing about how much farther ahead in the polls Obama should be at this point seems really unwarranted to me. dude is playing the long game - he's got nothing to gain from being in the spotlight right now, may as well let McCain flail around trying to get some traction on something/anything and then come back strong at the convention and then really lay into McCain in September. Debates are not gonna be kind to McCain...

well, debates were only water-treading for O too, but yeah mccain is way worse on his feet

I tried to talk to my mom about Georgia, and mention the war with Russia, and she gave me a really puzzled look on her face. "How did the Russians get to Georgia, and what's in Georgia that they care about so much?". Then I told her it was the country, not the state. Then she paused and said "Oh. Well I don't know a thing about that."

One more A-1 Republican who doesn't know and subsequently doesn't give a shit about (the country) Georgia.

Nobody cares about debates either, Shakes, although you're right about the rest.

I mean, if the Russia/Georgia war isn't visibly affecting gas prices or the presence of illegal immigrants, many voters aren't going to give a shit.

Hell, I dont think most people even fear Russia the way we did in the 80s any more. Which is a dangerous thing, tbh. Thanks, 9/11!

yeah I know debates don't decide anything for anybody, I just threw that in there

x-post

McCain's response is truly a triumph of stupid, but hatin on Russkies is a language everybody understands

What I'd ask McCain is - we know how you feel about Georgia - now what about Ossetia?

Is it the consensus of this thread that conventions do more than the debates to drive opinions of the candidates?

yeah I think so

everyone wants to be on the side of the winning mob, you know

Andrew Sullivan's apologia.

a little late, asshole

some fella in the local spar was explaining the situation to his mate on the till and mentioned "soviet tanks". i was going to correct him, but i didn't want to look like a smartarse.

I think my favorite part of this whole fiasco, if such a thing is possible, was when Zalmay Khalilzad (USA's man at the UN) disclosed a confidential phone call Condi had with the Russian Foreign Minister, who told her that the Georgian leadership had to go. Zalmay is all "Is Russia seeking regime change in Georgia?" And Russia's man at the UN says "That's an American expression."

Not read Sullivan in years but I just read that and it's very good.

Zalmay is all "Is Russia seeking regime change in Georgia?" And Russia's man at the UN says "That's an American expression."

okay, that's gold.

I have to say, reading this thread is so bizzaro... all the comments from the west about how Russia has backed the US into a corner, etc. etc. etc. where the "analytical" perception here in Russia is that the Russia has been suckered into doing something that has sharply turned world opinion against it (and thereby undermined its influence, short of playing the bully whenever it wants something)

Yeah, but what if the Russian government gets what it presumably wants? Does it care about saving face that much? (Serious question.)

Russia vs. Georgia settling scores OLYMPIC BEACH VOLLEYBALL right now. Come on Georgia!

Yay Georgia!

i.e. Brazil!

Christ, can it be even clearer than this? Even the Bush administration admits that it may have gone too far in prodding Georgia to attack:

The United States took a series of steps that emboldened Georgia: sending advisers to build up the Georgian military, including an exercise last month with more than 1,000 American troops; pressing hard to bring Georgia into the NATO orbit; championing Georgia’s fledgling democracy along Russia’s southern border; and loudly proclaiming its support for Georgia’s territorial integrity in the battle with Russia over Georgia’s separatist enclaves.

But interviews with officials at the State Department, Pentagon and the White House show that the Bush administration was never going to back Georgia militarily in a fight with Russia.

In recent years, the United States has also taken a series of steps that have alienated Russia — including recognizing an independent Kosovo and going ahead with efforts to construct a missile defense system in Eastern Europe. By last Thursday, when the years of simmering conflict exploded into war, Russia had a point to prove to the world, even some administration officials acknowledge, while Georgia may have been under the mistaken impression that in a one-on-one fight with Russia, Georgia would have more concrete American support.

You could multiply that first paragraph many times and it still wouldn't amount to the US causing this thing. It's not unreasonable to expect Georgia to show a bit of nous to interpret things properly. (I still maintain that they did this, knowingly taking a big gamble that just didn't pay off - but of course after the fact everything gets interpreted to make the US look like the bad guys)

This is a perfect example of how useless nomenclature like "good" and "bad guys" are in a situation still unfolding and multifarious.

OK, 'principal actors' if you'd prefer. Fact is, we aren't always at the centre of things. Georgians, like everyone else, are quite capable of fucking things up for themselves

You keep telling us they're not stupid, so surely they wouldn't be stupid enough to do this if they thought the US and NATO and the EU wouldn't back them up in some way - some way more than yap yap yap, tut tut tut?

Well, we don't know what led them to the calculation that this was the thing to do. They might have been banking on:
- Russia's deployments being weaker than proved to be the case
- Russia's will to fight being low
- Medvedev being the top man now (he seems to place more emphasis on international law)
- Georgia's armed forces being stronger than they proved to be
- intelligence that Russia is planning a build-up this autumn, so this was the last chance to strike
- intelligence that Russia was looking for a way out (maintaining troops in Ossetia being an expensive business)
- any number of other things, the impact of western words being one of these
I doubt that direct western intervention (which I assume is what you mean by more than yap yap yap) was a factor they were relying on. Why would they?

I'm not saying it wasn't a stupid thing to do. It turns out to have been stupid, but that's in retrospect. At the time, it was a gamble based on unknowns. All I'm saying is that they're as capable of and in as good a position as anyone to assessing these unknowns (and their relative importance) as anyone else. The suggestion in our media always seems to be that US support is the overwhelming factor in their thinking. I doubt that was the case

georgians say russian tanks heading for the capital, should we be worried or is this just propaganda on the georgians' part?

russians deny this move, but i don't think i can believe what either country is saying.

You wouldn't think it possible, but the Russians seem more credible than the Georgians at this point!

Sullivan:

I'm not used to instinctively suspecting America's actions in the world.

Oh, the height of the bar for "intellectuals" in this land of ours...

Remember: Sully really believes Reagan was a great president.

most read stories right now on the bbc news site:

1 Inflatable faeces raises a stink
2 Rocky Horror movie to be remade
3 'Sexercise' yourself into shape
4 Midweek quiz: Inventions
5 Mud phobia pig gets its own boots

But the most-read stories on a website are usually going to be the quirkies, aren't they? The GBP doesn't really need to read the the BBC news site's brief stuff on Russia/Georgia when it's on every TV and radio news bulletin and the papers have plenty of in-depth stuff for those who want it.

I'd like to see Moscow-based Mitya's answer to Ned's question before it gets buried and forgotten in this thread

Holbrooke was just on CNN repeating the admin line that "Russia started this"

I'm waiting on Mitya's answer as well -- we need to know more about this from the perspective he has and has access to!

so now bush wants to use military aircraft and ships to send aid to the region. is he fucking crazy?

Sully's been on fire the last couple of days:

It's possible to have differing views on how to handle Russia, although, depressingly, Obama seems to take the maximalist position of bringing Georgia into NATO. But what interests me about McCain's position is not so much the content as the tone. Check out the video above. McCain clearly believes that a nasty spat in the Caucasus is somehow the defining struggle of the next generation. He speaks in ominous tones about Russia, a state he obviously regards as some dark menace on the verge of dominating the planet. He speaks of faraway countries about which we know nothing in the manner of some Wilderness Years Churchill worrying about Hitler.

All of this is quite potty. Russia is no longer the Soviet Union. You'd think conservatives would understand this distinction. There is a difference between totalitarian states seeking world expansion and authoritarian petro-states in demographic collapse bullying neighboring states because of perceived humiliations.

Look: every Republican wants to be Churchill. But this is not 1938. And Putin's Russia is not Hitler's Germany. You'll have to find another fantasy on which to base a campaign.

Mud phobia pig gets its own boots

lol this story is still around

Something not quite thorough about "Russia's not dangerous so give 'em Georgia."

So have the tanks reached Tbilisi yet or is that more Saakashvili bull?

Tensions rose in Georgia today after an advancing Russian military convoy sparked concerns of a return to hostilities. President Bush today announced he is sending Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to France and then to Tbilisi, Georgia, in reaction to the conflict.

lol thanks for the throrough itinerary

so now bush wants to use military aircraft and ships to send aid to the region. is he fucking crazy?

I just saw the statement and this is nothing if not provocative (or maybe just naive). Russia now has ample opportunities to orchestrate 'incidents' in the Eastern Black Sea. Russia gets to do what it wants because the US has no ability to project power and Europe wants to stay warm this winter. I can't see any situation playing out where Russia doesn't 'win' by whatever standards it sets for winning.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/7559252.stm

o shit

yeah, but is this world war III??!!

fucking NUKES people!

Can we for a moment NOT assume that we're about to see Threads all over again, thanks?

They're delivering aid. It's the least they can do. Chill, jeremy.

yeah, but russia isn't gonna stand for this, is it? they're going to see it as an act of aggression.

Five to four says the US told the Russians first before the public announcement.

more reassuring words please, i'm having a coronary, here.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but what exactly were Russian peacekeepers, who had been stationed in S. Ossetia for 15 years, supposed to do when the Georgian military invaded Tskhinval? Their entire purpose was to prevent such an attack from succeeding!

Five to four says the US told the Russians first before the public announcement.

Undoubtedly, but it still throws the Russians another grievance/bargaining chip.

Berlin Airlift, jeremy.

the russians will authorise this before hand you mean?

They will be delivering biscuits and blankets, or whatever it is they deliver in these circumstances, not bombs

I'm just saying we've fed their enemies from military aircraft before and no bombs went off.

More like, they can accuse US of brining in troops/arms whatever, then blockade, the US has to back down, Russia wins.

It's humanitarian aid, people! C'mon.

us doesn't back down, bye bye planet

How much you guys want to bet that actual Ossetians see 0 of this aid

Jeremy, since you are clearly NOT interested in being talked down from your ledge...

i dunno, nobody else feeling anxious?

Nope

the US is not interested in a military confrontation with Russia and has nothing to gain from it. they'll drop their food baskets and that'll be it. Russia may see it as a minor provocation and just use it for more grandstanding.

http://sandradodd.com/game/hangman.gif

WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE JEREMY

OMG OMG OMG

DIE

DURAN DURAN?

STORE AN AN

Yeah how interested is Russia in a military confrontation with the US?

And vice-versa?

like either country is gonna nuke each other over fucking GEORGIA. no way.

sorry, guys. just a little tense. goes back to cold war fears as a kid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amerika_(TV_miniseries)

I saw most of that TV series, god help me. Talk about a fantasy! (Though I remember how the 'punk' kid was trying to show how edgy he was by wearing a jacket with the Taiwanese flag on it.)

that was a real low moment for Kriss Kristofferson

it was a low moment for everyone

in

AMERIKA

I was really thinking they might go whole hog and get after them pipes but now they haven't and this is all just a wash

it was funny when a georgian emigrant in atlanta decided to host the georgian president's web page in georgia, though, to stave off those dastardly hackers

This doesn't put up a cuban missile crisis or even berlin airlift level of crisis, this just gives Russia the chance to flex it's muscles and strong arm the US at a particularly weak time and I don't doubt it will take the opportunity.

No but it's a crisis all right, with Mr. Saakashvili determined to drag us into this (I was watching this on CNN myself but got irritated when the sophistry and question-dodging became cringe-worthy):

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/14/world/europe/14saakashvili.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Asked about the cease-fire, Mr. Saakashvili said the Russians “never meant a cease-fire.”

“This is the kind of cease-fire they had in Afghanistan,” he added.

“They even steal toilet seats, I’ve been hearing,” he said.

He made repeated references not only to the Soviet Union’s war in Afghanistan in the 1970s, but also to the invasion Prague in 1968 and even repeated references to the German invasion of Poland before the start of World War II.

As for how he planned to halt the formidable Russian forces if they indeed headed toward Tbilisi, he said, “This will not be only Georgian troops” but an “all-out defense.”

“Freedom is worth fighting for,” he said, adding that his country was doing this “not only for us but for the rest of Europe.”

Asked if the White House was doing enough, he said: “I just spoke to President Bush. Frankly, some of the first statements were seen as a green light for Russia. They were kind of soft.”

He said, “Georgia is the first test case.”

He said the United State should be doing more. “We should realize what is at stake for America; America is losing the whole region,” he said.

“Who else can stand up for liberty in the world?”

As for reports that he was warned not to instigate a conflict by sending troops to South Ossetia, Mr. Saakashvili said angrily: “I’m sickened of this cynical and unfounded allegation. Our troops were always there. It’s our territory. They’re killing our people.”

He dismissed allegations that Georgia started the fighting. “How can we attack Russia?” he asked. “That’s the ludicrous thing.”

Meanwhile the Russian troops are supposedly an hour from Tblisi

Saakasvili is such a douchebag

He wears such ugly ties too, so fat-knotted

He is stuck in the 90s!

As for reports that he was warned not to instigate a conflict by sending troops to South Ossetia, Mr. Saakashvili said angrily: “I’m sickened of this cynical and unfounded allegation. Our troops were always there. It’s our territory. They’re killing our people.”

I don't know... this sort of statement makes me sympathize with Georgia much less.

Considering that mainstream media reported this from "South Ossetia" yesterday...well, yeah. How many times will Saaky lie? Oh maybe until the West is there fighting, or Georgia is in NATO

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/ossetia;_ylt=AqK8MMR12BLaNzkpxxPSXgYGw_IE

Why Ossetians want Georgia out

The Ossetians, who claim to have inhabited the same territory for centuries, say their nation was broken in two by Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, who awarded South Ossetia to the Georgian Soviet republic against the Ossetians' will. (Stalin also took away Abkhazia's independence and made it an autonomous republic within Georgia.) As the USSR was collapsing, Ossetians fought a brutal war of independence against Georgia, which ended in a three-way peacekeeping agreement in 1992. Under that deal, Russian, Georgian, and South Ossetian forces were to jointly guarantee security until a final settlement was reached.

The arrangement collapsed in a hail of artillery fire and bombs last Friday.

"This is an historical problem. My great-grandmother told me that in the 1920s she saw Georgians massacring the South Ossetians," says Gavril Guzitayev, one of many young Ossetian men gathered Monday at Vladikavkaz's main recruiting center. "She said they came in fast on horses and attacked with sabres."

Along with other young men waiting to sign up for the Russian army and fight in South Ossetia, Mr. Guzitayev says "after all this, I don't believe Ossetians and Georgians can live together.... I just want a machine gun, and to ... stand beside my brothers."

Sorry about that link

http://news.yahoo.com/s/csm/ossetia;_ylt=AqK8MMR12BLaNzkpxxPSXgYGw_IE

Aargh. Oh well, I can't even cut and paste

so am i still wrong to be panicing?

Yeah, he's an enormous liar. I'm not saying Russia is 100% in the right, but honestly - if you attack a country, you need to take the consequences for it.

Haven't had much sympathy for Georgia/Saakashvili at any point in all this. And given that Russian soldiers ("peacekeepers") were killed during what amounts to the invasion of a territory they were protecting, the Russian response has been fairly moderate.

And no, the US and Russia won't be fighting each other directly over this.

And it's too bad that John McCain listens to his Georgian lobbyist aid. Because then he can trick the 45% of the country that supports him into denying the facts on the ground.

I actually never thought I'd say it, but thank god Bush is in the White House right now and not McCain. Because McCain has made it clear that if he was president, he'd precipitate a Cold War over this.

does anyone think the russians will enter the capital?

i've heard russian tanks are moving around, but are they actually on their way to the capital?

I hope they do. Imagine if Cuba, thinking that Russia supported them, attacked the Florida Keys or PR? We would march in and burn down Havana.

xps only if mccain gets elected.

it should be obvious that this is a serious but not world-threatening ethnic/border/territory dispute turned violent, with disastrous effects to people living there, but of no need to turn into a russia-us confrontation. unless we decide to make it one, which mccain and the claque of mostly disgraced neocons that have surrounded him fully believe is a fantastic idea.

from what i've read russia wants to weaken georgia, not own it.

xp again; i really hope the don't, christ that would be terrible

From that article:

Russia has accused Georgia of committing "genocide" in its assault on the rebel republic, which they say killed at least 2,000 civilians and displaced 34,000.

Western human rights monitors caution that it's too early to make any judgments about what happened. But Lev Ponomaryov, head of the Moscow-based Movement for Human Rights, says he hopes the West will hold Saakashvili's feet to the fire on this issue.

"I can't say whether this is a case of genocide, but it certainly is a humanitarian catastrophe," he says. "The methods Saakashvili used to establish constitutional order have to be condemned by the international community."

Well, the Keys or Puerto Rico were never part of Cuba -- at least South Ossetia's been part of Georgia since the Stalin days -- but I get your point.

Views on what this means for Nagorno Karabakh?

I don't know if this has been posted yet, but a really great breakdown on the situation by Charles King: http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/radio/2008/08/11/king/index.html

what the fuck, mccain 'announces' he's sending lieberman and lindsey graham as his own envoys to georgia:

http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/08/mccain_announces_that_lieberma.php

I don't know why it would make a difference in Nagorno-Karabakh -- unless you're concerned that it will embolden the Armenians (who think they need to act before Azerbaijan does what Georgia did) or Azerbaijanians (who are inspired? or think they need to show strength in the face of Russia?) and escalate the violence.

I mean, it just seems to me like anything you would say about N-K would be speculation.

hahahaha man I hope McCain really fucks up his standing over this

if anything exposes what a totally ludicrous foreign "policy" he would execute, this could be it

Yeah, this more than anything makes me fear for a McCain presidency. "real life consequences"

McCain has made it clear that if he was president, he'd precipitate a Cold War over this.

-- Mordy

Except he's actually sending people to Georgia. And he's still a Senator making decelerations about what we should do in Georgia. His actions already have consequences. Saakashvili is citing McCain as an example for US support.

sending people = sending political envoys. not sending soldiers, obv.

Of course...

Will John McCain turn Tsar Putin’s invasion of Georgia into a drill, drill, drill issue? He should. It will throw Democrats even more on the defensive — especially Sen. Obama whose weak response to Putin’s neo-Soviet actions have already put him way behind the eight ball on Russia.

McCain’s responses have been superb. And President Bush today adopted many of them — in particular the warnings on world trade, the G8 (G7?), and a Truman-like airlift of humanitarian assistance relief. Even sending Condi Rice over there and putting SecDef Bob Gates into play.

McCain has been appropriately tough all along. And this Putin ploy will resonate with voters much more than Beltway pundits believe.

any chance of the russians entering tbilisi?

i am shitting it here

You are shitting Tblisi? ow

The "cold" war is starting before he may take office. And by sending other Repubs over there he's upping the ante for what "soft on foreign policy" Obama must do - stupid to us, but as strategy may work. What doesn't when everything can be spun into a foreign policy = "national security"/"protecting Democracy" issue?

Yes, I know Media CW is that this is good for McCain. But obv that's because most of the media are fucking idiots.

Not to mention: TNR??

You are shitting Tblisi? ow

-- HI DERE, Wednesday, August 13, 2008 3:06 PM (21 seconds ago) Bookmark Link

Roffle. Jeremy you may want to find a tranquilizer gun and step away from teh internets the next few days, if you can't handle the fact that Russia doesn't want NATO on its southern doorstep

major x-post to Larry drill-kill-thrill Kudlow via Alfred up there.

I wouldn't freak out quite yet. I know Saakashvili is claiming that the Russians are marching on Tblisi, but he's pushing hard for Western invention. Not saying that they /aren't/ going to occupy Tblisi, but I'd take it with a grain of salt at the moment.

just tell me the us and russia won't be fighting anytime soon.

>Saakashvili is citing McCain as an example for US support.

They're "friends" - McCain visited him and they went for a picnic on the Black Sea last year.

Will have to find the link

I don't think they'll be fighting anytime soon. XP

Saakashvili sounded, shall we say, unhinged on network TV this morning. I know his people are dying, but he (shrewdly) pushed every signifier beloved of American punditocracy ("freedom-loving," "Cold War," "appeasement").

I am curious how this actually IS playing out with Americans cuz I really really really have a hard time envisioning the Republican base getting all fired up about protecting the "democracy" of some proto-petro-dictatorship they've never heard of when they're all getting laid off/can't pay for gas/losing their homes.

x-post

I know they're friends. (Has this been posted yet?)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/12/AR2008081202932_pf.html

I don't think they'll be fighting anytime soon. XP

Just to be safe, though, go grab the nearest person and have sex with them; you never know if it'll be your last chance before the bomb.

A few old Cubans called in today to say that Russia's actions are "nothing less" than Czechoslovakia in '68. Most people are buying school supplies.

(xxpost)

Just to be safe, though, go grab the nearest person and have sex with them; you never know if it'll be your last chance before the bomb

Fuck you -- I've been using this line for years.

Believing that this is similar to Czech in 68 assumes that you totally ignore every fact of the situation.

>>I am curious how this actually IS playing out with Americans cuz I really really really have a hard time envisioning the Republican base getting all fired up about protecting the "democracy" of some proto-petro-dictatorship they've never heard of when they're all getting laid off/can't pay for gas/losing their homes.

You live in San Francisco, right? I remember back in the summer of 04 some NYC Ilxors were pretty overconfident re: Kerry, and I would also waste my on the (god forbid) AOL message boards, and I had a more pessimistic-realist view. (And Hi DERE made a good funny about it, but I can't remember it just now :) I have the same feeling now (though like you, I'm also a Californian and "don't know any/many/one who'd vote McCain" - in fact, I know of Obamacans) ...considering that Ohio, Michigan, PA and Florida are going to call this election again

Michigan is on the verge of turning red before all of this even took place. Blame Kwame. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1828307,00.html

Mordy that hadn't been posted before...but no I'm specifically looking for the Black Sea picnic link I saw yesterday

All the "3AM moment HAS happened" talk is also making me angry, and, um, the "leftist" label on Obama doesn't help either

I think McCain could win, even tho living in NYC makes you think otherwise. But I don't underestimate what masses of low-info voters will do.

What really annoys me about this is that everyone is trying to spin this as a win for McCain. And I think this is an enormous lose. But everyone will think it's a win, because no one thinks for themselves.

And like I said yesterday, all the "Russia invades Georgia," without mentioning Ossetia - even skewereing of *that* head line on Jon Stewart last night - don't help

*headlines

Vichitravirya: As you say, McCain may well win this election, but Georgia won't have much to do with it. Shakey's doubts about the political mileage that can be squeezed out of this conflict = OTM.

For the moment, anyway...

To clarify Russia is NOW invading Georgia, but that isn't what happened last Thursday-Friday

Saakashvili, is he a bit of a mentalist? regardless of the rights and wrongs of the situation, restorting to military force against an enemy who will stuff you out of it is surely never a wise course of action.

"The Ossetians, who claim to have inhabited the same territory for centuries, say their nation was broken in two by Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin"

lol at the AP's hedging on Ossetian history! it's practically "Stalin is claimed to have killed many people during his reign"

"Hitler, who Jews claim instigated a Holocaust costing many millions of lives..."

"The Sun, which many say rises in the morning, took several hours to cross the sky today"

"However, groups representing cave-dwellers criticised the reports for lack of inclusivity"

I have a REALLY bad feeling about American troops in Georgia, as in flashforward to a nuke exchange... "No one ever thought it would happen this way after W looked into Putin's eyes..."

The US and Russia are not gonna exchange nukes over this. Period. That's crazy talk.

http://www.wereldoorlog1418.nl/warpictures/begin/images/01-sarajewo-dwo-011.jpg

Today's conspiracy theory: Apparently the US has been massing aircraft carriers in the Gulf, and there are many more there now than there "should" be. The US prodded Saakashvili into provoking a Russian invasion, which now makes it impossible for Russia to complain when the US unveils its *real* goal from this series of events, which is a US attack on Iran.

No, really - there are actually people here who this makes sense.

why would russian involvement in georgia have any effect on any reaction to us war with iran

http://leninology.blogspot.com/2008/08/washington-to-saakashvili-shut-up.html

Bush left enough threads dangling that one could infer a wide range of possible US actions - and from this administration, you certainly wouldn't rule out the most aggressive strategies. There is an element of the 'madman theory' in action here: let the world think we're about nuts enough to do anything, and they'll go along with our preferred strategy with some relief and gratitude. Saakashvili spoiled it by blustering that, uh huh, America was going to take over Georgia's airports and sea ports and run them from Washington. This provoked an immediate denial from his nervous American backers....

It seems as if there is an effort by some in the defense establishment to take the heat out of Bush's remarks. The US military leadership may not want anything that could even approach a confrontation with Russia - but the civilian leadership is quite ruthless and has a knack for outmanoeuvering its opponents in the state. Regionally, the US may also decide to up its game. The presence of US troops across the former Soviet states has thus far been quite limited: no need for them as long as there's a pro-Washington regime and no serious military threat. Although the 'lily-pads' are significant in terms of their potential uses, securing strategic routes for US troops should the need arise, the total number of US troops in the former Soviet countries as of 2005 was 132 (by contrast, there were over 35,000 troops stationed in Japan and almost 30,000 in South Korea). In light of intensified struggles in the Caucasus and Central Asia, that figure may rise substantially. And as I have said before, even if the current dilemmatic is temporarily resolved, it is bound to flare up again soon. The fact that this contest is rooted in something as central to global capitalism as the extraction and transport of energy means that it is permament and inclined to escalate - and that ought to give us a presentiment of real horror.

xpost

The idea is that with Russia out there conducting its rogue war, when the US invades Iran, Russia wouldn't be a credible voice to oppose the US attack. (As far as I followed it.)

If it does kick off in Iran, no-one is going to give two hoots what Russia might or might not be up to in Georgia

I don't know what to make of all this.

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2008/08/13/did-karl-rove-chat-to-saakashvili-about-south-ossetia-too/

Did Karl Rove Chat to Saakashvili about South Ossetia Too?
By: emptywheel Wednesday August 13, 2008 12:41 pm
42
diggs
digg it

The White House has started to panic over a July 9 meeting between Condi Rice and Mikheil Saakashvili, desperate to suggest they didn't encourage Georgia's crack-down in South Ossetia. Given that panic, I wonder whether Karl Rove had any similar chats with Saakashvili when they were in Yalta together just days later?

Now, there's been a lot of justified chatter about the role of Randy Scheunemann, who appears to be advising the Republic of Georgia at the same time as he provides campaign advice to John McCain.

Sen. John McCain's top foreign policy adviser prepped his boss for an April 17 phone call with the president of Georgia and then helped the presumptive Republican presidential nominee prepare a strong statement of support for the fledgling republic.

The day of the call, a lobbying firm partly owned by the adviser, Randy Scheunemann, signed a $200,000 contract to continue providing strategic advice to the Georgian government in Washington.

Given the way McCain has boasted of his frequent calls to Saakashvili in attempts to reclaim the mantle of the best international leader, it raises questions of whether the Administration's "see no evil" approach to Georgia was part of a deliberate campaign strategy.

Particularly when you consider the fact that Karl Rove may have met with Saakashvili just days after the July 9 private dinner between Condi and Saakashvili that the White House, State, and DOD are now panicking about. Rove was in the neighborhood, in Yalta, at a conference with Saakashvili three days after the meeting (h/t brendanx).

Anything to win an election, right? I don't know.

"Rove was at the Y.E.S. (Yalta European Strategy) conference. Along with Tony Blair, Mikulas Dzurinda, Aleksander Kwasniewski, William Taylor, and a couple hundred of their closest friends."

http://www.yes-ukraine.org/

Anyway, the $200,000 fee for lobbying on behalf of Georgia by Scheunemann is no conspiracy theory. But the guy has a great resume: http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/06/17/randy_scheunemann_mccain_advis.html

McCain's connections to Saakasvili are well known to those who are paying attention and I wouldn't put it past McCain (or rather, his advisers) to have a plan beforehand to exploit this to their mutual benefit.

Thx Mitya for responding to Ned's question.

More on this fiasco's perception in Russia. From a Czech paper:

http://www.tol.cz/look/TOL/article.tpl?IdLanguage=1&IdPublication=4&NrIssue=282&NrSection=2&NrArticle=19850

The highly emotional media coverage of the conflict has helped to inflame public opinion. Most of those polled by the Russian media hold the view that the conflict was a provocation on the side of the United States, the country that they believe "perceives Russia as its main competitor."

According to a recent poll conducted by the influential nationwide polling agency VTSIOM, every fourth Russian sees the United States as an enemy. Similarly, 25 percent see Georgia in the same way. Other states in Russia’s “axis of evil” include Ukraine and the Baltic nations.

"The way that the West tries to present Russia in the conflict in Southern Ossetia has one major goal: the talk is about changing the charter of the United Nations, where Russia is one of five countries who have the veto right," St. Petersburg lawyer Igor Kalinin told me in a street poll this week. "There’s no legal mechanism to deprive us of this right, therefore everything is being done to discredit Russia and to change the charter. Today, the world is balanced by that charter.

....

Sergei Shelin, a St. Petersburg-based political analyst, said the result of the crisis in South Ossetia would be “the irreversible secession of South Ossetia and Abkhazia from Georgia.”

Perhaps predictably, most of those Russians who have access to Western television channels and agency reports tend to disdain the foreign coverage as "anti-Russian propaganda."

Many Russians blame the United States much more than Georgia. As Mikhail Romadov, a theology student, said in a street poll, Russia and Georgia, as nations, are not enemies. "These two nations are friendly and Orthodox," he said. "Therefore, I think this conflict is in the interest of the world’s major powers, who are not interested in having Russia as a strong economic and political rival.”

>McCain's connections to Saakasvili are well known to those who are paying attention and I wouldn't put it past McCain (or rather, his advisers) to have a plan beforehand to exploit this to their mutual benefit.

A plan is one thing but I think Russia called McCain/Sakaashvili/Scheunemann's bluff.

I wouldn't put anything past Karl Rove

anti-American sentiment in Russia dies hard I see.

seriously most Americans don't give two shits about Russia anymore. Standard narrative is "we won the Cold War and now they love our jeans and rock n roll, those crazy drunken commies!"

>seriously most Americans don't give two shits about Russia anymore

Which is perhaps why desperate Republicans didn't think anything of engineering a crisis on the *one* issue (foreign policy) McCain has consistently polled ahead of Obama on (by up to 20 points). Yet just like with Iraq (Scheunemann miscalculated there as well, if you read the resume link) they underplayed the consequences

And now Putin has served check mate, and it is a crisis. I don't think Bush was anticipating the tanks moving towards Tblisi, at that volley ball game

Bush is probably drunk 24/7 these days, I doubt he's anticipating much of anything

Or maybe this was partially stage-managed by the Russians? Whatever the case, for this to start at the beginning of the Olympics is no coincidence

x-post Bush is probably drunk in anticipation that he'll get to go back to the ranch after all these years of being center-stage

These conspiracy theories ... it's like the US has become Israel all of a sudden

so russia is "moving around" in georgia. anyone think they're planning an occupation of the whole country? or are they just trying to pull the "irregulars" into line, to stop future flare-ups? (like they say)?

still kinda shook

It's getting colder out there: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080814/pl_nm/shield_poland_dc

U.S. and Poland sign missile shield deal

WARSAW (Reuters) - Poland finally agreed on Thursday to host elements of U.S. global anti-missile system on its territory after Washington improved the terms of the deal amid the Georgia crisis.

---

RUSSIA VEHEMENTLY OPPOSED

If everything goes to schedule, the interceptor base would be ready by around 2012, officials have said. The Czechs have already signed an agreement to host the radar although parliament there must ratify it.

Russia has vehemently opposed placing the shield installations in central Europe, saying they would threaten its security and upset the post-Cold War balance of power in Europe.

Washington reiterated on Thursday this was not the case.

"In no way is the (U.S.) president's plan for missile defense aimed at Russia," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said. "The purpose of missile defense is to protect our European allies from any rogue threats."

Moscow has threatened to take retaliatory steps against Poland and the Czech Republic, its former reluctant vassals who are now part of the European Union and NATO.

---

"rare success"

Russia has also been angered by Poland's strong verbal support for Georgia.

The shield deal, if approved by parliaments in Prague and Warsaw, will be a rare success for President George W. Bush who has argued it is essential to contain the threat of a potentially nuclear-armed Iran.

Washington hopes the shield might persuade Iran to abandon its nuclear program, although Teheran says it wants to develop nuclear energy only to generate electricity and not to make nuclear weapons.

Not sure how this snuck into the press, but one of my (reliable) friends reported reading in a story today that a Russian regular army soldier - a Chechen, in fact - said that his unit had been in South Ossetia for months (i.e. Russia had planned for this eventuality).

http://osinform.ru/foto/7787-vojjna-v-juzhnojj-osetii-89-fotografijj.html

Thanks. Some of those are none too pretty. Funny how you can know how that's what war's all about, but not really think of 'til you see the pictures

Kremlin announces that South Ossetia will join 'one united Russian state' says the Times. It's pretty brazen stuff now by Russia. The backstory seems to be shifting slightly day by day too, so that what initially seemed a crazy gamble by Saakashvili now looks more like a last-ditch attempt to pre-empt an imminent invasion that was going to happen anyway - exactly what Mitya said three posts above

saakashvili met this girl at the vancouver olympics and made her the georgian economy minister! she was in my grad class!

http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/28/georgian-minister-rues-nightclub-photo/

╔══════════════ ೋღ☃ღೋ ══════════════╗
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Repost this if ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ you are a beautiful strong black woman ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ who don’t need no man ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
╚══════════════ ೋღ☃ღೋ ══════════════╝

― jaxon, Wednesday, 5 October 2011 04:13 (18 hours ago)

Uh
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYHLHTUSwU0

^^ that is Ivanishvili's son rapping about (I think) Georgian Dream, his eccentric billionaire father's political movement.

Not sure what to make of Georgian Dream. Saakashvili is fairly widely discredited but Ivanishvili's alliance seems to be held together by little more than his personality / cash.

Yeah, shit is bananas over there. I heard something about a horrible prison rape scandal, but haven't read much about it.

opening chords sound like "Bye Bye Bye"

His lipgloss is something else. Apparently there is a Saakashvili supported rapper who Bera has beefed with publicly.

Kakha Kaladze appears to be Deputy Prime Minister now!

Wow. Apparently they're going with the "invite all the cool kids to the party" approach?

There appears to have been a coup / revolution, of sorts, in Abkhazia. Protesters have taken over government buildings, the President has fled and the government has resigned. It's not entirely clear what their objective is at the moment.

Twitter now being used for pass-agg diplomacy:

Carl Bildt
‏@carlbildt

If @PrimeMinisterGE does not want to listen to the best friends of his country in EU that’s his choice. We take note. @LinkeviciusL

Bildt - Swedish Foreign Minister
PrimeMinisterGE - PM of Georgia
Linkevicius - Lithuanian Foreign Minister

Context: http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2014/08/07/saakashvili_doesnt_need_a_little_help_from_his_friends

წყლის ჭავლი pic.twitter.com/0BOZzjYtHc

— Rezo 🇬🇪 (@RezoBear) March 7, 2023

The first inhabitants of Nagorno-Karabakh have reached Armenia. Nearly the entirety of the population - 120,000 people - are expected to leave the territory as Azerbaijan takes control. https://t.co/ok1Wz2JLeb

— Neil Hauer (@NeilPHauer) September 24, 2023

The President of the Republic of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh), Samvel Shahramanyan, has signed a degree on its dissolution, effective immediately. The Republic is no more. https://t.co/pyIszJ8tBU

— Neil Hauer (@NeilPHauer) September 28, 2023

auto-correct doesn't know about decrees?

That's right. Knowing how to spell doesn't make you less of a shit.

grumpy much today, xyzzzz?

Spare us the posts where you feel you are "hated" by some on here, or you made to feel "less than human".

That's all I'll say.

Protests escalating again

HappeningNow: #Tbilisi’s main avenue is packed with tens of thousands of people protesting against the #RussianLaw.
People keep coming irrespective of tear gas and rubber bullets.#NoToOligarch #Ivanishvili pic.twitter.com/MPghQQKdQS

— Giorgi Oniani (@OnianiG) May 1, 2024

This is Tbilisi. Heart of Europe. 10:25 pic.twitter.com/vciUS2gyeq

— Nodar Rukhadze (@xonoda) May 2, 2024

A lot of conflicting reports on just how big these crowds are but certainly appear to be growing

Fascinating to see!

Yeah, good for them... hope it's not another Belarus situation

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j5lEcJCJec0

Further footage here

Yeah, good for them... hope it's not another Belarus situation

Has something of a Maidan feel, with the arrival of Titushky as well, though so far small in number

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CB1S7d91fLk

Starting to look like Maidan

Chichinadze street side of the parliament right now. Police pushed people here and stopped for now. pic.twitter.com/bRJ853bcKk

— Mariam Nikuradze (@mari_nikuradze) May 13, 2024

What foreigners and the Vake/youth liberal bubble needs to understand is this:

YES. Most (but not all) of the country is on their side on the Russian law

YES. 80%+ are pro-EU

YES. Almost everyone hates Russia

BUT....🧵 https://t.co/2Zb6PqIqYO

— Alex Scrivener - ალეკო სკრივენერი (@alscriv) May 17, 2024

Not exactly a counter-argument as such, but could be a broader picture on where the Georgian public as a whole is right, now. b

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GOW5WWaXUAIWbxJ?format=jpg&name=large

not backing down