Russia expands Georgia blitz, deploys ships

Monday 11th August, 07:11 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

Latest 15 of 93 Total Comments Show All

pathat at 09:47 AM JST - 12th August

Euphoria spreads throughout the Pentagon, the rest of the U.S. military establishment, defense contractors etc., as the realization dawns that they will not have to pretend to find post-Cold War enemies anymore, hey, Russia is back! We are in the money!

"There cannot be one standard for the US and a different standard for everyone else. The US and its citizens cannot reserve the right to say who is and who is not a security threat to whom nor can it legitimately play a double game and sometimes seek and sometimes reject the authority of the Security Council."

Nice post, SEZ. Not to worry about the "fulminating" of SuperLib, you did an excellent job of fumigating afterwards. The air is clear now. Some of us understand the truth, some here at JT never get it. Such is life.
Betzee at 10:00 AM JST - 12th August

Gee, what a warped sense of values some posters here exhibit. I mean it's OK for someone to use human carnage as an excuse to get into puffed up armchair general mode to offer such insightful predications as this: My guess is that they'll keep pushing further into Georgia to provoke a response, then use the response to remove the Georgian government. But I could be wrong. (Don't think anyone needs the qualification.) Yet the same poster self-righteously launches into a long-winded diatribe about the politics behind my post while never addressing the substance.

Analysts, BTW, never accept that leaders are "stupid." Not because there's any shortage of idiots running around but rather it's unlikely someone lacking a minimal amount of brainpower could get the top job. Hence this doesn't provide any insight of any use in understanding the origins of this conflict:

I think it was a monumentally stupid decision to start killing Russians.

We start with the premise leaders make rational decisions but they may be ego maniacs working with limited information leading to miscalculation. Indeed the Christian Science Monitor (linked above) offers some insight:

Russia must be condemned for its unsanctioned intervention. But the war began as an ill-considered move by Georgia to retake South Ossetia by force. Saakashvili's larger goal was to lead his country into war as a form of calculated self-sacrifice, hoping that Russia's predictable overreaction would convince the West of exactly the narrative that many commentators have now taken up.

Until I read something more persuasive, I'm going to accept this. The president of Georgia seems to have provided his people with very poor leadership owing to this miscalculation. In reaction to the Russian invasion, he alternates between giving interviews to CNN and hiding under the bed.

And for all the jokes about European impotence made on this site, the US can only chime in condemning Russia as it willfully ignores the advice of the world to observe the ceasefire. Moscow has clearly calculated they can get away with this and they are probably right. Is anyone going to boycott their oil and gas after all? Doubt it.

Where they've miscalculated, is the cost of an occupation which follows regime change. It's always considerably higher than what leaders convince themselves (and their taxpaying citizenry) it will cost. The Vietnamese learned this in Cambodia, we've learned it in Iraq, and the Russians of course found out the hard way in Afghanistan.

Now some will say the Russians would have done this anyway and the US preemptive strike against Iraq had nothing to do with it. Maybe. But we've lost the moral basis from which to criticize. I'm waiting for GWB to tell the Russians what Condi told the Chinese in the midst of their Tibetan uprising earlier this year: "violence doesn't solve anything." You gotta practice what you preach if you want to be taken seriously.

Betzee just happens to speak a little more forcefully than average.

In fact, not. My paycheck comes from the federal treasury and amongst the people I work with, my views are quite moderate.
SezWho2 at 10:23 AM JST - 12th August

Betzee,

...than average on this board--which was the point of SuperLib's contention, I think. Well-reasoned arguments are, in my opinion, more forceful than invective. But if you wish to be modest (or moderate) I promise to try not to magnify your abilities.
SezWho2 at 10:42 AM JST - 12th August

undecidedbout08,

As far as I know, Georgia has not been the subject of UN sanctions, does not actively support terrorism, and not all of its neighbors may be wary of its military adventurism--although the South Ossetians are probably a bit ticklish about that at the moment. So what?

The point that you are missing is that you are of the people who are positing that in these circumstances it is OK to be the aggressor but in those circumstances it is not. There simply is no agreement that what you posit is, or even should be, the standard.

Absent a standard, we are simply left with the fact that invasion and or disproportionate response is OK under some set of facts and circumstances. Now we need to try to haggle over what those facts and circumstances are. I give you long odds against an international agreement on that any time soon.
Betzee at 10:50 AM JST - 12th August

One of the attractions of a site like this is that we can "meet" people we wouldn't cross paths with otherwise in daily life. And we can dispense with the social pleasantries that are necessary to keep the balance in a group situation from which you can't come and go (like your office). But, as a former colleague of mine observed once about me, "I wouldn't want to go up against you in an argument." I hope that's reflected here as well....

As for the topic of this thread, it's clear the next administration will have to manage America's relative decline. We have no more leverage over the Russians than the frequently derided Europeans.

It's also clear once you get into this, who's the bully depends upon where the accuser stands in the food chain. Many point the finger at Stalin's geographical engineering, in fact the disputes over land rights may go back to the Ottoman empire.
seansezso at 12:03 PM JST - 12th August

I dont think I can say anything that Superlib hasnt already said. Good show mate!
seansezso at 12:15 PM JST - 12th August

Where they've miscalculated, is the cost of an occupation which follows regime change. It's always considerably higher than what leaders convince themselves (and their taxpaying citizenry) it will cost.

Betzee, it wont cost the leaders anything, not their lives nor their treasure. If they dont profit from the other bloke's gold, they will use the situation to profit from their own country's. If the American elected officials can do it, then its going to be 3x easier for the Russian oligarchy.

I still have to agree with Superlib that the Georgian move was stupid. Even if the Georgian goals are all met, it was still stupid. War is stupid. People who get others killed for land and cash are stupid. They may be clever in certain ways, but they are stupid in a fundamental way, as only the selfish and greedy can be.
seansezso at 12:27 PM JST - 12th August

Many point the finger at Stalin's geographical engineering, in fact the disputes over land rights may go back to the Ottoman empire.

This old woman has a good point:

“The Georgians burned all of our homes,” said one elderly woman, as she sat on a bench under a tree with three other white-haired survivors of the fighting.

She seemed confused by the conflict. “The Georgians say it is their land,” she said. “Where is our land, then? We don’t know.”

The land belongs to the individuals who hold it. Then they choose their government. This process should not work in reverse, except in some very particular circumstances that I dont see here. A majority of South Ossetians do not want to be part of Georgia. So Georgia can never control South Ossetia without slaughtering or displacing a majority of South Ossetians. There is simply no good reason to do that to people, only bad ones.
TonyUS at 03:48 PM JST - 12th August

No one wants to let go of something they once controlled. As for Russia and its energy supplies, they better take advantage of it while they can because the world will compose itself from those with energy supplies and use that as the forceful hand in which they base decisions on, especially decisions made that goes against the basic rights and freedoms of others. Russia has developed into such a governing state as for, cutting off supplies to its neighbors and now with this excessive force against Georgia, The world is trying to set the future for alternative fuels and many nations will have enough of its own oil reserves once all is taken off total reliance on oil as the only energy source, Even if Russia holds this as its ace in the hole, they will not have this advantage forever, same with Venezuela’s rise from their economic gains from their oil. All the craziness from Hugo Chávez and rants and crazy exaggerated statements outward towards the US, this seems to be in character with the appearance of Russia over the last few years. We have seen both of these countries find themselves a sudden rise in power from their energy sources and begin this outward approach towards others with an attitude lased with threats and aggression. Now Russia has shown how wealth can change the demeanor of how they treat their one time adversaries and take an opposite approach to issues where at one time would have taken a softer approach.. The disadvantages and advantages of wealth and the use of ones power, but again this falls in line with individuals as well..

But as to some of the comments above,,,as much as one does not like the actions of the US, Those of you that wish to condemn the actions of the US, this does not and should not be used as an excuse for others to perform actions against another. Do you believe because US attacked Iraq, that this gives Russia a reason to invade Georgia?? This is what you are implying and I find that something like a child’s argument! So Russia has the right because we did it, and besides, this is against a country based on democracy which no matter what, we should support, and if you can not bring yourself to support democracy and the spread of democracy, and also support one of our allies, then go live in another country without such values or that are based on such values. I hear voices continually bashing the US here and who’s words seem to say that are from the US, if that is the case then you should stand for the values the US is based on in support of Georgia and its development and against what Russia is doing to them. Georgia has its boarders, the majority voted to go with the western alliances, and Russia is helping to divide the country. That is wrong no matter how anyone wants to compare it to how bad the US is and that they have the right to do what they have done. I say they don't.
SezWho2 at 06:41 PM JST - 12th August

TonyUS,

It's not that Russia has a right because we did it. It's because we have no standing to criticize because we did it.
Betzee at 10:48 PM JST - 12th August

SezWho,

This is the final paragraph from an article in the NYT's today about Putin:

It may take time to work out the messages Mr. Putin has sent in the past week, but this one is clear: Russia insists on being seen as a great power. “The problem is, what kind of great power is emerging?” said Mr. Trenin, of the Carnegie Center. “Is this a great power that lives by the conventions of the world as it exists in the 21st century?”

What are those conventions, however? They were redefined by the GWB administration in the name of national defense.
seansezso at 11:00 PM JST - 12th August

Georgia has its boarders, the majority voted to go with the western alliances, and Russia is helping to divide the country.

South Ossetia also has its borders. And the majority of people of that area dont want to be part of Georgia. Either one supports self determination, or one does not.

I really do not see the problem with letting South Ossetia go, except the meaness of a child.
SezWho2 at 11:30 PM JST - 12th August

Betzee,

Yes, what are those conventions?
Betzee at 03:50 AM JST - 13th August

Well, Vlad the impaler has thrown down the gauntlet on this, SezWho, (which will no doubt provoke outrage from the usual quarters):

'"Of course, Saddam Hussein ought to have been hanged for destroying several Shiite villages . . . And the incumbent Georgian leaders who razed 10 Ossetian villages at once, who ran over elderly people and children with tanks, who burned civilian alive in their sheds -- these leaders must be taken under protection.
JoeBigs at 03:57 PM JST - 13th August

ReaganLegend at 04:39 AM JST - 11th August Bush has to tell Russia to sort out these problems peacefully. The Russians and Georgians have a lot of respect for the current administration. Peace is a reality in this region, with US intervention.

I wish your dream was a reality, but Bush is as loved and respected as a gnat is on Parris Island in summer. Hell at least with a gnat you know what he intends to do.

But that is not here or there, the only thing the Russians respect is brute force. Pound their forces into dog meat and they will respect you. What we need to do is supply the Georgians with enough weapons and maybe a merc or two dozen and go to town on them.

Only good Russian...well you know what I mean. Russia is a toy bear, kick it and they will just look at you.