ArnautDaniel
Veteran
- Aug 28, 2006
- 5,295
- 328
- Faith
- Other Religion
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Others
Well this makes God uncomfortably reminiscent of Darth Vader.
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
My prophecy:
[thundering voice of God or James Earl Jones]
We're going to have some cold weather this January!
Well this makes God uncomfortably reminiscent of Darth Vader.
It seems that Georgia threw the first punch.
And they have now withdrew from Iraq where they were the third largest force along with the United States and Britain.
Which leads to the question on where the United States and Britain are going to stand on this? Will they stay out of it or will they support Georgia?
This might get really messy.
Forgive my ignorance of specifics but isn't this similar to how World War One started?
I wonder what we promised Georgia, to get them to provide so much suport?
Bush has already ordered support so we are using our permanent bases in iraq to stretch ops out further. Now just wait for the Bush admin to declare Russia fired on one of our planes delivering humanitarian aid to Georgia.
This is a messy conflict that stretches back years. Georgia didn't throw the first punch because a decade ago S. Ossetia broke from Georgian rule but it is still a Province inside Georgian borders so Russia is occupying sovereign territory, even if the residents are pro-russian.
The Bush admin's quick response absent UN authorization is very telling and this could very easily be the spark that sets off several other conflicts, especially if we interfere.
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/rtrs/20080813/twl-uk-georgia-ossetia-bush-bd5ae06.html
The UN isn't going to authorize anything, because Russia has veto power.
South Ossetia should never have been made a part of Georgia in the first place. It's just lines drawn on a map, and, as was done by the British Empire in Iraq long ago, those lines don't reflect the reality on the ground.
I agree the Russian response has been excessive, but then again, Georgia had to realize it was provoking that 800-pound gorilla when it blasted and charged into South Ossetia like a bull in a china shop. What we need now is Russia out of Georgia, and for Georgia to pledge not to station troops in South Ossetia. That region should be administered by international peacekeepers until a plebiscite can be held to allow the citizens there to choose whether they want to be part of Russia, part of Georgia, or independent.
And while that's going on, the events of the Georgian attack on South Ossetia and the Russian response need to be independently investigated, because both sides may have committed war crimes.
Who drew the S Ossetia line? Since it is a Province of Georgia iam not sure how it could be guilty of war crimes for simply fighting a foreign military within its own borders?
This (or at least the latest iteration of this conflict) began when Georgian forces attacked South Ossetia before the Russians came in. The whole reason Russia intervened (ostensibly) was because Georgian forces shelled and bombed civilians in South Ossetia.
So far I haven't seen proof that Georgian forces committed war crimes, but I'm not willing to dismiss the possibility out of hand either. The actions of Georgia prior to the Russian invasion should be investigated, and if Georgian forces committed wanton acts of violence against civilians, then war crimes indictments should follow.
Likewise, the actions of the Russian forces should be investigated, and if they engaged in ethnic cleansing or other attacks on civilians, their leaders too should be indicted.
http://www.stratfor.com/frontpage said:In this simple chronicle, there is something quite mysterious: Why did the Georgians choose to invade South Ossetia on Thursday night? There had been a great deal of shelling by the South Ossetians of Georgian villages for the previous three nights, but while possibly more intense than usual, artillery exchanges were routine. The Georgians might not have fought well, but they committed fairly substantial forces that must have taken at the very least several days to deploy and supply. Georgias move was deliberate.
The United States is Georgias closest ally. It maintained about 130 military advisers in Georgia, along with civilian advisers, contractors involved in all aspects of the Georgian government and people doing business in Georgia. It is inconceivable that the Americans were unaware of Georgias mobilization and intentions. It is also inconceivable that the Americans were unaware that the Russians had deployed substantial forces on the South Ossetian frontier. U.S. technical intelligence, from satellite imagery and signals intelligence to unmanned aerial vehicles, could not miss the fact that thousands of Russian troops were moving to forward positions. The Russians clearly knew the Georgians were ready to move. How could the United States not be aware of the Russians? Indeed, given the posture of Russian troops, how could intelligence analysts have missed the possibility that t he Russians had laid a trap, hoping for a Georgian invasion to justify its own counterattack?
South Osetia is an area populated by Osetians and Georgians... about 1/3 of the people there are Georgian, there are Georgian villages interspersed with Osetian villages. The Georgians jumped in for a reason, no one seems really sure why... other than that Osetians had steped up the shelling of Georgian villages and that US inteligence might have completly misread the situation, and advised Georgia that it could get away with that move.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?