1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Georgia and Russia...

Discussion in 'General Nonsense' started by hat, Aug 10, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. MadCow New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Messages:
    544 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    33
    I already knew that, I'm not arguing that. I'm just saying that I looked at Russian media a bit to get a feel for their side of the story, I didn't completely trust them. I'm glad that we can finally agree on something though. :)
  2. Polaris573

    Polaris573 Senior Moderator

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2005
    Messages:
    4,279 (1.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    709
    Location:
    Little Rock, USA
    The secretary of state is rattling sabers in Moscow, but that's all that will ever come of it. Georgia is not a NATO member nation as of right now. It has declared intent to join but no official treaties have been established. There is no alliance to honor, Georgia is of no strategic value, and has little economic value. The only reason the United States would become involved in a conflict there would be to protect the lives of innocent civilians. Combining the possibilities of further infuriating Russia, with our rather weak record of helping innocent civilians in Georgia (Russia attacks them from time to time this is nothing new) I am quite confident that despite your best wishes you will not get your all out nuclear war. Why you would wish for that in the first place is beyond my comprehension. I suspect you do not entirely understand what a nuclear weapon is nor what the consequences of detonating thousands of them simultaneously would have on your life.
    Last edited: Aug 10, 2008
    yogurt_21 says thanks.
  3. WhiteLotus

    WhiteLotus

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2007
    Messages:
    6,532 (2.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    847
    I would like to say a few things but everybody has already stated them. Russia are just literally saying to Georgia, look mate back off, get out of this country which many citizens are Russian or we kill you.

    Of course that is putting it very bluntly.

    IF the USA does get involved then by pure relations the UK most likely will too. Which is unfortunate because our forces are already spread about quiet a bit. We are not a superpower, but we do know how to fight. We just neither have the man power or the finances to do such a thing. The USA does have such liberties, and shows it.
  4. KBD New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2007
    Messages:
    2,477 (0.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    279
    Location:
    The Rotten Big Apple

    Spread quite a bit? I think you are confusing UK with the US. Thats who has its army spead too thin right now. No offense, but as far as i know aside from measly contingents in Iraq (which will be withdrawn next year), Afganistan and may be Kosovo i'm not aware of any major deployment of British troops around the world. If anything the Brits (and other NATO countries) are not contributing enough forces to the abovementioned operations.
  5. WhiteLotus

    WhiteLotus

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2007
    Messages:
    6,532 (2.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    847
    Current:
    Afghanistan - about 8000
    Iraq - about 4000
    Kosovo - I think just less than 600

    Other deployments:
    Cyprus
    Falklands
    Gibraltar
    Sierra Leone - 1000
    Rest of middle east - 3700
    Nepal

    That may not sound a lot but we ARE A SMALL country.
  6. KBD New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2007
    Messages:
    2,477 (0.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    279
    Location:
    The Rotten Big Apple
    I was referring to major international deployments like in Irag and Afganistan. I wasnt talking about former and current British dominions like Cyprus and Gibraltar. Of course, it would be natural to have your troops there. Do not underestimate the size of your country and its milatary strenght though, its army is one of the largest and most powerful in Europe. And the country aint small either, i think it has close to 65 million residents as now, i wouldnt call that small. In any event, i know that the UK public is against sending more forces to aid the US, i just wish they would contribute more anyway.
  7. WhiteLotus

    WhiteLotus

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2007
    Messages:
    6,532 (2.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    847
    Yea i know - i don't know what is wrong with our Government/public opinion. We have one of the worlds best Naval records - ever, yet our "mother" ship has to limp around on one engine because there isn't enough money to buy more fuel for it. I mean wtf?

    and also the Challenger MKII tank pwns, and the Eurofighter Typhoon - a massive European undertaking can carry conventional and Nuclear weapons - first to do that IRCC. And we have the mighty Harrier, vertical take off ftw!
  8. imperialreign

    imperialreign New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    7,043 (2.71/day)
    Thanks Received:
    909
    Location:
    Sector ZZ₉ Plural Z Alpha
    I've been kinda following this as I tend to take interest in the affairs of the baltic and slavic nations . . .


    just noticed in the news today, Bush's statement to Russia over their actions. Specifically, how Bush has been condeming their actions as innapropriate, and has been qouted as condeming the bombings Russia has been doing . . .


    huh . . . quite hypocritical if you ask me . . . I distinctly remember Putin discouraging the US' actions leading up to our involvement in Iraq, and condeming our air-strikes against "critical" targets before we even launched a land invasion - even to the extent that they refuse to offer any aide in Iraq, either.

    and even more dumbfounding, our government is condeming what Russia is currently doing, but we're aiding the Georgian massacre by airlifting their troops from Iraq back to their frontlines and capital.


    They way I look at it right now, though, this is an incident that is between Georgia and Russia, and we have no business at all getting involved. Nor, do we have any real basis of arguement to stand on in disapproving of Russia's actions, as it mirrors our own at the start of our last conflict.


    But, hey, that's the US for you . . . do as we say, not as we do . . . we can't be the international police organization without pissing someone off, whether it's our own citizens or other nations. Screw what our allies think, we know what's best for them and the rest of the world.

    McDonald's for all :toast:

    :shadedshu

    TBH, I don't forsee the UK jumping on the US' back in this right now. The UK got screwed by the US with our little crusade in Iraq and Afghanistan. It took them a couple of years to wisen up and start pulling out of Iraq, but I think they finally saw the light.

    That, and Bush's "man in the can" Mr. Blair is no longer in office, either. IMO, the only reason the UK was hopping on board everything the US did was due to some kind of behind-the-scenes relations between Bush and Blair; whether Bush was offering him a cut of the booty that was pillaged or otherwise, I couldn't tell ya.

    Thankfully, France and Germany knew better than to support the US' involvements in the middle east, even though it lead to quite a fall-out on our side of the pond by all the brainwashed patriots. If the UK had joined up against the US back then, it possibly could've prevented us from pushing forward.

    Even still, if the US decides to go and wave it's dick around in another country, even more so if we'll end up being against Russia, don't expect that any of the other poweerful European nations will be quick to join sides. No one will want to stand between either Russia or the US, as taking the side of one will cast the evil eye from the other.
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 11, 2008
  9. MadCow New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Messages:
    544 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    33
    imperialreign, I completely agree with you.

    I found it funny how Bush condemned Russia, while he himself ordered the invasion of Iraq for the same reason. Of course that obviously wasn't the reason for Iraq, but still. So it's only OK for the U.S to invade to stop a genocide, according to him, if anybody else does it then it's unacceptable. Then he says that Russia is trying to impose a government on S. Ossetia, while true, that's exactly what the Ossetians want, they want to be part of Russia. And again Bush's hypocrisy comes into play. This whole situation pretty much mirrors the invasion of Iraq, except this time there's a very, very good reason.

    The amount of bias in north american news about this event is dumbfounding. I was watching CNN earlier and they keep repeating Georgia's view, making Russia sound like the aggressor for around 20 minutes. Then a 30 second blurb about Russia's justifications, then back to Georgia. The second I heard the phrase "Russia's actions are unjustifiable" I just left, I couldn't watch it anymore.

    News media is acting as if Georgia never bombed it's own cities and killed it's own innocent civilians, almost all of whom had a Russian passport, killing Russian peacekeepers in the progress, peacekeepers that were there in an agreement between Georgia and Russia.
  10. candle_86 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,916 (1.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    233
    Why because the UN in its infineate wisdom will send a peace keeping force, its what they do, and who spear heads every peace keeping force?

    as for nuclear war i understand it entirely, but what it means for me is diffrent than alot of people, it means that the lord is comming back and i get to go home. Its why death and war do not bother me, for i know if i die today, i awaken in heaven.
  11. candle_86 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,916 (1.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    233
    speard thin yes the US Forces are spread out, but we have one thing that puts millions of troops into combat over night, we call it a draft. Also ww2 clearly showed that American can send most of its male population under 30 into war and still churn out enough war supplies to keep our allies fed. This is one reason why America can afford to be spread out like it is, there is alot of males 18-35 in America not in the military to be drafted should the need arise
  12. candle_86 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,916 (1.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    233
    umm the Typhoon wasnt the first do to that, there where alot before designed to carry nuke/conventional weapons.

    F-100 SuperSaber
    F-111
    F-4 Phantom
    F-102
    F-106
    F-117
    F-105

    are the ones off the top of my head that served as fighters that where designed to carry nuclear or conventional payloads

    As for the Harrier, yall should get some of the ones we are retriing to suplement your aging fleet of Harriers. Our AV8B is alot more modern than the ageing AV8A yall use
  13. MadCow New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Messages:
    544 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    33
    candle_86: how about you keep this on topic. We all know that you love the U.S and everything, but a triple post barely a single sentence on the conflict is bordering on spam IMO.
  14. candle_86 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,916 (1.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    233
    if post count mattered in GN id have merged it, but it doesnt, so i dont see the harm here.
  15. MadCow New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Messages:
    544 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    33
    It's just cluttering up the topic, you could've easily done all that in 1 post.
  16. WhiteLotus

    WhiteLotus

    Joined:
    Jul 30, 2007
    Messages:
    6,532 (2.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    847
    I think it can carry them at the same time though, maybe it's just something special about the way it does this. You know it's claim to fame.

    And i heard about the Joint Strike vertical take off project - that looks nifty.


    @Imperial - yea the amount of jokes we had over here with Blair being Bush's lap dog - rather funny to say the least. At the moment our government as a shambles, wouldn't vote for either of the parties, it's that bad. Incompetent Brown or smug Cameron... hmm choices!


    @Topic - I really do hate the way Russia is being made to look bad. It's just coming down to the typical Russia is a baddie, when in this case it is the complete opposite.
  17. candle_86 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,916 (1.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    233
    actully I don't trust Russia this whole thing with them is very simple, they are tring to put the USSR back together. They have rebuilt most of there military again, and want to be the big kids on the block. We will let them take the first move and then we will shut them up. I don't trust Russia, I don't Russia.

    Also I don't belive the Typhoon can carry nuke + conventional a tactical nuke weights a lot.
  18. MadCow New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Messages:
    544 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    33
    I forgot to mention something in my previous post, and that is Obama seems to have some sense at least. While McCain is taking Bush's stance, condemning Russia using strong language and probably believing the BS that's being fed to him, Obama seemed unsure about the whole thing. Although he said pretty much the same thing, he sounded like he didn't mean it and he was just saying it to please the public, to echo their opinion. Shows that at least he has more integrity, or that he's more informed than McCain.

    And I can't see anything that bad with Russia trying to get more countries in its influence. Georgia is a shithole, Russian influence can only help them. But I doubt that will happen, Russia know its boundaries, and they won't overstep them.
  19. candle_86 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,916 (1.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    233
    all it shows is that Obama can't say what he means, one more reason not to vote for him in Novemeber
  20. MadCow New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Messages:
    544 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    33
    While McCain runs his mouth about subjects he clearly has almost no knowledge of. Either that or he's so good at lying that it seems like he truly believes that.

    But again, I don't want this to stray too off topic.
  21. imperialreign

    imperialreign New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2007
    Messages:
    7,043 (2.71/day)
    Thanks Received:
    909
    Location:
    Sector ZZ₉ Plural Z Alpha

    very true - our news media propagandonists (like that word, eh? :p) are only aimed at justifying and supporting one side of the arguement. In any case, at least here within the USA, Russia is always wrong in the eyes of our media - which helps reassert our populaces belief that Russia is evil and should be chained like a dog.

    It follows the same principle as to why our public schooling history text books completely eliminate so many different accounts and bits of information from events where Russia was involved. It's why our text books don't even bother to mention Stalin and the "Great Terror," - our text books ignore the truth behind the Cuban Missle Crisis, or Russia's militaristic supremacy over the US throughout the cold war. We don't want our people to think that Russia is better in any way, nor do we want to have been known as being associated with a nation and leader who was more extreme, and crazier, than Hitler ever could've been. We have to acknowledge we were allies at one point due to WWII, but we barely touch on the fact that the USSR won the war, not any of the other allies.

    Although the Cold War might not still be going on, our media continues to allow it to happen. If we could've learned anything from the relations Gorbachev and Reagan had sown, it would've been that mutual understanding between our two nations, the need to not keep "secrets" from each other, and be willing to bite the bullet and sometime act in the other nations best interest . . . both of our nations would've been so much stronger for it. Instead, we failed. As soon as the next president was in office, we were off to our way of crusading against heathens once again, and left Russia amidst a turmoil of political upheaval and economical collapse, while we, bent in the notion that we can do no wrong, we off again pursuing the almighty dollar. We even went so far as to offer aide to many of the baltic nations to help fuel and rebuild their economies after their claim of independance from Russia . . . . and what did we offer the Russians? Not a damn thing. Even if they had rejected an offer of our aide, it would've shown them that we were willing to put the past behind us and extend an offer of help if they needed it. That would've shown them our integrity as a nation. Instead, we ignored them for the next 6-8 years, spending more time playing marco-polo in the deserts and passing out the tubes of KY to all the civil strifes that cropped up throughout Europe and Africa.

    That, IMO, is where we continue to have bad relations between the US and Russia. They completely changed their government, lost their economy, and had to rebuild after we helped their states reach independance, and we helped Russia along in making that decision. They were counting on our continued support and alliance. Again, we offered and helped to rebuild many of their states economies, but we made no real effort to help Russia.


    Russia has been the only country over the last 100 years with the ballz to call America out when we're doing something that no one agrees with. And we continue to brush their disapproval off like it was nothing more than a stern look from a high school teacher. But when they go and do something we don't approve of, we're the first to jump down their pants with a bucket of ice-water . . .

    Considering that Russia's economy is rising quite quickly now, and we have NO IDEA as to the extent of their military spending and the true condition of their military; we should be asking ourselves at this point, considering how strung out our forces are, can we afford for our protesting of Russia's actions to escalate into a possible military engagement? Can we afford to take that risk of so thoroughly pissing them off? Can we afford to risk the interaction of a very few select countries that would possibly come to the aide of Russia?

    The country was not given the nickname "The Great Bear" for nothing. The bear has been in hibernation for the last 2 decades, and we all know how grumpy a bear can be when it wakes up.

    Remember as well, we thought the Russian economy was complete and utter shit when Hitler effed-up and broke the Molotov-Ribbentrop Non-Aggression Pact they shared; and which nation during that war tromped on the Nazi's like a 5-year old does to ants? Y'know how they say history repeats itself . . . :shadedshu
    WhiteLotus and MadCow say thanks.
  22. candle_86 New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2006
    Messages:
    3,916 (1.40/day)
    Thanks Received:
    233
    Im aware Russia was a former ally, that doesn't chage what they really are. A mob state, the Russian mob runs the state.
  23. MadCow New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2007
    Messages:
    544 (0.21/day)
    Thanks Received:
    33
    Wow, very well said. :p

    yea I found it funny how the battle of Stalingrad, the bloodiest battle of WWII had a paragraph dedicated to it in my grade 10 history textbook, while some random 2 day long battle in China that held no significance had a whole page. And of course they failed to mention that it was the USSR that took Berlin pretty much by themselves.

    IMO, the U.S wouldn't dare touch Russia if they had some sense. The country turned around completely over the past few years, their economy is booming. And if they keep the same ruthless battle tactics as the USSR (retreat and you get shot) then their opposers would be screwed. Plus they have technology that we've never even heard of. (Radar than can detect the B-1 "stealth" bomber, rendering it completely useless, for starters)

    @candle: Right, and the U.S government isn't influenced at all by illegal, outside forces. :laugh: And so what if the mafia has influences in government? That's perfectly normal for a large democratic country. Also, I see that you've been brainwashed by the Cold War propaganda, and you still stick with those beliefs. People like you are the reason we can't have an alliance with Russia which will benefit everybody greatly.

    EDIT: Just found this article, pretty much echoes what I've been thinking all along. http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=13285
    Last edited: Aug 12, 2008
  24. KieranD

    KieranD

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2007
    Messages:
    8,017 (3.11/day)
    Thanks Received:
    814
    Location:
    Glasgow, Scotland
    Georgia invaded some other country or breakaway state and forced Russia to retaliate, Russia bombed the hell outta Georgia and killed a few people, Georgia had to declare war on Russia for bombing its people.

    All in all i dont think any one else will get involved, no one is stupid enuf to attack Russia.

    The answer was simple we should have let Russia into Nato, i mean there is no conventional enemy, honestly Iran and North Korea might hate us but they seriously can attack any mojor powers.

    Russia was fucked after the cold war, it spent way to much on defense and as a result it has a poor economy. It taking all the gas and oil for itself because its Russias biggest source of income.

    Russia is fine at least us Europeans like them.

    Its not mob that run Russia its Tycoons who want all the leftovers from the USSR, see communism everything was owned by the government then it went democratic and sold everything cheap.

    We dont want to send troops everywhere we are content to have a defensive policy we live on an island the only way we can be invaded is by sea or air. When the time comes we will defend territories like we did in the Balkans and Falkland islands. We are content to be friendly with Europe because its in our best interests defensively and economically.

    EDIT: i think Obama is sitting on the fence, usually the Republicans in America take the aggressive stance
  25. KBD New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2007
    Messages:
    2,477 (0.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    279
    Location:
    The Rotten Big Apple
    Agreed, Russia cant be trusted, at the present it is not a friend of the US and the Western world. That regime is corrupt, oppresive and disregards many of their citizens needs. Their present govt rejects western values, however they dont reject the western way of life. Many of the Russian corrupt elite and top officials have western bank accounts, send their kids to school here, travel freely around the world and enjoy a comfartable standard of living at home. Their anti-western rhetoric is mainly for domestic consumption intended to further fuel the nationalist sentiment in their country. It's part of what helps keep the Russian leaders in power. So they are not trying to put the USSR back togerher, even though they publicly say that the collapse of the USSR was a mistake, they will never risk open war with the West as that is where they keep their money and go on vacation. Nor do they have the military strenght to recounquer ex-Soviet states. Their army is weak and demoralized, for the most part it is comprised of 18 year-old consripts who dread joining the army. They get abused by officers and elder servicemen, many thousands die during peacetime, thats how bad it is. Their military budget is 30 times smaller than that of the US and they have no allies in the world aside from Belarus. Though they still have nukes and their military tech is awesome, in some instances even better than that of the US, but due to the lack of funds they cant develop much and have a hard time upkeeping their nuclear arsenal and actually rely on US funding to dispose of it.

    However, i beleive that this time Russia cant be blamed for what they are doing. Their response was approriate, though i think they are starting to take this too far. I think they want to damage the Georgian army and econmy as much as they can so it wont be threat to them for a long time.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page