Originally posted by MerkTrying to become a wealthy nation (and even a world power) is not a bad thing in itself. US, certainly, cherishes world power status.
Yes. And now Soviet era KGB is in power of a more wealthy nation than when it broke up. Worse yet, Russians feel disrespected and while they might not think a return to Soviet era is best, they most certainly prefer being the world power they once were over being discounted by the world. And in truth, Russia probably hasn't gotten the respect it could have because it hasn't asserted itself all that much.
I see very little difference between the Kosovo War in 1999 and the Russian intervention here. In both cases, you had a restive province of an internationally recognized state resisting that state's authority and the state used military force to subdue said resistance. Then outside countries decided to intervene to support the resisters. If you loved NATO intervention in Kosovo, then you should love Russian intervention in South Ossetia. It should be noted that NATO, like the Russians, did not confine its use of military force to the geographical confines of the restive province.
EDIT: A good article giving the background of the conflict is here: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2008/0812/1218477341404.html
As far as the right-wing dream mentioned that right after WW II it would have been a relatively easy matter to "roll" the Soviets back to their border, that is a complete fantasy. The Red Army in Europe was massive, battle hardened and well-equipped and had faced the bulk of the Nazi forces since 1941. There was also a significant Soviet Army in the Far East which had smashed, in two days, probably the best Japanese field army. The Soviets entered the war against Japan on the date that was agreed; it is pretty much beyond question that the US decision to bomb Hiroshima on August 6 was based on a desire to do so BEFORE the Soviets entered the next day. A war against the Soviets would have been bloodier and more difficult than the war against the Axis even assuming (which is highly doubtful) that all the other Allies had joined it. the threat of atomic bombs (which perhaps one would have been available for 6 months after V-J Day), would not have induced the USSR to surrender its security zone in Eastern Europe (composed of mostly countries who joined in the Nazi invasion of the USSR) paid for with the blood of 20-25 million Soviets.
One can also imagine the reaction among the West's population to a decision, after a long and terrible war, to pre-emptively attack an ally thus immediately triggering yet another long and terrible war. It seems doubtful that since a decision would have been politically possible.
Originally posted by no1marauderCan't agree with the first paragraph. Perhaps the full extent of how this war started hasn't reached the West yet.
I see very little difference between the Kosovo War in 1999 and the Russian intervention here. In both cases, you had a restive province of an internationally recognized state resisting that state's authority and the state used military force to subdue said resistance. Then outside countries decided to intervene to support the resisters. If you loved NAT ...[text shortened]... terrible war. It seems doubtful that since a decision would have been politically possible.
Tskhinvali, the South Ossetian, capital was annihilated by the prolonged air and ground bombardment. By some estimates 98% of the city is destroyed. Civilian inhabitants spent horrendous hours hiding in the basements. It appears that 2000 people died (and better than half of the Ossetians are Russian citizens). 15 Russian peacekeepers were killed as well. And all that after Saakashvili first declared a one sided truce and then unleashed this attack less than 2 hours after saying Georgia lost its patience. He broked a status-quo that existed for about 15 years as well as all previous agreements reached.
Wasn't Russia obligated to interfere and defend its citizens? The US invaded Grenada in the eighties and overthrown its govrnment just on the pretext that some harm may come to the American students.
Originally posted by infomastA Serbian offensive in Kosovo was the trigger for the NATO bombing in 1999, just as a Georgian offensive in South Ossetia has been used as a justification for Russian intervention here. I see little difference.
Can't agree with the first paragraph. Perhaps the full extent of how this war started hasn't reached the West yet.
Tskhinvali, the South Ossetian, capital was annihilated by the prolonged air and ground bombardment. By some estimates 98% of the city is destroyed. Civilian inhabitants spent horrendous hours hiding in the basements. It appears that 2000 peop verthrown its govrnment just on the pretext that some harm may come to the American students.
Russia's granting of citizenship status to people residing in another country (Russia does recognize Georgia AND that South Ossetia is part of Georgia) is not a legal justification for intervening in that country's internal affairs; unless, of course, the Kosovo War established new international law.
Originally posted by no1marauderKosovo's declaration of Independance set a legal precedent. Why shouldn't South Ossetia be allowed to declare it wants to break away from Georgia ?
A Serbian offensive in Kosovo was the trigger for the NATO bombing in 1999, just as a Georgian offensive in South Ossetia has been used as a justification for Russian intervention here. I see little difference.
Russia's granting of citizenship status to people residing in another country (Russia does recognize Georgia AND that South Osset ...[text shortened]... untry's internal affairs; unless, of course, the Kosovo War established new international law.
Originally posted by no1marauderThe citizenships were not forced down upon Ossetians - they asked for them. Russian peacekeepers were staying legally there, by agreement with both Georgians and Ossetians. Protection of soldiers and citizens from a real, not imagined, mortal danger may be enough grounds for intervention to restore the status quo. Murder of an ambassador, for example, was considered enough of a reason to start a war.
A Serbian offensive in Kosovo was the trigger for the NATO bombing in 1999, just as a Georgian offensive in South Ossetia has been used as a justification for Russian intervention here. I see little difference.
Russia's granting of citizenship status to people residing in another country (Russia does recognize Georgia AND that South Osset ...[text shortened]... untry's internal affairs; unless, of course, the Kosovo War established new international law.
Originally posted by Bosse de NageLast time we had such a collapse it made us internationally dominant.
Compared to the Russians? Come on. Thinking that having badder bombs makes you tougher is a prime example of delusion. How do you think most Americans would shape up in the aftermath of economic collapse?
Or the Israelis. You think your corn-fed nation can armwrestle the children of Zion?
Originally posted by shavixmirThe fact that you're anti-American shows just how soft we're not. What does a fat citizenry mean again?
Hell yeah. The US is the fattest nation on Earth.
Fat, soft, squidgy, no back-bone (or they'd have finished off Vietnam in the 60's).
Hell, I've seen leaner and meaner retired sumo-wrestlers.
Oh yeah. It's when your people are strong enough that nobody can starve them.
Why do you think sumo wrestling exists? Because the big fat guys when it comes down to it can kick butt like no other.