Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


T in the Park

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Russian warning on Nato warships



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 29 August 2008
RUSSIA has issued a stark warning over what it says is a build-up of Nato ships in the Black Sea, as tensions rise to their highest level since the outbreak of hostilities in Georgia.
The missile destroyer USS McFaul is already off the coast, with the US Coastguard ship Dallas docked in Georgia's port of Batumi, both to show support for the Caucasus nation. Washington has now ordered the flagship of its 6th Fleet, the sophistic
ated command ship Mount Whitney, into the area, saying it will deliver humanitarian supplies. But the flotilla has angered the Kremlin.

Dmitry Rogozin, the Russian ambassador to Nato, warned against western interference in Georgia's two breakaway regions, saying: "If Nato takes military actions against Abkhazia and South Ossetia, acting solely in support of Tbilisi, this will mean a declaration of war on Russia."

Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin, the Russian prime minister, dragged the United States presidential candidates into the row. He suggested Georgia might have been pushed by someone in the US into using force to protect the two separatist states, saying the anti-Moscow rhetoric would help give a competitive advantage to one of the candidates.

Colonel-General Anatoly Nogovitsyn, Russia's deputy chief of the general staff, claimed up to 18 Nato vessels were in, or expected to be in, the Black Sea, and he attacked the use of warships to deliver aid to Georgia as "devilish".

Three frigates – from Spain, Germany and Poland – sailed into the Black Sea eight days ago. They were joined later by a US frigate, the Taylor, for port visits and exercises off the coasts of Romania and Bulgaria. Four warships of Nato member Turkey are also in the Black Sea.

Mr Putin's spokesman said: "The appearance of Nato battleships here in the Black Sea basin … and the decision to deliver humanitarian aid (to Georgia] using Nato battleships is something that can hardly be explained.

"Let us hope that we do not see any direct confrontation."

Russia claims the build-up is contrary to the 1936 Montreux Convention, which regulates the passage of warships there. But that charge has been denied by Carmen Romero, a Nato spokeswoman, who said the alliance had applied for transit into the Black Sea in June and stressed that the vessels would stay less than 21 days, as required by the convention.

"There is no Nato naval build-up in the Black Sea," she said. "Nato is conducting a routine and long planned exercise limited to the western part of the Black Sea. The exercise is not related to the crisis in Georgia."

Meanwhile, in an interview with CNN, Mr Putin, the former president, suggested the conflict was orchestrated to give one side in the battle for the White House an advantage. Although he did not single out John McCain, the Republican candidate has been more strident in his criticism of Russia than his Democratic rival, Barack Obama.

Mr McCain has said that Nato's failure to sign up Georgia into the military alliance had left the country vulnerable. And while Mr Obama has called for restraint on both sides, he has condemned Russian aggression.

Mr Putin said he suspected someone in the US had provoked the Georgia conflict to make the situation more tense and create "a competitive advantage for one of the candidates fighting for the post of US president".

He went on: "The fact is that US citizens were, indeed, in the area in conflict during the hostilities. It should be admitted they would do so only following direct orders from their leaders."

Mr Putin added that the US had armed and trained Georgia.

But a White House spokeswoman, Dana Perino, said: "To suggest that the United States orchestrated this on behalf of a political candidate – it sounds not rational."

Pressure on Russia will mount on Monday at an emergency summit of European Union leaders, to be attended by Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister.

Bernard Kouchner, the French foreign minister, suggested the EU would consider sanctions against Russia.

As current president of the EU, France said it would aim to get consensus among all 27 countries of the bloc if sanctions were envisaged.

While the EU is not contemplating the most stringent of sanctions, such as the travel bans and arms embargoes imposed on Iran, it could postpone talks on a new partnership and co-operation agreement with Russia scheduled for September. The EU could also scrutinise the activities of the Russian energy giant Gazprom, which obtains 70 per cent of its profits from sales to Europe.

Washington said it was considering scrapping a US-Russia civilian nuclear co-operation pact in response to the conflict.

In a related development, Moscow, which has been incensed by the proposed US anti-ballistic missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic, announced it had successfully tested a long-range Topol-M intercontinental ballistic missile.

According to the Russians, the missile has been modified to avoid detection by the anti-missile defence systems.

Meanwhile, after previous tough criticism of Russia, David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, yesterday said "there is no question of launching an all-out war with Russia".

He said: "No-one ever doubted that a Russian army of up to 800,000 people was going to defeat a Georgian army of up to 18,000 people. Indeed, that has happened over the last two weeks. The question, though, for Russia is whether it wants to suffer the isolation, the loss of respect and the loss of trust that comes from that."

A statement signed by Mr Miliband, along with the foreign ministers of the US, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan, said they "deplored" Moscow's "excessive use of military force" in Georgia.

Moscow was offered one supportive comment, however. Alexander Lukashenko, the president of Belarus, Russia's closest ex-Soviet ally, said the Kremlin "had no other moral choice" but to recognise the Georgian regions.

The crisis flared early this month when Georgian forces tried to retake South Ossetia and Russia launched an overwhelming counter-attack.

Russian forces swept the Georgian army out of the rebel region and are still occupying some areas of Georgia proper.

PROFILE

THE USS Mount Whitney, a Blue Ridge class command ship, is the flagship of the United States navy's 6th Fleet.

It is also the command and control ship for Nato's southern European strike force.

It is currently based out of Gaeta, Italy.

Considered by some to be the most sophisticated command, control, communications, computer and intelligence (C4I) ship ever commissioned, Mount Whitney incorporates various elements of the most advanced C4I electronic equipment and gives the embarked joint task-force commander the capability to control all other US naval sea units.

Mount Whitney can receive and transmit large amounts of secure data from anywhere through HF, UHF, VHF, SHF and EHF communications paths.

The vessel carries little in the way of armaments, other than guns for close-range defence.

Mount Whitney typically carries enough food to feed the crew of over 300 for 90 days and can transport supplies to support an emergency evacuation of 3,000 people.

Its distilling units make over 100,000 gallons of fresh water a day.

Traditional allies of Moscow denounce force

CHINA and several central Asian nations rebuffed Russia's hopes of international support for its actions in Georgia, issuing a statement yesterday denouncing the use of force and calling for respect for every country's territorial integrity.

A joint declaration from the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation, or SCO, also offered some support for Russia's "active role in promoting peace" following a ceasefire, but overall it appeared to increase Moscow's international isolation.

The Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, had appealed to the SCO alliance – whose members include Russia, China and four central Asian countries of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan – for unanimous support of Moscow's response to Georgia's "aggression".

But none of the other alliance members joined Russia in recognising the independence claims of Georgia's separatist regions, Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

Mr Medvedev's search for support in Asia had raised fears that the alliance would turn the furore over Georgia into a broader confrontation between East and West, pitting the United States and Europe against their two main Cold War foes. But China has traditionally been wary of endorsing separatists abroad, mindful of its own problems with Tibet and Muslims in the western territory of Xinjiang.

The joint statement, which was unanimously endorsed, made a point of stressing the sanctity of borders – two days after Russia sought to redraw Georgia's territory.

"The participants… underscore the need for respect of the historical and cultural traditions of each country and each people, and for efforts aimed at preserving the unity of the state and its territorial integrity," the declaration said.

Internet maps 'are wiping out' British landmarks

THE internet is wiping thousands of British landmarks off the map, a leading geographical society warned yesterday.

Churches, ancient woodlands and stately homes are in danger of being forgotten as internet maps fail to include the traditional landmarks, said Mary Spence, the president of the British Cartographic Society.

In recent years, web applications such as Google Earth have become a popular way for people to search for maps and satellite images.

Speaking yesterday at a Royal Geographic Society conference, Ms Spence said: "Corporate cartographers are demolishing thousands of years of history – not to mention Britain's remarkable geography – at a stroke by not including them on maps which millions of us now use every day.

"We're in real danger of losing what makes maps so unique; giving us a feel for a place even if we've never been there."

But Ed Parsons, the geospatial technologist at Google, said the way in which people used maps was changing. He said: "Internet maps can now be personalised, allowing people to include landmarks and information that are of interest to them.

"Anyone can create their own maps, or use experiences to collaborate with others in charting their local knowledge.

"These traditional landmarks are still on the map, but people need to search for them," Mr Parsons said.

"Interactive maps will display precisely the information people want, when they want it.

"You couldn't possibly have everything already pinpointed."

1936 treaty comes under the spotlight

THE Montreux Convention cited by Nato with regard to Black Sea access may be regarded by some as an obscure treaty, but amid the current high level of tension in international politics with Russia, its terms are coming under close scrutiny.

The agreement, signed on 20 July, 1936, gives Turkey full control over the Bosphorus Straits and the Dardanelles and regulates military activity in the region.

It permits Turkey to remilitarise the straits and imposes new restrictions on the passage of combatant vessels.

The treaty also guarantees the free passage of civilian vessels in peacetime.

It severely restricts the passage of non-Turkish military vessels and prohibits some types of warships, such as aircraft carriers, from passing through the straits.

The terms of the convention have been a source of controversy over the years, most notably concerning Russia's military access to the Mediterranean.

Under the agreement, Turkey must be notified 15 days before military ships sail into the Black Sea, and warships cannot remain longer than 21 days. The convention applies limits on individual and aggregate tonnage and numbers.

These limitations effectively preclude the transit of major "capital" warships and submarines of non-Black Sea powers through the straits, unless exempted under Article 17.

That clause permits a naval force of any tonnage or composition to pay a courtesy visit of limited duration to a port in the straits, at the invitation of the Turkish government.









The full article contains 1940 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 29 August 2008 8:17 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Russia , Georgia
 
1

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 29/08/2008 00:24:14

'HOY' YOU! @#1, you being funny,?

Whats with the Name,?
2

Statsman,

Edinburgh 29/08/2008 00:45:22
The Americans seem to be winding the Russians up.

There is another territory that may suddenly appear important:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/country_profiles/3641826.stm
3

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 29/08/2008 01:06:58


"Greenslade" no-doubt! but why clone the name, even if one has spelling error,?
4

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 29/08/2008 01:08:14

BTW, your 'Gap' is pants!
5

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 29/08/2008 01:32:09

Awe thanks, #9 bring them on, that's nice of you, I often read you posts, so don't think that I don't appreciate what you say, just because I don't make comment to you, because I do.
6

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 29/08/2008 01:34:32

BTW! I dont know what this guys game is about, trying to clone me, Karl Linksaill, spelt wrong.
7

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 29/08/2008 07:13:53
Roulette, or chess? Russians play both.
8

scottish person,

paisley 29/08/2008 08:11:46
The Americans are wrong as usual. They want to put weapon detection equipment in Poland (neighbours of Russia) but got very upset when Russia wanted to do the same in Cuba in the early sixties. Yes football is much more interesting.
9

Boy Wonder,

29/08/2008 08:24:11
#12. And they both cheat at it too!

#9 and #10/#11 are both the same person. 94 year old Chuckles Linskaill. He's getting worse!
10

fons et origo,

29/08/2008 08:25:44
The Russians have been pushing the West about under Putin for too long,this culminated with the Russians nuking central London with the Litvinenko affair.

Nato needs to stop their creeping power base,funded on nothing more than that they happen to live on a sea of gas and oil.

Nato must take the Russians on,militarily if necessary, as power and strength is all Putin seems willing to recognise.

Then punish them further by isolating them for 20 years or more.

Were that to happen the Russians under Putin could blame no one but himself.
11

fons et origo,

29/08/2008 08:28:38
#13 The Russians were wishing to deploy offensive weapons on Cuba.

Poland will only have defensive systems.

Big difference.
Isn`t it.
12

fons et origo,

29/08/2008 08:38:11
That the Chinese have condemned Putins hostilities is a major blow to the Kremlin.
A blow that cannot be underestimated.

Putin fears the Chinese far, far more than they have ever feared the West,simply because of their unpredictability.
Now that the Chinese have condemned Putin we will probably see Putin looking for a way out,of backing down without losing face.
Putin should not be allowed to do that.

When Putins punishment is decided on by the West and China,all peoples outside and inside Russia must be aware what that punishment consists of.
No saving face deals behind closed doors must be permitted.

Putin must be publically held to account and punished.
13

Griffe,

29/08/2008 08:56:07
Russia get out of Georgia! US fleet leaves. End of problem.
14

Bigwull,

edinburgh 29/08/2008 09:06:40
be afraid, uncle George has his twitchy finger on the button, and not long left on his presidency.
15

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

29/08/2008 09:06:49
Some our media have displayed their usual anti-American tendencies - just listened irately to the Today programme where they all but blamed Georgia for instigating this.

The villians are not the Georgians but the Russians, who have actively encouraged a long-term ethnic cleansing of South Osettia and Abkhazia, purely to satisfy their own imperialist expansionist goals.
16

UrbanFox,

29/08/2008 09:08:49
There is no doubt that Saakashvili was an idiot to send his troops into SO although I suspect he was provoked by the Russian ethnic residents. However since then Russia has acted like an uncivilised violent caveman. Does Russia really want to be part of the world community? Or do they want to isolate themselves through their bullying aggressive attitude. Even China looks like a civilised world partner compared to the sulking Russians. They say they are protecting ethnic Russian residents of OS, what about the Georgian residents that are being cleansed from the enclave? The problem for Russia is that freedom and democracy are built into the human spirit and there is nothing they can do about it.
17

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 09:15:55
#18 Griffe,
Sorry Griffe, not that simple. They're there for the long haul now, until they've finished what they are there for, and that's to secure the oil supply by trying to control the tap.
Russia's recognition of two independent states was a nice excuse to get in there, kind of like the 18 warships now present to deliver 'aid'.
Whether or not Russia is right, the US is definitely wrong, it's nowhere near their neighbourhood, they just jumped on the opportunity.
18

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

29/08/2008 09:31:33
"Whether or not Russia is right, the US is definitely wrong, it's nowhere near their neighbourhood, they just jumped on the opportunity."

You obviously have a short memory when it comes to history.

Putin's actions are no different from the expansionist policies of Hitler in Nazi Germany or Stalin in the old Soviet Union.

Russia is taking wee bites out of its neighbour. Who will be next? Belarus? Ukraine? The Baltic republics?

If history tells us anything it is that a bully won't be stopped by appeasing him - NATO are right to act now to stop the Russian bully.
19

YHOTA,

Newbridge 29/08/2008 09:37:18
I guess you guys who make these knee-jerk anti-Amercian comments are either to young or too ignorant of history to realise that throughout my lifetime (born 1940) we have all survived by working together against people who would do us harm. Pay a visit to Bastogne if you need some evidence. Where is Bastogne? Google it chump!
20

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 09:37:31
#23,
Russia maybe taking nibbles out of its neighbours, but the US is taking huge bites out of the Middle East, and what excuse do they have for being there?
Where ever there's oil to be found, you'll find the US lurking nearby, and if there's no oil, well, just take one look at Zimbabwe.
21

,

29/08/2008 09:41:20
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
22

sonofhamish,

edinburgh 29/08/2008 09:42:36
Looks like two articles in one here, is no-one at the Scotsman proofreading these days?

Apart from anything the bully here is more the U.S. than Russia and its unfortunate that our own govt has thrown their hat in with the U.S. but not surprising.

The Georgians decided they could go into these regions and ethnically cleanse Russians was ALWAYS going to be a provactive move that the Russians would respond to. I smell the hand of the neocons and specifically Cheney behind this little prank...
23

Silence of the Yams,

29/08/2008 09:47:49
#25. Maybe you should ask the Iraqi govt? Chumps like you forget that the US are there by the invitation of a democratic govt. Maybe you should ask why the Chinese are in Tibet? Because they are NOT wanted there, pal!
24

Alan B,

29/08/2008 09:49:11
#scottish person

"They want to put weapon detection equipment in Poland (neighbours of Russia)"

So by logical implication Poland should not be allowed membership of NATO. And be kicked out of the EU.

Remember Poland was the victim of Russian oppression for 40yrs, under the soviet union. And now you want to punish the victim in case we upset the country that conducted the crimes.

NATO is the promise by a group of countries to protect each other in the event of war. A promise to safeguard their sovereignty. If Georgia was a member of NATO we would have not other option but to go to war to protect it. (unless you thing it is ok to promise mutual help for each other and then do nothing in the event of anything happening). NATO cannot simply choose to protect some of its members and not others. If any country is invaded and NATO does not react then NATO is finished.

The best way to protect a NATO member is not to leave it undefended and then have to go to war to try to free it with all the civilian casulties that will happen. If a country is allowed to join NATO it has to be strongly defended from the outset. ie you prevent invasion and you ensure no-one is stupid enough to try. As such you need missile systems in Poland and other countries at the outer border. Remember by asking to join Poland is asking for help to defend itself. Poland is asking that the 40yrs yrs of totalitarian rule from Russia is not allowed to return.

Can you credible have a EU member that is barred from NATO membership. The EU would be ineffect saying if you are invaded we will not lift a finger. You are a second class member of the EU. The EU is refusing to protect its own borders.

It is interesting that you like punishing the victim of 40yrs of Soviet oppression.



25

Alan B,

29/08/2008 09:52:04
#Postmark-55

A comparison with Zimbabwe is completely illogical. The only country that was interested in internal Zimbabwian issues were the British because it is an ex colony. There are worse in Africa and the rest of the world than them.
26

Tweedmouth,

Coldstream 29/08/2008 09:53:12
Is anybody else worried that we have a walking foetus called Miliband as Foreign Secretary - a guy who looks like a 16 year old school prefect and who has never had ANY real job in the real world??? This guy has never run a corner shop - and he is out there saying " we don't want an all out war with Russia"!!!!

This is a very dangerous situation and the poverty of talent and experience in the Nulab party is cruelly exposed by this moron. Brown is even worse.
27

yockel,

29/08/2008 09:53:38
Where are the isolationists when we need them?
28

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 09:55:22
#28 Silence of the Yams,
Please save your China comments for a China article, this is about the US, NATO and Russia.
29

Alan B,

29/08/2008 09:55:48
#Tweedmouth

Many of the British foreign secretaries have been poor. While i think labour generally have a poverty of talent in their ministerial ranks, look at many of the poor excuses we had under the tory decades (howe, hurd, major etc).
30

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 09:59:34
#30 Alan B,
Hey Alan, how's it going?
My point is that there's no oil in Zimbabwe, thus no US military lurking nearby.
31

Silence of the Yams,

29/08/2008 10:05:53
33. The thread is about Georgia you clown, not the Middle Wast.
32

Alan B,

29/08/2008 10:07:57
#Postmark-55

I know but I see no parallel with Zimbabwe. Why would anyone go in militarily to Zimbabwe. You would have to invade many, many more countries first, as they are far worse. France has even invited their leadership to certain African meetings so they have not even been properly isolated. South Africa has no real problem with it.

There are serious problems with the middle east. Whether it is wars, global terrorism, mass internal problems (Sadam using chemical weapons), the rest of the world giving tin pot dictators tonnes of money for their oil, which they then can use to buy weapons and have nuclear ambitions. There is also the problem of Israel. If the US (which i think is totally wrong about israel) was purely motivated by oil why does it support Israel so much, an enemy of the oil producing countries. There is also alot of history in the middle east becase of france and britain carving up the old turkish empire after ww1. And also the cold war and the strategic nature of the place. As such it was a pawn in the game to defeat the soviet regime.



33

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 10:10:50
#36 Silence of the Yams,
Yes ,but I'm drawing comparisons as to what the US is up to, and how they get involved when there's oil at stake, but stay away when there's no oil. You see, I'm still talking about US involvement, and that's relative to this article.
34

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 10:18:16
#37 Alan B,
Well Alan, Zimbabwe is just one blatant example that came to mind, thus the comparison of oil vs no oil.
As far as Israel is concerned, the Americans are no dummies, and know how the rest of the Arab world perceives Israel, so they put their money into a country who can keep an eye on their neighbours, most of who are sitting on a lot of oil, oil that the Americans want and need.
The US is strategically based all over the world, and it's not for friendly reasons, just for reasons that they hope can and will benefit them.
35

K McDonald,

Glasgow 29/08/2008 10:18:26
35 Postmark-55,China, 29/08/2008 09:59:34
My point is that there's no oil in Zimbabwe, thus no US military lurking nearby.>>>

And there is oil in Sudan and no US military lurking nearby.....the only foreign lurkers are Chinese oilmen, weapons salesmen and military advisors.

Amazing that the US is the only country singled out for criticism for providing military advice to their friends. There were Russian's helping to shoot down stealth fighters during the Kosova war, Brits in West Africa helping to defeat the West Side boys, Chinese in North Korea, North Koreans in Syria and on and on and on.....

Putin is a gangster trying to recapture his old turf. Simple as that.





36

Alan B,

29/08/2008 10:26:53
#Postmark-55

I still cannot see how Zimbabwe is a blatant example. it is a threat to no-one and has caused not wars and does not involve itself in international issues or disputes and has no terrorist activities.
37

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 10:28:05
#40 K McDonald,
Ah, but you don't see China involved here do you? Well at least not for the present time anyways.
The US on the other hand is heavily involved, and oil is the reason, bottom line.
38

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 10:33:19
#41 Alan B,
Alan we all know that Zimbabwe isn't involved in this dilemna.
I just brought Zimbabwe into the picture, making a point that if there's oil involved, you'll find the US in the neighbourhood, but if oil isn't on the menu, the US won't be dining there.
Zimbabwe has had terrible atrocities commited against its citizens, but because there's no oil, you won't find the US there.
39

Alan B,

29/08/2008 10:37:47
#Postmark-55

I think you really do not understand how the US has got to where it has.

Much of the big problems in the world were caused by the colonial empires particularly from Europe. Take many of the world problem areas and they were british colonies, afganistan, iraq and palestine (although the middle east was previously dominated by the turkish empire), india/packistan. You can even look back at the disputes between china and japan.

WW1 was a colonial war, fought over and between european countries and their empires.

The US was dragged into this war, before which its policy was one is isolationism.

Again the US was dragged into anothe european inspired world war with ww2. Where again it had previously resumed its isolationist stance.

Most of the problems in the second hald of that century have been underpinned by the soviet regime and trying to stop the evils of stalin. This was made worse as some countries lined themselves up with the oppressive totalatarian communist regimes eg china.

As such much of the issues were trying to safeguard the democractic world from communist dictotorships.

The cold war meant getting involved in a dirty way to win that war but avoid military conflict. Much of the world is still damaged from being pawns in that dispute.

If you look at it seriously the US has been a victim of european colonialim (alhtough it was created by this way itself) and the evil spread of communist dictorarships.
40

Alan B,

29/08/2008 10:45:05
#43 Postmark-55

Why would the US get involved in Zimbabwe.

The US gets involved in areas that are strategic, aligning up against what it sees as it main enemies.

There is no oil in europe so why does the US have so many bases here. No oil in eastern europe so why there.

Is there oil of china for export? Doubt it. But that is to try to safeguard these disputed areas from Chinese aggression. (know you will not agree with that).

Was there much oil in South Korea. Or any part of Korea. Is vietnam really a new middle east?

Remember it was the french and russians that had gone behind the sanctions of iraq to make oil deals. It was france that broke the sanctions for oil deals in Lybia.

We heard gulf war 1 was about getting Iraq oil. The US proved that argument wrong by not going in to Iraq.

If it was all about oil why did the allow the Iranian revolution by withdrawing support for the Shah.

Most of US foreign policy has actually been about stopping communism and the threat is saw from there. To many in europe it was obsessed. eg McCarthy trials.


41

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 10:46:33
#44 Alan B,
Well Alan, the way I see and understand it, nobody drug the US into any conflict, but they came in because there was something to be gained and the enemies already weakened, that makes the US clever opportunists, rather than the saviours they would like us to believe.
The cold war was just another justification to beef up their military and increase an already overly gross military budget.
And I agree with you on the point that much of the world suffered and are still suffering on account of the cold war, which in fact was never a war.
We were all pawns.
42

Alan B,

29/08/2008 10:47:27
#Postmark-55

If you are going to invade Zimbabwe because it has a leader that fixes elections, then you would first have to rid the world of all countries that do not even go through the sham of having free elections.
43

Lianachan,

Highlands 29/08/2008 10:47:34
#20 "Some our media have displayed their usual anti-American tendencies - just listened irately to the Today programme where they all but blamed Georgia for instigating this."

Well, Georgia invaded South Ossetia when they thought nobody was paying attention - killing civillians and (even more stupidly) Russian soldiers. You can't help but at least partially attribute blame to them.
44

UrbanFox,

29/08/2008 10:50:49
Postmark-55, Thanks for such an enjoyable Olympic games, you really provided the world with a wonderful spectacle. There is much about China that I admire today.

However as Alan suggests you really seem to have a blinkered view of the world: "Zimbabwe has had terrible atrocities commited against its citizens". Yes, and I am old enough to have watched the raw footage from Tiananmen Square as your government massacred its own young citizens. It was horrific and sometimes you just had to look away. It was really awful, the instinctive desire for freedom and democracy being mercilessly butchered. So I think you should be a little more circumspect before you condemn any other country.

45

Alan B,

29/08/2008 10:53:38
#Postmark-55

"nobody drug the US into any conflict, but they came in because there was something to be gained"

I suggest you read some history about the start of both world wars.

Why did the US enter the first world war? Why did they come into the second?

Neither of these wars were started in any way by the US. They were very isolationist in these days.

In ww1 they came in for 2 main reasons. The german uboat campaign meant many US trade ships were attacked. And Germany also offered part of texas to Maxico if it attacked the US.

WW2 the US was attacked by the Japanese. It had stayed out the war. Should the US just have allowed Hilter to run europe or hand over to almost equally repugnant Stalinist regimes.

In many ways the US was a victim of the problems of european colonialism, and the communist dictorships and ideologies of the 20th century from the soviet union and china etc.

To a large extent is has got involved to stop it suffering from these things again.
46

Alan B,

29/08/2008 10:57:31
#Lianachan

The underlying problem is. Georgia is a sovereign nation and was dealing with an internal disput.

Russia invaded a soveign nation. Russia was also sponsoring disruption in these areas before this conflict.

Many people view the Iraq war as illegal. That was due to the fact that to go to war to invade another country you need a UN mandate.

Russia has not such mandate. As such this invasion was illegal.

In your opinion does it matter if a country goes against international law and invades another country without a UN mandate?
47

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 10:58:39
#45 Alan B,
Well Alan, that part of the world just happens to be a highway for transporting oil, thus my previous mentioning of the US controlling the tap back at post #22 to Griffe.

And you're 100% correct about the US trying to stop Communism, because Communism was a so called threat to keep the west scared and justify gross military budgets and justifying all the constant new and high-tech weapons, just to stop those dreaded Communists.

Well Alan, As you can see by my location, I live in a Communist country, and it's great here. There's nothing to fear from Communism or Communists.

If you want to talk about atrocities committed by anybody, all systems are equally guilty, as colonialism so clearly showed us, and yes Communism too, when being led by the wrong leaders.
Presently in China we have good and sound leadership under Hu Jintao, and our economy is thriving and many people are starting to see the benefits, and yes we have a long ways to go, but give us time, we'll get there.
48

Alan B,

29/08/2008 11:07:33
#Postmark-55

"There's nothing to fear from Communism or Communists"

There is nothing wrong with democratic communism. But most of the communist regimes were dictatorships. Like many regimes they were expansionist.

Look at the soviet regime of Stalin. The invade half of europe. So there was alot to fear. The whole communist doctrine was for an internation revolution.

Where hitlers socialism was of a nationistic type the communist socialism was for world wide rule.

Although in practice, soviet style communism was just as nationalistic and full of anti seminism.

The reason democracy are better, is the people can kick out bad leaders. We all know power corrupts leaders. Dictatorships obviously suffer much worse as they cannot kick out these leaders.

The totalarian communist dictatorships of the 2nd half of the 20th century were the wrong doers. The rest of the democracies were the victims of them.
49

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 11:11:23
#49 UrbanFox,
Hi there UrbanFox,
You're welcome for the great Olympic Games, but I won't take the credit, that would go to the Government, organizers, volunteers and whoever else I left out.
These Olympic Games also highlighted that China has come into its own, and has left the past behind. Tiananmen Square was nineteen years ago, and has nothing to do with the present people in charge. The present government has and is making great strides in improving its citizens lives, and considering the overly massive population, it is doing a good job. But we need more time and not criticism. We are going through our industrial revolution now so to speak, and we are making mistakes and hopefully learning from them as well from the not so good past.
The more you criticize and condemn us, the more likely things will recede, rather than go forward, and I for one don't want to revisit the past, it's there to be learned from, and of course never to be forgotten.
50

Alan B,

29/08/2008 11:12:36
#Postmark-55

People would trust China considerably more if it allowed the Chinese people to freely elected their leaders.

If the current Chinese leader is as good as you say, he should have no worries about letting the Chinese people elect him.

Only leaders afraid of the judgement of their own people would be afraid of an election.
51

The Tin Man,

29/08/2008 11:20:44
#51 AlanB

There is a difference between a sovereign nation and enclaves within a nation that have never been governed by that nation, ever since it's creation.

'Sovereign nation' is a sweeping generalisation that is not really applicable in this situation. In order to be part of a nation, surely a region has to agree to be governed by that nation, and for government to be put in place?
52

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 11:21:08
#50 Alan B,
Well Alan I never claimed that the US started either WWl or WWll, but rather that they knew when to enter and defeat an already weakened enemy, all for self interest, but making it like they were the white knights in shining armour rescuing the fair maiden.
They are kind of guilty of overkill to say the least wouldn't you say by nuking the Japanese twice.
To this day they want all but Israel and a few select allies to disarm or not enter the nuclear program, but I for one don't want them to be the world's policemen, do you? After all, they are the only ones to have tested nuclear weapons on people, and they did it twice in three days. Still trust them Alan? I know I don't.
53

The Tin Man,

29/08/2008 11:27:39
#51 AlanB

China has never been a democracy, and the UK has never strived for communism.

Get over it.
54

Mashimaro,

China 29/08/2008 11:28:39
#51 The rest of the world would trust America a whole lot more if it let people elect the leaders they wanted too.
55

Mashimaro,

China 29/08/2008 11:29:56
#49 Stalin "invaded" "half" of Europe? Are you nuts?
56

DaveK,

Edinburgh 29/08/2008 11:29:59
Well if nothing else Holywood will dine out on this one for years, not to mention the countless computer games that will spin off from this little confrontation. I can see it now, 2009 Russian invades Ukraine, America responds, Uk dragged in, Vin Diesel single handedly takes on the might of the Russian army and wins without breaking a sweat. Playstation brings out "Euroconflict" in time for Christmas.
At least that way you can blow the hell out of each other and the biggest injury you get is a sore wrist.
57

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 11:30:06
#55 Alan B,
Sorry Alan, trying to keep up here, but you're bringing up a lot of points for me to respond to.

Alan, a one party system without elections works for a country with the size of our population.
To keep this many people happy, fed, educated, looked after medically, is a huge challenge, and we just don't need the infighting that multiple party systems bring.
It isn't perfect, but it is working for us, and so we will continue on that course until its broken or stay with it if it is indeed successful over the long haul. It isn't exactly a picnic trying to keep control over such a huge population, especially when there is so much corruption at the lower and local levels, but we're trying to clean that up, ever so slowly.
Please give us time Alan, you went through your growing pains, and that's where we are at now.
58

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 11:33:24
Hey Mashimaro,
Am I ever glad to see you, there are a lot of points for me to respond to and I ain't the world's fastest typist.
59

Alan B,

29/08/2008 11:33:53
#Postmark-55

I completely disagree with your view of US reasons for entering into both World Wars. You have ignored the reasons I put for their entry. What was the self interest in ww1. They took none of the spoils that Briain and France did. In ww2 they were attacked.

Particularly in ww1, there was no glory. It was a truely awful war.

"They are kind of guilty of overkill to say the least wouldn't you say by nuking the Japanese twice."

Difficult to say as I was not old enough to have a perspective of the time. The 2nd bomb was becuase the Japanese refused to surrender after the first one. So it is easier to blame the Japanese leadership for stupidity.

From the little i really know of war with the Japanese, my perpective is those that fought them thought they were truely evil. There was actually a respect for the germans in both wars (not the nazis), but the Japanese were consider totally differently. (i am talking about a british perspective, do not know US perspective).

The Japanese had a reputation from being cruel in a way that others were not even in war. The whole torture and treatment of prisioners etc.

I do not know if that played a part in nuking them.

Also since Japan attacked the US origninally the question has to be asked, how many US people should be killed in action before you use the weapon available to you. Without nuking the Japanese would they have been beaten. Remember the fighting with Japan did not take place in Japan but proxy wars in other parts.

Difficult choice to make.
60

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 29/08/2008 11:34:08
The posters on this forum must be green as the grass that you are smoking.

This whole mess was instigated by George Bush and his CIA to help McCain get elected by the American People. They know that Obama is becoming unbeatable after the republicans filling each others pockets out of the phony war in Iraq.

The Russians are quite correct to feel threatened by the placement of a missile shield in their former satellite countries. Would the USA allow missiles in Cuba?. Kennedy was willing to go to Nuclear War with Kruschov to stop the missiles going to Cuba. Why should Russia feel any different. Christ the majorityb of Scots dont like their neighbours especially Sarkozy, who is a bitter little short man who has napoleonic aspirations to run Europe.

The Yanks will get rid of the worst President of the United States in November. Obama will get rid of the missiles and the right wing nutters who are running the show for their big business mates.
61

Edward,

29/08/2008 11:36:27
Russians are pathetic to get faux worked up about a Coastguard cutter which has one light gun and is painted all white with a big red stripe accross its sides. Not exactly a threat!
62

Alan B,

29/08/2008 11:37:33
#56 Mashimaro

"Stalin "invaded" "half" of Europe"

If you refute that you know little of european affairs. Stalin created the soviet union and and also took over eastern europe.
63

Alan B,

29/08/2008 11:39:17
#Mashimaro

"The rest of the world would trust America a whole lot more if it let people elect the leaders they wanted too"

Explain?


The problem with America is their democracy has been so corrupted by money.

64

Edward,

29/08/2008 11:40:38
#61 A Better Way,Scottish Republic
Slight difference between the anti missile shield that the US is proposing to set up in Poland and the ICBM's that Russia tried to deploy in Cuba!
Anti Missle is exactly it says on the tin, its for knocking out any ICBM's launched (its Ground to air)
where as the ICBM's that Russia had in Cuba are Ground to Ground long range missiles
So please get it right
65

Alan B,

29/08/2008 11:40:47
#A Better Way

"Christ the majorityb of Scots dont like their neighbours especially Sarkozy"

I would doubt the majority of Scots either know who Sarkozy is and have any strong opinion on him.
66

Alan B,

29/08/2008 11:43:45
#A Better Way

If you reject the missle system to protect eastern europe, then by you should atleast spell out the implications.

ie all eastern euopean countries should be expelled from NATO as it simply does not make sense. And most probably expelled from EU.

see my post #25 to explain in detail.

You should also put in context why Poland etc the victim of soviet oppression should be punished to appease the wrongdoer.
67

The Tin Man,

29/08/2008 11:47:11
#63 AlanB

I am sure that you know that Stalin did not create the USSR.

#67 AlanB

It has been a long time since short-range balistic missiles have been sited in Poland, even when they were batting for the other side. Why did Nato not take up the offer to use Russian radar installations?
68

UrbanFox,

29/08/2008 11:48:22
#50 Postmark-55

A fair response. China is certainly on a good road. The young chinese people I have met have been well-mannered and hard-working and are welcome to live in the UK. Your young people will have their day.

Cheers
69

Alan B,

29/08/2008 11:52:50
#52 The Tin Man

"'Sovereign nation' is a sweeping generalisation that is not really applicable in this situation."

A sovereign nation is a country with internationally recognised borders. Georgia has been this way since what 93? As such Russia is invading a soveign nation. This terrerory is not part of Russia. Considering Russia ran the whole place only a few decades ago they could have carved it all up however they wanted it anyway.

I support people that want self determination. The real issue is what the process should be and how the the international community will support that process (ie through UN).

A country that simply invades another becuase it does not like its internal workings without going through the UN, particulary when Georgia is not threat to Russia, makes this not only an illegal act but wrong.

"In order to be part of a nation, surely a region has to agree to be governed by that nation, and for government to be put in place?"

Yes. Remember the whole issue like Yugoslavia is coming to terms with the falling of the soviet empire and the problems it caused and before that the other colonial empires like Autria Hungarian one.
70

Harry "Dingy" Reid,

Las Vegas 29/08/2008 11:53:56
#9 scottish person

You are wrong, even if you were right are you supporting the Russians in Georgia?
71

Harry "Dingy" Reid,

Las Vegas 29/08/2008 11:55:55
12 fons et origo

You're a voice of reason in this crowd of idiots.
72

Travis,

chi 29/08/2008 11:57:39
Christ here we go again!
73

Harry "Dingy" Reid,

Las Vegas 29/08/2008 11:58:13
2 Statsman

"The Americans seem to be winding the Russians up."

No, the Russians are winding up the Russians. And why did you leave Spain, Poland, France, and the UK out of your hateful comment?
74

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:00:37
#The Tin Man

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin

Stalin took over in 1922 from Lenin.

1922 was the date of the creation of USSR treaty but 1924 before it came into being.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Creation_of_the_USSR


Anyway do you think most of eastern europe and soviet republic had the democratic choice under Stalin to choose membership of soviet union.

It has been more than 20yrs since is did this for ograde at school :)

75

Harry "Dingy" Reid,

Las Vegas 29/08/2008 12:01:48
Putin, just like the other the Middle East terrorists wants Obama as president so they can do anything they want when Obama is elected, just like in the Clinton days.

"Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin, the Russian prime minister, dragged the United States presidential candidates into the row. He suggested Georgia might have been pushed by someone in the US into using force to protect the two separatist states, saying the anti-Moscow rhetoric would help give a competitive advantage to one of the candidates."

76

Mashimaro,

China 29/08/2008 12:04:46
#64 Alan, the US interferes in elections all over the world, all the time. The UK too, for that matter. Does that show the will of the people? No.
Democracy is a lie.
77

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:04:56
#68 The Tin Man

I do not think the west yet trust Russia. They are not sure which way Russia will necessarily go.

Things like the murder of the russian in london does not help and underpins a deeper problem that is not played out in the media.

Remeber much of NATO is to protect it members from Russia.

Russia has not yet really dealt with the wrongs of the communist regimes and its effects on the europe and particularly stalin, in the same way that Germany has had to deal with the issues surrounding hitler.

78

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:08:51
#Mashimaro

"Democracy is a lie"

In some countries maybe. But for most of european and the west in general it is real. Not perfect but real. All constrained by the limitations of the different models of democracy they choose.
79

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:12:56
#Mashimaro

You are right the US has interfered in many places over the world. And in many ways it would be better if it butted out.

The problem is from the end of ww2 the world has been a mess becuase of the evils of the communist regimes and there invasions of other countries running them against their will.

Much of the areas where the US has invened in the past is part of the cold war.

If you take the view like me it was the soviets that were the "evil empire" trying to dominate others against their will as in half of europe (and would have gone further), then the west was the victim of this wrong doing.

All you are doing is pointed out the victim did things unbecoming in order to beat those intent on its destruction.
80

The Tin Man,

29/08/2008 12:19:21
#78 AlanB

Thanks for the correction.

However, remember much of NATO is to protect the military / industrail complex.

Do you seriously think that Russia poses a military threat to any Nato members?
81

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:19:30
#The Tin Man

Russia ran most of eastern europe and other soviet state with an iron fist at the hands of Stalin and the leaders that followed him. Many of these countries were taken by force against there will.

Do you honestly think that make Russia the best person to take an independent view of how to manage any disputes over territories and judge the rights and wrongs of the situation?

I think you gloss over the fact that Russia and particularly the stalinist phase was the root of so many of these underlying problems.
82

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:27:49
#81 The Tin Man

Probably not. I was really hoping that in the fullness of time Russia would have been part of the EU.

Putin seems to be playing too many games and has apparently receded on the democracy that we thought Russia was getting with the fall of the soviet union.

I was actually against the missle systems by the US until I thought about it yesterday in this type of discussion on another thread.

I just cannot see how, you can have Poland a member of NATO (and others) and not have weapon systems in place to prevent attack. It does not make sense.

I can completely see why the Russians would be against it.

But the question comes down to. Should we allow eastern european countries into NATO (and that means promising to go to war to protect them) or do we say no we are not prepared to do what is necessary to protect you and are not prepared to let you join our security club.

It also comes down to seeing eastern european countries as the victim of 40yrs of soviet rule and whether they should be allowed the protection of NATO.

While i hate Bushisms, with Russia it almost comes down to are they with europe or against it.
83

Nevsky,

Moscow 29/08/2008 12:29:22
82:

It is not the Russia of today Alan i am afraid. Every debate about modern Russia always comes back to Stalin and the old and tired perceptions of Russia which is now at least 40 years out of date.

It's like talking about the UK and the destruction it caused in Africa and India (not so long ago) every time you mention the country...move on from this kind of debate!
84

The Tin Man,

29/08/2008 12:32:01
#82 AlanB

That is not an answer.

You are correct in you assesment of the Eastern Bloc, but do remember that the USSR paid for the re-building of eastern Europe after the war (not with loans), as well as the rebuilding on E. Russia.
85

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:33:29
#Nevsky

I am not saying it is the Russia of today. Russia has changed.

But in areas where the domination of Russia is so recent can Russia really be the sole arbitar of a dispute?

Take a step back. We do not want war. We need international mechamisms to deal with disputes over terretory and land.

In europe I see the EU being the best placed. Although from a military perspective like in Yugoslavia it will need the US to back it up (unfortunately). I would support the EU have enough military muscle to deal with european disputes.

86

The Tin Man,

29/08/2008 12:36:56
#83 AlanB

Remember that Russia has never been a democracy as we know it. They had a breif dallience with something very vaguely like western democracy, and got burned so extremely badly that it is unlikely to return any time soon.
87

Neil,

Glasgow 29/08/2008 12:37:35
Rather more important than this story about American ships not quite locking horns with Russian ones is Putin's announcement that he has reason to believe US soldiers directly involved in the genocidal attack on Ossetia. It is certainly impossible to believe that, with hundreds of US soldiers & advisers in the country & 1,000 soldiers having been training them a few days before, that the US did not authorise this genocide as they did in the Krajina Holocaust. For them to have actually physically assisted in the genocide of Russian citizens would be an even more serious step.
88

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:38:18
#85 The Tin Man

#83 was my answer. (I should probably direct my post better)

The US paid for much of the rebuilding of western europe, i still would not want to be run from there.

Any dictatorship does something well. However in my mind the means does not justify the end. The soviet regime was wrong to take eastern europe by force.

I can understand the communist regime taking control with Russia itself as Russia was suffering from the year of dictatorship from the Tsar. (although Lenins communists actually displaced the short lived Kerenshy democratic government).
89

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:40:14
#Neil

For what strategic reason would the US want these enclaves to be held as part of Georgia?

90

Nellie,

Liverpool 29/08/2008 12:42:48
Silence of the Lambs.
You should note that the Georgians are NOT welcome "in" South Ossetia. South Osettia wishes to be aligned with Moscow, not Tblisi. Ditto Abkhazia, as they were both within the USSR, when they were NOT under the thumb of Georgia. Why can't they both determine their own future as did Bosnia? NATO supported Bosnia to break away from Serbia, ironically against the wishes of Moscow. Now Moscow is supporting South Osettia and Abkhazia just like NATO did Bosnia, and NATO is now opposing South Osettia and Abkhazia for wanting to break away from Georgia, while Moscow supports them.

NATO and Moscow are as a pot and kettle calling each other black!

It all goes to illustrate that the USA AND Russian are engaged in a power struggle in Eastern Europe without any genuine regard for the people who live in the territories they seek to "protect". Both deserve condemning.

91

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:44:30
#Nevsky

"It's like talking about the UK and the destruction it caused in Africa and India (not so long ago) every time you mention the country"

The problems of UKs colonial period and the empire underpin many of the problems we see today. Afganistan, Zimbabwe, Iraq, India/Packistan, Isreal/Palestine.

Many of these countries would not see Britian as part of the solution as it was part of the problem.
92

The Tin Man,

29/08/2008 12:49:23
#86 AlanB

I don't think that the EU eas anything to do with the Caucuses.

Georgia appears to have been completely unmoveable over any right to self determination in Abkhazia or S. Ossetia, despite never having control over the areas, and despite UN involvement. The Russians have now taken full advantage of the Georgian's pig-headedness.
93

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:51:46
#Nellie

I do not think anyone on these threads would be against self determination for people where that is what the people want.

The issue is the process to achieve that.

Whether Russia can bypass the UN and illegally invade a sovereign country to sort out an internal problem.

Much of this mess if due to the collapse of the soviet regime and coming to terms with a new order.

I agree the west should be more supportive of the concept of self determination. But in many cases it is very difficult as the problem areas are generally coming out of some dictators rule.

I would support the right of the Kurds to have their own country. But practically you have to deal with the response of the Turks. And how oil would be split within Iraq.

Should an independent Kurdistan have bits of all the neighbouring countries.

In Yugoslavia, the EU made a mess of it. It was an EU not Nato plan to try to keep the place together. Part of that was due to the difficulties and problems with letting it disintegrate into its component parts.
94

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

29/08/2008 12:53:54
Thank god for the voice of sanity - Alan B - most other posters seem to be peddling the usual leftist anti-American drivel and conspiracy theories.

This whole problem has been going on a lot longer than the initial Goergian action - the Russians have been actively encouraging the ethnic cleansing of South Ossetia and, to a lesser extent, Abkhazia - granting many Russian citizenship. There is an estimated 70% in South Osettia having Russian citizenship. Russian authorities and military supplied logistical and military aid to the separatist side.[16] Today, Russia still maintains a strong political and military influence over separatist rule in Abkhazia. Russia has also issued passports for the citizens of Abkhazia since 2000 and subsequently paid retirement pensions and other monetary benefits. More than 80% of the Abkhazian population have received Russian citizenship.

Russia's policy has effectively been annexation by stealth.
95

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:57:41
#The Tin Man

"I don't think that the EU eas anything to do with the Caucuses. "

Who should make judgement in international disputes?

The UN?

EU in europe?

We cannot have one country (and that included the US) deciding the rights and wrongs of a situation and then using military force to implement its solution.

Georgia may well have been pig headed. I do not really know what is really going on there. But more judging of how we should be dealing with these international disputes. Who should be the arbitar of right and wrong?

Like most things it will not really be that black and white.

Russia has probably been stirring problems for ages and is failing to come to terms with many of these countries turning towards the west and thus losing its influence. We saw that with the a ukrainian elections a few yrs ago.

On the other side the Georgians have probably acted badly over a long period of time to these enclaves.

Stragtegially you also have to remember, does Gerogia not border Iran?
96

The Tin Man,

29/08/2008 12:58:35
#90 AlanB

Georgia is politically important to the US, as the oil & gas pipeline from Azerbijan runs through Georgia.

This pipeline was built for geopolitical reasons, to bypass Russian control over non-Russian Caspian oil & gas exports. As such, it is in the West's intrests to support decisions made by the Georgian government, vice-versa it is in Russia's intrests to cultivate a pro-Russian government in Georgia, as they are neighbours.
97

Nevsky,

Moscow 29/08/2008 12:59:32
92:

Sure but for the people of Ossetia Russian ARE the solution. The people clearly do not want to be part of Georgia and Georgia's response was to attack and kill civilians in the absolute SURE knowledge that the Russians would retaliate AND that the Americans were fully aware as to what was going on.

Georgia now sits back having achieved the goal of further isolating a Russia (who were morally bound to protect the lives of Ossetians).

Georgia has achieved it's and America's goal..faster inclusion into NATO as protection against the 'bad russians' and just plain sc**wing Russia because of the Presidents hatred of the country.


98

Mashimaro,

China 29/08/2008 13:02:02
#80 Alan, I have a completely different view of communism from you. I don't believe the soviets were evil at all. They didn't want to dominate anything - they could barely run themselves. If the west had left them alone, or even befriended them, the whole system would have been entirely different.
But as I have said on many of these threads, the rich westerners decided to protect their interests at all costs - even the costs of human lives like the unspeakable evil of dropping TWO nuclear bombs on Japan.
Every time a country thought about becoming communist, the west attacked it. (For west read UK/US). Take Cuba as a shining example of this - assassination, invasion, bio warfare, black ops, sanctions, attempted regime change - is it any wonder Castro was a bit paranoid? and you think YOU'RE the good guys?
They have done the same with China and the USSR. We call it cat pawing.
Every time impoverished people of the world have tried to better their lot - the rich have crushed them. That is exactly what they tried to do to communism, and it is only thanks to leaders like Stalin and Lenin and Castro and even Mao that people's lots improved.
Do you think the Russians and the Chinese forget that America turned its guns on us?
99

Alan B,

29/08/2008 13:02:19
#The Tin Man

I understand why Georgia is important i was asking about the enclaves.

As I also pointed out, I think Georgia is important to the US, as i border Iran I believe. (should not be lazy and should google a map)

100

Nevsky,

Moscow 29/08/2008 13:05:59
96:

'Russia has probably been stirring problems for ages and is failing to come to terms with many of these countries turning towards the west and thus losing its influence'

It has little to do with the direction these countries wish to take but rather that the Russians rightly feel agrieved at the bribery and political coersion of Russias neighbours by America in a deliberate attempt to turn away from Russia and to the west..when in actual fact there is no need to do either.

The US are drawing and encouraging the divisions to isolate Russia; that is the common perception among the people here.

The whole thing stinks of interference.

101

Alan B,

29/08/2008 13:15:11
#Mashimaro

Are you trying to say the soviet regime did not take by force most of Eastern Europe. That the Russians did not rule Poland, East Germany, Czech, Bulgaria, Romania etc by dictatorship.

It was all an illusion.

Are you not aware Stalin made a deal with Hitler to split much of europe up between them? It was only when Hilter turned on Stalin that Russia had to fight of the nazis.

Were all these soviet republics free to leave if they wanted.

The west does not have any real dislike of Russia. It just wishes it would get it act together.

The only real hatred of the Russians is in these eastern european countries that were ruled by the evils of stalin.

China has been different as it was largely isolationist and has not played a part in holding europe to ransom. The problem with china was more by aligning with a regime intent on europes destruction like Stalin, it was by association lining up to help with Europes destruction, and hence held with contempt for that reason.

I could understand Lenins revolution to a large degree which i said earlier, as it was becuase of the long history of the Tsars dictatorship. Stalin was evil and was a completely different kettle of fish. Maybe if Stalin had been unable to get rid of Trosky it would have been all different, we shall never know.

The problem with your view of communism is it is the dictatorships of these regimes that is wrong. There is nothing wrong with democratic communism.

You talk of the people but want the people to have no say in how they are run. Democracy means that people choose there leaders and kick them out when they fail or do things wrong. These communist regimes were about running these countries against the will of the people.

102

Mashimaro,

China 29/08/2008 13:18:15
hear hear Nevsky
103

Alan B,

29/08/2008 13:20:38
#101 Nevsky

Every sovereign country has the right to follow its own path. If Georgia wants to align with the West ie and join EU and NATO it has that right.

Because Georgia was run by the Russians for decades under the soviet regime, will probably mean like in many other eastern countries there is much recentment to Russia.

Russia has a choice. Try to integrate with Europe or rival europe. Putin has chosen to rival europe and has not followed the democratic route that was open to it.

While you have got past the evils of the soviet regime many others have not. Has Russia really dealt with the guilt of that time, in the same way Germany had to come to terms with the nazis. As far as i can see it has not.

If you were criminally negligent for so long you really have to make it up to these neighbours.
104

Mashimaro,

China 29/08/2008 13:23:30
#102 Yes I am aware of the deal between Stalin and Hitler, which took place for the very reason I mentioned above. Russia was in no position to defend itself after world war I and the civil war and influenza.
Invasion is not what happened after WWII and you know it. I would wager that Russia would have easily let any of the countries go if the US had not interfered so badly. Do you think we don't know why the US dropped nukes on Japan? Huh?
I say to you that there is no such thing as democratic communism for the simple reason that your rich masters have ensured it will never survive. Any leader of any communist nation has been under constant threat from the west. That is what MAKES dictatorships. You know that as well as I do.
105

Alan B,

29/08/2008 13:25:21
#103 Mashimaro

So Georgia a sovereign nation free from the soviet regime (remember Nesky is saying Russia is different from the Soviet times not agreeing with you that the soviet regime was good), free to do what it wants, does not have the right to align itself with the west if it so wishes.

Under you logic it should remain aligned with a country that its leadership hates for historical reasons. ie the evils of the soviet regime and the treatment of non ethnic russians.
106

Alan B,

29/08/2008 13:27:59
#Mashimaro

You are mental. Ask any Pole or Czech if these countries were free to do as they wished.

You should get out more and not listen to such propoganda. I do not know whether you are just on a wind up, you are getting so ridiculous.
107

Nellie,

Liverpool 29/08/2008 13:32:09
Alan B.

But Georgia opposes self determination in those regions - how else are they to achieve it without the help of a friendly (to them) neighbour if the rest of the World won't help them? And the rest of the World won't help them because of their self interests, not for any concern for the people in those regions. So, more strength to the breakaway states' elbow, I say - leave them alone to be independent of Georgia and align themselves with whoever THEY choose, not who USA/NATO desires, just as the USA/NATO allowed Bosnia to break from Serbia, when Russia opposed this because of THEIR own selfish interests.

The same for Kurdistan, beggar what the Turks or Iraq think. Beggar that a real Kurdistan has bits of the countries that surround it - as long as those bits are filled with a majority of people who wish to be a part of an independent Kurdistan. If they want self-determination, why not let them have it, not undemocratically dictate what they can or cannot do? If the majority of people in Scotland chose to separate from the UK, would it be reasonable for England to invade and demand they stay in the UK because England decided it would be in the interests of England for Scotland to stay? Of course not.
108

Alan B,

29/08/2008 13:32:48
#105 Mashimaro

So you think Stalin made a deal with Hilter to defend itself? From who?

The US was so far away and irrelevent to europe at the time. Planes were only really starting and ridiculous by todays standards. Anyway the US had not designs on Russia anyway and took none of the spoils that britain and france took after the end of ww1.

France and Britain were in no way a threat. They were in a complete mess.

There was not threat to Stalin. The soviet regime under Stalin also was militarily strong.

Russia was not even on Germanys side during ww1.

The deal they made was to divide most of europe between them. If you have heard of the deal you must know that.

With your logic next you will be posting hitler was a great humanitarian.
109

Alan B,

29/08/2008 13:40:10
#Nellie

I completely support the right of these areas to have self determination?

The question is how you go about that, ie the mechanisms.

Has there been a referendum etc?

Russia because of its history is not objective and is not a good arbitar. We need these disputes to go via UN (and/or EU).

In this dispute you agree with the Russia view. What about the next time when you do not believe Russia is correct? You cannot have one country, particularly one with a record like Russia making decision like this.

You cannot have Russia invading other countries.

Look at it this way. Russia has not on most cases supported self determination. Bosnia, Croatia, Kosovo, even Chesnya. So Russia has not shown some ideological support for self determination.

Russia has now shown that to all other ex terroritories in eastern europe that they are no necessarily safe. Russia is back and flexing its muscles. Russia is saying to them all fear us or else.
110

The Tin Man,

29/08/2008 13:42:38
#100 AlanB

The enclaves that are important to the West, it is more the support of any decisions made by the Georgian government vis. America / Isreal.
111

Alan B,

29/08/2008 13:44:59
#The Tin Man

Do you think any dispute should go via international bodies ie UN and that we really cannot have one country (us or russia) deciding what it thinks is right, and then enforsing that by military means?

112

The Tin Man,

29/08/2008 13:46:19
#101 Nevski

Well put.
113

Alan B,

29/08/2008 13:46:56
Anyway got to go. Have fun arguing.
114

Nevsky,

Moscow 29/08/2008 13:50:04
110:

Way way off the mark. The situation in Ossetia is fairly unique and has nothing to do with Russia potentially invading Poland, that would just never happen.

Russia is simply not interested and there is no justification or basis in fact regarding anything you are saying.

There is no threat to any European or Eastern border by Russia...there will be a threat if America continues to increase it military presence in the region though.
115

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 14:23:00
#20 YHOTA,Newbridge
James Donald,Newbridge
Nah, can't be!
Just the same manners.
116

Gere,

Scotland 29/08/2008 14:37:56
Once again, let us remember that Georgia attacked!!!

Remember Kosovo, America did not respect the territorial integrity of Serbia it not only completed the Kosovorian terrorists task of displacing the Serb population of Kosovo by military intervention but was all too ready to recognise an independent Kosovo.

That Putin fellow is sharp enough to work out that somehow America is involved up to its eyeballs in encouraging Georgia to attack!

I think Bush, in a vision heard those oil reserves in Russia calling out to him to come and liberate them and effect regime change! However, before making his move to invade Russia and install a compliant puppet government as he did in Iraq and Afganistan he wisely decided to test the resolve of Russia! (Just as a precautionary measure)

Russia is going to find itself surrounded by countries that with American encouragement will aspire to and seek membership of NATO.

Nato was designed specifically for the purpose of taking collective Military action against Russia! No country can just stand by and let that happen!

America certainly would not, remember the Cuban
missile crisis?

At the time of the Georgian attack there were many Israeli "Military Advisors" and an awful lot of Israeli weapons in Georgia! It would seem that Georgia's attack was not something that just happened on the spur of the moment. What America and its Israeli masters did not expect was Russia's response!

Engaging Russia militarily will not be the same as Iraq or Afganistan. America and its allies will have a real fight on their hands. They should carefully consider their positions. There is a real possibility that if this conflict becomes a full scale military confrontation it could so easily result in a nuclear war !!!!
117

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

29/08/2008 15:00:15
#117 There is some dispute over who actually fired the first rocket:
http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2008/08/200886171817421680.html

What concerns me is that the excuse of invading to protect the South Ossettians has eerie echos of the past.

The Russians actions are reminiscent of Hitler's response over the Sudetendeutch - that Germany had to invade Czechoslovakia to protect them from actions by the Czechs. What is going on here seems to be no different. The Russians have for some time deliberately been stirring up and arming the South Ossetians - ready for the excuse to react when the Georgians took action.

What is also disturbing is how Russia invokes democracy when it pleases itself - anyone for democracy in Chechnya? Or how about allowing the Georgians to join NATO?
118

Gere,

Scotland 29/08/2008 15:10:17
Post #118 The Federalist (AKA Nauon)

The Americans took military action against the Serbs claiming that they were protecting the Kosovorians!!!

Georgia initiated the invasion of Osssetia while the world was occupied with the Olympic Games.
119

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

29/08/2008 15:13:08
#119 So you support the ethnic cleansing of Georgians in South Ossetia?
120

Gere,

Scotland 29/08/2008 15:17:23
Post#119 The Spook in Leith

I think it is in the Russian character to be cautious and patient that is how they eventually defeated all invaders of Russia in the past!

They are also not keen to cause any permanent damage diplomatically. If Attacked though that will readily change!

I like your historic harbour in Leith, my wifw and I travel down from Dunfermline and enjoy a visit to Leith!
121

Gere,

Scotland 29/08/2008 15:23:30
Post # 122

I think that the allegation of Georgian ethnic cleansing from Ossetia is an invention of the propaganda that the Georgians have generated as justification for their American encouraged attack on Ossetia! Probably had some help from the MOSSAD and the CIA in compiling this one!
122

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

29/08/2008 15:24:28
#123 You're the idiot if you can't see Russian propoganda for what it is.
123

,

29/08/2008 15:55:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
124

Nevsky,

Moscow 29/08/2008 16:13:45
It won't come to war neither country will benefit anything and to be honest the Russians and the Americans are both sh*t scared of each other.

A spat in Georgia is no excuse for the two countries to go to war and they won't.

125

,

29/08/2008 16:22:57
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
126

Lynne,

Palm Beach Gardens 29/08/2008 16:29:25
#55 Mashimaro..The US should elect the leaders YOU want?
That is why you are in China, and we are in America..
WE elect who WE want.
127

Wally,

By THe Rivers Of Babylon (USA) 29/08/2008 18:24:07
I agree with Gere in 117. and I agree with Nevsky in 131 that neither russia or US really want war with each other. But the US may be ruled by insane people, did you hear Condi Rice virtually threatening Russia given the angry tone of her voice when she warns russia.

THe US is likely rushing military supplies into Georgia. There is a significant US Naval force in the Black Sea. The US & Israel both have 'advisors' in Georgia. Here are interesting related articles.

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080829/116377956.html

http://www.moonofalabama.org/2008/08/russia-fears-an.html#more

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/presidentbush/2008/08/georgia-war.html

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/08/28/russia.georgia.cold.war/index.html

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080828/116349686.html

128

Brodric,

29/08/2008 18:32:16
Coming in at this late stage means there is just too much to respond to - which is impossible.

Suffice to say that AlanB, the self-elected professor of all things truthful and pure, is an utter pain in the bahookey, mostly because he is so up his own at-time bewildering and half-cocked opinions about history.

I quote: "You have ignored the reasons I put for their entry" (re USA entry in WW1 and WW2. You have ignored! Oh, please be careful, we who comment, the democracy dictator has spoken. Beware at your peril. As if his ideas were the most important thing.

Thats not to say that any man is totally wrong. But we need a bit of balance here.

Thankyou No 23 SonofHamish "the bully here is more the U.S. than Russia" "The Georgians decided they could go into these regions and ethnically cleanse Russians was ALWAYS going to be a provactive move that the Russians would respond to. I smell the hand of the neocons and specifically Cheney behind this little prank..."

No 21 Postmark China: "Russia maybe taking nibbles out of its neighbours, but the US is taking huge bites out of the Middle East".

Also Gere and Spook in Leith - excellent points made here, as usual Spook.

126 Federalist: "You're the idiot if you can't see Russian propoganda for what it is." This kind of response to the spook is exactly the kind of response which sickens me. The point is that many people are deriding the communist approach here as something very unwholesome because of propaganda, but in reality, most countries are guilty of this. There is more than one way to crack an egg or to govern a country - note well what Postmark 55 said about the size of China's population.

I am not a communist. But I find it more frightening that there are people in the free west who are not able to see that there isn't a perfect system in existence, including democracy. The USA, the richest country in the west, has immense social problems and immense poverty. Does that make the
129

Brodric,

29/08/2008 18:32:59
continued:

Does that make the USA democratic model a desireable export - that is, the one they are currently trying to foist on the rest of the world.
130

Kipling,

Blood & Gori 29/08/2008 18:40:37
Well done to those who recognise the feelings of the populations of Abkhazia and South Ossetia. Perhaps each of these region states should run referendums ? That should put pay to the so-called democratic self-righteousness of Bush, Millipede, & Cameron.

And to those who identify Stalin with the Russians... er, Stalin was a Georgian.

To quote from
"His legendary life unfolds in front of us. From a poverty-stricken childhood in Gori, to education in a Tbilisi seminary, to his glorious revolutionary career in Moscow. ... Many in Gori share ---'s pride. When after independence, angry crowds across Georgia tore down all the statues of Stalin and Lenin, hundreds of people gathered in Gori and refused to let theirs be touched."
131

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 29/08/2008 18:49:42
Russia is a combination of paranoia and imperialism. Very unstable. Always has been in my lifetime and probably always will be in my lifetime.

132

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 29/08/2008 19:01:54
Let's face it, Russia replaced a one family democracy with a one party democracy. That is progress?
133

Vasya,

29/08/2008 19:04:08
#138 Right! God bells USA the most anti-imerialistic peacefull democracy in the world!
134

Kipling,

29/08/2008 19:06:08
#138, Jock. According to an article by Edward Lucas (http://www.edwardlucas.blogspot.com/) in the Daily *M**L 28 August, those running Russia now are ".. ruthless ex-spooks and spivs". The Daily *M**l is very keen nowadays on identifying its political enemies as "spivs" (demonstrating the interesting range of language wielded by their correspondants) -- unless of course they've come over to the UK with billions of LSD in their pockets to buy up portions of London. Ie, A good Russian is one that spends money which should have been reinvested in Russia in the UK.
135

McGinty,

29/08/2008 19:06:23
This idea about Russia and China moving on and learning from the mistakes of the past is all very well, but China killed 20 million of its own, and in Russia as many as 55 million were killed. In Russia, the same kind of people seem to be in charge, but rather than kill people, they seem to take their wealth, their livelihoods, their land and then charge for protection money. In China, fewer people may be getting killed, but they are still being harassed, hounded and persecuted, especially over religious and political matters. So it would appear that neither nation are learning from their mistakes or if so, they're far too slow. There also seems to be denial about these millions of casulaties. This is something which especially Germany has avoided, and in this respect, at least there was some justice as those who committed crimes that were caught were punished and seen to be punished, and there has been a public acknowledgement of guilt. But until this happens in Russia and China, there can be no true progress, reconciliation and change and it does the veterans who have suffered unjustly in prisons, torture chambers and camps a disservice. So whatever was achieved under Stalin was always done with the handicap of the loss of some of its finest, or Russia might be in a better place today. Men like Sakharov might not have been building bombs for fear of execution or Siberia. So to glory in this past, without acknowledging these losses is wrong, mistaken and foolish and this is the kind of remedy preached by such as Alexandr Solzhenitsyn.

136

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 29/08/2008 19:13:16
Vasya, 140, I made no mention of the USA. I was passing an opinion on Russia.
137

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 29/08/2008 19:17:13
141, Kipling, according to me in the Scotsman comments I think Russia is both paranoid and imperialistic.
138

Nevsky,

Moscow 29/08/2008 19:33:02
142:

You have nothing to teach the Russians about Stalin and i don't even know where to begin with what you say.

Again Russia is talked of and Stalin is mentioned, just quite amazing the level of ignorance regarding modern Russia. NO young Russians talk of Stalin...NOT ONE! They just don't care.

What they do mention is the hypocrisy of the west with regard to Iraq and Afgahnistan, British lapdogs of America , American interference in europe, the middle east, Korea, Iran, Israel and South America.

These are present issues that concern Russians not Stalin.
139

Vasya,

29/08/2008 19:36:05
#143 What is your position is based on???
#142 Do not smoke too much weeds dude! Where did you get th inforamtion abou 55 million??? What do you know about Solzhenitsyn???
140

Vasya,

29/08/2008 19:38:39
Sorry guys for my English, I am a bit drunk tonight... and English is not my native language
141

Nevsky,

Moscow 29/08/2008 19:47:44
142:

Just to qualify what i have said i am not an apologist for Russia. I live here and i know the problems, some i have seen with my own eyes and others not.

But i have a fairly good understanding of how the system works and i can assure you Russia is not a land of gangsters, indeed Russians are some of the most honest people you will meet.

The 90s and the de-valuation of the ruble plunged the country from the relative stability of communism into the wildest and most agressive of capitalism practically overnight.

Corruption is not as bad a it was (althougb of cousrse still here in all it's varieties).

The reason is this..my last lecture. There is NO security in Russia. In the UK the social welfare system will look after you..here if you do not work you do not eat...simple.

People are terrified about their personal security although things are getting better and you cannot blame them. It will take time, society will take time to stabilise including Russian politics but it will happen.

So before people open their gob's and pontificate things are not so simple as they seem ok.
142

Wally,

By The Rivers Of Babylon (USA) 29/08/2008 19:48:43
I don't go along with bashing Russia & China over past events. It is certainly not a justification for the US poking at Russia. Remember, the Georgians with US soldiers among them started the fighting first by turning their guns on russian peace-keepers by surprise and then by killing russian civilians.

It is very interesting that Stalin was Georgian, I learned that today. The Soviet Union was not the same as Russia.
143

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 29/08/2008 19:56:13
146, Vasya, (note that I give a name with the number) my opinion is based on the fact that I think that Russia is a dangerous mix of paranoia and imperialism.

Who else could sit in the same geographical location with the same territorial landmass and not be the link between the east and the west? The major hub.

Only Russia could alienate Europe, China and the USA instead of being the middle man.
144

Nevsky,

Moscow 29/08/2008 20:01:12
150:

How is Russia imperial? Every former Soviet state has ceded without one gun shot apart from the complications in Chechnya? Not sure what you mean?


Russia is paranoid you are right..but then just about every country has had a pop at trying to conquer it and the US is in EVERY former state surrounding the borders of Russia.

145

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 29/08/2008 20:12:10
150, Nevsky. Get a life and try to put Names to numbers - the numbers change on here without reason. Suppose that would make you feel more at home. Eh no?

Do you mean that every former Soviet state was not satisfied with the way their affairs were being run by Moscow?
146

Nevsky,

Moscow 29/08/2008 20:19:23
152: Jock Tamson

What has that question got to do with you stating Russia is is imperial?

Point us in the direction of the countries where it wants to march in and take control?

If you can't back this up, why bother making an ill-informed statement?

147

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 29/08/2008 20:21:34
Nevsky. Just about every country has had a go at trying to take over every other country. Let the Dutch run Russia for a few years and it will be the hub of the world.
148

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 29/08/2008 20:23:58
153, Nevsky. Georgia
149

Nevsky,

Moscow 29/08/2008 20:27:40
154:

I see you are a facist anti-slav. goodnight.
150

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 29/08/2008 20:31:23
156, Nevsky, is copy deadline near? Or perhaps your shift at Johnston Towers is over? Half eight finish was it?
151

Andrew BOD,

Aberdeenshire 29/08/2008 21:22:37
56 Mashimaro

Ghengis Khan invaded half of Europe too!!
152

Wally,

By The Rivers Of Babylon (USA) 29/08/2008 21:33:08
What does Khrushchev say about all this?

http://thephoenix.com/Providence/News/66451-Khrushchev-calls-conflict-a-matter-of-protecting-R/
153

McGinty,

Glasgow & Aberdeen 29/08/2008 22:12:22
'In recent years, support of Stalin has resurged. Millions of Russians, exasperated with the downfall of the economy and political instability after the breakup of the Soviet Union, want Stalin back. A recent controversial poll revealed that over thirty-five percent of Russians would vote for Stalin if he were still alive. This is seen by some as a return of Stalin's cult. In Krasnoyarsk, it has been decided to rebuild a communist-era memorial complex dedicated to Josef Stalin. Also, a new statue of Stalin is to be erected in Moscow, “returning his once-ubiquitous image to the streets after an absence of four decades, a top city official said yesterday”.

'A survey from late 2006 revealed that 47% of Russian respondents viewed Stalin as a positive figure, and only 29% as a negative one. Some controversy also ensued when a recently approved history textbook for Russia’s schoolchildren attempted to illustrate Stalin’s purges as a necessary evil in the process of state-building. In July 2008, Stalin topped at the list of most popular figures of the Russian history and culture in the nationwide television project "Name of Russia. Historical Choice 2008" in which 178,881 out of 1,453,390 voted for him.'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin

'Putin's presidency also witnessed a change in the way Russians viewed the Soviet past. Whereas under Yeltsin popular histories and general opinion were critical of the Soviet period and nostalgic for the prerevolutionary period, during Putin's tenure aspects of the Soviet period—for example, the victory in World War II, Russia's superpower status, and even the Stalinist period—were again glorified (Stalin was described in one teaching manual as “the most successful leader of the U.S.S.R.”), and this dualism was reflected in the country's symbols. Despite nostalgia among some communists for the Soviet period and uncertainty among many about the future, by the early 21st century Russia seemed poised to set upon the long path
154

McGinty,

Glasgow & Aberdeen 29/08/2008 22:13:49
of economic and political development. However, deep structural problems in the economy remained, and the number of people living in poverty remained high.'

http://search.eb.com/eb/article-274482
http://search.eb.com/eb/article-9389464

Some protest too loudly. No offence, but as the saying goes those who fail to learn the lessons of history are condemned to repeat them. I don't suppose Russians talk much about Solzhenitsyn either. I couldn't really care less about the U.S., they're severely misguided. They're currently delivering aid and doing exercises in the Black Sea and once they've drawn blood there, there may be an issue, but until then one can only go on about America's past misdeeds. There's few things there that haven't already been said. Unfortunately Russia are the ones going about in tanks on someone else's turf to international condemnation.

However, I'm sure that I'm not alone in saying that when British politicians get involved in such misdeeds one has to be similarly scathing, and only a few misguided belligerents seem to be boasting about our recent achievements. Not many people here are proud of our recent foreign policy. But however abysmal it is here, I'm much more optimistic about the future here than I am about Russia's. I'm also fed up with Russians coming on these boards trying to tell us how big and hard and clever and scary Russia is and how justified they are in doing what they want, yet at the same time being sycophants for trashy Western culture. Thankfully many will make up their own minds, but there will always be those who don't bother to do their own research who will listen to Russian propagandists - goodness knows why they post here anyway. I don't know why I come on these boards with the amount of cheek and abuse flying about anyway. Russian people are some of the best in the world, but generally these boards attract idiots (speaking for myself as much as anyone) and Russian idiots are obviously no different from anywh
155

david hill,

bern, swiss 29/08/2008 22:23:37
Is it not now perfectly clear with the gravity of the Russia incursion that the world is constantly in an unstable situation of near world conflict? But unfortunately it has to be said that things will get far more acute as the Earth’s natural resources deplete and especially those we depend upon to preserve human life itself.

Therefore in order to prevent an eventual World War 111 where there will be few survivors this time, world politicians have to now seriously consider the formation of a world government that people like Einstein fully subscribed to whilst he was alive.

In this respect one can predict within reasonable certainty now that during the next two generations a global conflict will occur. Using common sense one can see that with the vast depletion of non-renewable natural resources over the next 50-years meeting head-on with between 9.7 billion and 12.4 billion humans, global conflict is more-or-less guaranteed.

The best thing therefore that Obama or McCain can do after one of them is elected the next president of the United States is to start the vital process of creating such an global overseeing institution. Indeed this is the greatest need in this present century, for if not, we will possibly never enter into the next century, as all human life will be extinct. We are therefore now in the century of either the preservation or elimination of the human experience. In this respect if Obama really does believe in his own words and ‘Let me change the world’, he could not find any better way to do this.

Dr David Hill
World Innovation Foundation Charity
Bern, Switzerland
156

Nevsky,

Moscow 29/08/2008 22:25:59
161: mcginty,

Well i am neither a Russian nor an idiot (i hope). I am a Scot living in Russia.

Yes there people here who would have communism back (mostly the old) but i can honestly say i have NEVER EVER heard anyone here who has said they would like Stalin back, simply a non-issue.

Chikdren are taught in school about Stalin, in fact if you speak to Russian about this they feel more than anything ashamed. Generally they don't like to talk about it, most families have been affected in some way or another.

Also i have never seen one statue to Stalin that survives, there must be some but i have not seen one, plenty of Lenin but Stalin none that i know of.

I have a lot of confidence in Russia and think they are going in the right direction, slowly politically i agree and can be heavy handed but the young here are in no way different from anyone anywhere, are open, liberal, welcoming and interested in the world.

No-one suffered more than Russians at the hands of Russians, they know their own history but for most it is regarded as another time and another place.

And the reason why most of the some of the older people want communism back is that they have nothing here. When you see an 80 year old woman and old men on a daily basis scavengeing in bins for bottles and cans you realise why they want it back.
157

Vasya,

29/08/2008 22:51:12
#149. Good for you))) Stakin was georgian his original family name was Dzhugashvili (-ili and -dze are the most popular ends of georgian family names like Saakashvili, -ov and -in like Pitin Stalin in Russia). There is a story that when USSR crushed and Georgia became independent some georgians said - what a huge colony we lost))) Georgians were probably most prosperous nation in the USSR.
#150 I am still missing your point. Yes Russia is big and the main territorial part of Russia is in Asia.So what? To connect territories you need that those terrotories wanted to be connected via you. Europe tries to be more and more independent from russian transit))) Japan is under US control and so on)))
158

Vasya,

29/08/2008 23:00:37
#163 Nevsky, my respect. Do not you agree that this is a graet advantage to see real stereo picture on any event from both points of view?
Stalin is very-very controversial figure in russian history... I have wrote here about it.
By the way one of the greatest russian poets Lermontov (from original family name Lermont) had scotish roots.
159

Nellie,

Liverpool 30/08/2008 02:16:52
Alan B.
I do not share your faith in the UN to arbitrate fairly on this business, as they have so often failed to do in the past. The USA and UK want Georgia in NATO, and the UK with the USA dominate in the UN while Russia is in opposition and China sits on the fence not wanting to upset it's trading partners on either side. The USA and UK did not wait for a UN decision before the invaded Iraq or Afghanistan, so it is not consistent for them to demand Russia should seek UN approval before it moved to defend S Ossetia. If they see their allies in the breakaway area being killed, would you have them wait for a few weeks, while more get killed, before wading in to protect the dead? Besides, just as the US and UK knew well that the UN would not sanction the invasion of Iraq, so too did Russia realise the UN would not sanction their defence of S Ossetia. Right or wrong, Russia behave no differently than their critics have done most recently.

Look, I am no fan of Russia. Nor am I of the USA. Both are self-serving, as are most governments. Indeed, perhaps the USA is more so in recent years, but only because it has been able to afford to throw its weight around! However, in this case, I believe Russia has right on its side. They didn't sit on their hands but defended their allies with force against a ruthless attack from Georgia, which is more than the US did for the Georgians when the Russians kicked them out of Ossetia!
160

Nevsky,

Moscow 30/08/2008 10:21:26
165: Vasya:

I know. What about Jacob Brus, Patrick Gordon and Samuel Greig, James Wylie and Chrichton, James Keith and Adam Menelaws. What about Muir and Merillees founders of TSUM and Christopher Galloway builder of the Spasskaya Kremlin Tower ;-) Gascoigne and baird in St Pete?
161

Gere,

Scotland 30/08/2008 20:50:26
Post #162 Dr David Hill

One problem with Einstein, he did not accept the concept of quantum mechanics did he?

He was capable of error, not that I am attempting to detract from his genius!
162

jarmon,

31/08/2008 20:12:17
I'm an american.Here's my view on some things said:-The atomic bombing of japan was an unfortunate neccesity.It saved american lives by avoiding an invasion of japan.The japs started the war,were very cruel,and had to be stopped. Georgia started it's conflict with russia.Russia was probably looking for an excuse to invade anyhow.Russia feels the u.s. is trying to surround them.The u.s.interest there is not totally about oil.They are up to something else.There is plenty of oil in america,but certain businessmen and politicians are wanting to impede drilling for it. George bush is a sorry president.But he is a new world order guy and an elitest.He,and the powers that be here,are not looking out for america,but for their niche of power in the upcoming one world government. My dad used to ride an office elevator with bush.Dad would always say hello and good morning,but bush would put his nose up in the air and say nothing.Really pissed dad off.Bush has a look down on attitude to his fellow americans.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.