Russians strike civilian airport

[avatar4321]

http://www.reuters.com/article/latestCrisis/idUSLA548281

Hitting an international airport, especially when there are probably diplomats leaving the country...

[hjmick]

Where are the cries of "Terrorists" in regards to the Russians? Why is no one applying all the same terms to the Russians that they appled to the U.S. in regards to Iraq?

[Gaffer]

They intend to take Georgia back into the fold. Everyone is a target so they can terrorize the population into going along with their demands. This is an all out invasion and conquest of the country. It has been planned for a long time.

Putin is taking advantage of our involvement in iraq and afghan as well as our build up for a possible war with iran. If we get involved here we will have to draw forces away from iran, which, I believe is part of the plan.

It's like a chess game and it's our move.

[Mr. P]

They intend to take Georgia back into the fold. Everyone is a target so they can terrorize the population into going along with their demands. This is an all out invasion and conquest of the country. It has been planned for a long time.

Putin is taking advantage of our involvement in iraq and afghan as well as our build up for a possible war with iran. If we get involved here we will have to draw forces away from iran, which, I believe is part of the plan.

It's like a chess game and it's our move.

Totally! We're spread toooo thin and he knows it. Time for the rest of the WEST to step-up...IMO.

[Gaffer]

Totally! We're spread toooo thin and he knows it. Time for the rest of the WEST to step-up...IMO.

I totally agree, This is not just a US thing. The rest of europe needs to step up now and take serious action. This is what NATO was created for.

[Mr. P]

I totally agree, This is not just a US thing. The rest of europe needs to step up now and take serious action. This is what NATO was created for.

YEP!

[emmett]

This really isn't our gig man.

[avatar4321]

This really isn't our gig man.

Until we obtain energy independence, it has to be our gig. or we are in serious trouble.

[Kathianne]

This morning Yahoo! is saying that Russian president is calling for a halt of Russian attacks, oh unless there is any resistance:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080812/ap_on_re_eu/georgia_russia


Russian president halts military action in Georgia

By VLADIMIR ISACHENKOV, Associated Press Writer 22 minutes ago

Russian President Dmitri Medvedev ordered a halt to military action in Georgia Tuesday, saying it had punished Georgia and brought security for civilians and Russian peacekeepers in the breakaway South Ossetia region.

"The security of our peacekeepers and civilians has been restored," Medvedev said in a nationally televised statement. "The aggressor has been punished and suffered very significant losses. Its military has been disorganized."

At the same time, Medvedev ordered the military to quell any signs of Georgian resistance.

"If there are any emerging hotbeds of resistance or any aggressive actions, you should take steps to destroy them," he told his defense minister at a Kremlin meeting....

As Ralph Peters pointed out the day after the attack started, the "Russian response" to "Georgian ethnic cleansing" was planned well in advance as was their cover story. It takes a lot of time and logistics to move that kind of 'response' into place. The West knows this, what ultimately will be their response?

Bottom line, Russia is going to tone it down, now that it looks like UN and EU were getting ready to actually do something. If there are no repercussions, let's just say one can look for the smarter Ukrainians to start trying to get out of there.

Note there is no discussion of leaving the Georgian territory. The US will not militarily get involved, just as we didn't in the aftermath of WWII. Is this just a restart of the Cold War? The furthering of instability that leads to another major war?

[Kathianne]

I read this analysis a couple hours ago:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDcwY2I4MjhjMTc0Y2Y4ZmJmMWNmNzJlOTA0Y2MxYjg=


Moscow’s Sinister Brilliance
Who wants to die for Tbilisi?

By Victor Davis Hanson

Lost amid all the controversies surrounding the Georgian tragedy is the sheer diabolic brilliance of the long-planned Russia invasion. Let us count the ways in which it is a win/win situation for Russia.

The Home Front
The long-suffering Russian people resent the loss of global influence and empire, but not necessarily the Soviet Union and its gulags that once ensured such stature. The invasion restores a sense of Russian nationalism and power to its populace without the stink of Stalinism, and is indeed cloaked as a sort of humanitarian intervention on behalf of beleaguered Ossetians.

There will be no Russian demonstrations about an “illegal war,” much less nonsense about “blood for oil,” but instead rejoicing at the payback of an uppity former province that felt its Western credentials somehow trumped Russian tanks. How ironic that the Western heartthrob, the old Marxist Mikhail Gorbachev, is now both lamenting Western encouragement of Georgian “aggression,” while simultaneously gloating over the return of Russian military daring.

Sinister Timing
Russia’s only worry is the United States, which currently has a lame-duck president with low approval ratings, and is exhausted after Afghanistan and Iraq. But more importantly, America’s attention is preoccupied with a presidential race, in which “world citizen” Barack Obama has mesmerized Europe as the presumptive new president and soon-to-be disciple of European soft power.

Better yet for Russia, instead of speaking with one voice, America is all over the map with three reactions from Bush, McCain, and Obama — all of them mutually contradictory, at least initially. Meanwhile, the world’s televisions are turned toward the Olympics in Beijing. The autocratic Chinese, busy jailing reporters and dissidents, are not about to say an unkind word about Russian intervention. If anything, the pageantry at their grandiose stadiums provides welcome distractions for those embarrassed over the ease with which Russia smothered Georgia....

...The Russians rightly expect Westerners to turn on themselves, rather than Moscow — and they won’t be disappointed. Imagine the morally equivalent fodder for liberal lament: We were unilateral in Iraq, so we can’t say Russia can’t do the same to Georgia. (As if removing a genocidal dictator is the same as attacking a democracy). We accepted Kosovo’s independence, so why not Ossetia’s? (As if the recent history of Serbia is analogous to Georgia’s.) We are still captive to neo-con fantasies about democracy, and so encouraged Georgia’s efforts that provoked the otherwise reasonable Russians (As if the problem in Ossetia is our principled support for democracy rather than appeasement of Russian dictatorship).

From what the Russians learned of the Western reaction to Iraq, they expect their best apologists will be American politicians, pundits, professors, and essayists — and once more they will not be disappointed. We are a culture, after all, that after damning Iraqi democracy as too violent, broke, and disorganized, is now damning Iraqi democracy as too conniving, rich, and self-interested — the only common denominator being whatever we do, and whomever we help, cannot be good.

Power-power
We talk endlessly about “soft” and “hard” power as if humanitarian jawboning, energized by economic incentives or sanctions, is the antithesis to mindless military power. In truth, there is soft power, hard power, and power-power — the latter being the enormous advantages held by energy rich, oil-exporting states. Take away oil and Saudi Arabia would be the world’s rogue state, with its medieval practice of gender apartheid. Take away oil and Ahmadinejad is analogous to a run-of-the-mill central African thug. Take away oil, and Chavez is one of Ronald Reagan’s proverbial tinhorn dictators.

Russia understands that Europe needs its natural gas, that the U.S. not only must be aware of its own oil dependency, but, more importantly, the ripples of its military on the fragility of world oil supplies, especially the effects upon China, Europe, India, and Japan. When one factors in Russian oil and gas reserves, a pipeline through Georgia, the oil dependency of potential critics of Putin, and the cash garnered by oil exports, then we understand once again that power-power is beginning to trump both its hard and soft alternatives....

Just saw this analysis of the 'Russian's 'cease fire':

http://www.transatlanticpolitics.com/2008/08/12/russia-has-stopped-its-invasion-in-georgia-but-at-what-price/



Russia has stopped its invasion in Georgia. But at what price?

Russia has stopped its military invasion. Foreign Minister Serghei Lavrov called earlier for president Saakashvili to step down. French president Nicolas Sarkozy declared, after his meeting with Medvedev, that he finds it "justifiable" for Russia to defend the rights of Russian citizens abroad.

Now president Medvedev says Georgia should be "demilitarized". And these are just the conditions made public.


MOSCOW, Aug 12 (Reuters) - Russia’s President Dmitry Medvedev said on Tuesday a full settlement of the military conflict with Georgia was subject to two conditions, including Georgia moving its troops to pre-conflict positions.
"We can discuss the question of a definitive settlement if two conditions are met," Medvedev said before meeting French President Nicolas Sarkozy.
"First, Georgian troops should return to their initialposition and be partly demilitarised. Second, we need to sign abinding agreement on non-use of force."

But other consequences we can think of are obviously a brutal regime change, an end to Georgia’s NATO aspirations and Europe being cut off from the Caspian oil and gas reserves. Also, a much stronger Russia when dealing with European countries. Already Italy, Belgium and now France are caving in to Russia, condemning the "anti-Russian" stance in Europe.

[Gaffer]

Like I said russia is there to take over Georgia. How its done in the long term is not important. It will be done. Georgia will be absorbed by russia and after this others will be taken over as well, either through military means or political coercion.



emmett This really isn't our gig man.

Like I said, where do you draw the line?

[Kathianne]

Like I said russia is there to take over Georgia. How its done in the long term is not important. It will be done. Georgia will be absorbed by russia and after this others will be taken over as well, either through military means or political coercion.




Like I said, where do you draw the line?

I don't think we 'draw the line', I think the crossing of the line suddenly becomes clear, the problem is no one sees it until it's been crossed.

[hjmick]

This really isn't our gig man.

When in modern times, with the exception of WWII, has it ever been our "gig."

[Kathianne]

I read this analysis a couple hours ago:

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDcwY2I4MjhjMTc0Y2Y4ZmJmMWNmNzJlOTA0Y2MxYjg=



Just saw this analysis of the 'Russian's 'cease fire':

http://www.transatlanticpolitics.com/2008/08/12/russia-has-stopped-its-invasion-in-georgia-but-at-what-price/

So just how bad did Sarkozy sell out Georgia? Typical of our NATO 'partners':

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MWEzYTkyNDJlZjg4ZTkyNTlhM2E3MjQ0MmUzNzE1ZDg=


More on Georgia [Rich Lowry]

Kagan’s take as of last night:

It appears that Saakashvili has signed without significant change the document Sarkozy presented him. If true, it has the following consequences

+
Georgia has been compelled to agree to an international treaty (on the non-use of force regarding Abkhazia and South Ossetia) that it had been refusing to sign, effectively coerced by the presence of Russian forces on Georgian soil and continued aerial attacks.
+
The military situation is NOT a return to the status quo ante:
#
Russian air attacks and ground fighting have severely degraded the Georgian military, so that it is not in any way comparable to the force Georgia had before the fighting began; Russian losses have been trivial in comparison with Russia’s military power
#
The agreement does not appear to contain provisions for the presence of Georgian peacekeepers in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, even though the 1992 agreement by which Russian forces are there stipulated a tripartite peacekeeping force.
#
Saakashvili has apparently requested that Russia leave in place only the same kinds of troops that had been present in Georgia previously (i.e., not armored forces or crack troops), but it is not clear that that demand is reflected in the actual agreement.
+
The political/diplomatic situation is also not a return to the status quo ante:
#
Although the agreement requires both sides to enter negotiations about the future status of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, the Russian leadership has repeatedly declared that it will not negotiate with Saakashvili, that Saakashvili is no longer a “partner,” and so on, so the terms of the negotiation will be very different from those that existed before this conflict
#
The Russian Attorney General has declared that Russia can charge Saakashvili or any other Georgian official with crimes under Russian law, and an investigative commission has been set up in Vladikavkaz to make the case
#
The Russian leadership has repeatedly declared that it cannot see any circumstance in which Abkhazia and South Ossetia would “return” to Georgian state control
#
The international agreement on the non-use of force the Russians just compelled Saakashvili to sign now also has the imprimatur of the European Union, since it was presented by Sarkozy in his capacity as EU president—previously it had been a document under negotiation between Georgia and Russia without external participation
+ In sum, there has been no compromise. Russia has imposed its demands upon Georgia by force, under coercion and in the midst of partial military occupation, under the auspices of the European Union.

[Kathianne]

Pretty good advice, IMO:

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-boot12-2008aug12,0,2132727.story


Stand up to Russia
Sending troops to help Georgia is out of the question, but the U.S. must do more than issue strongly worded statements.
By Max Boot

August 12, 2008



First some background & history:


...At a time like this, it is vital for the leaders of the West to stand together and make clear that this aggression will not stand. This is no time for weaselly statements of moral equivalence claiming that Georgia brought this war on itself ... The presidents of Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and Poland were on the mark in their demand that "aggression against a small country in Europe ... not be passed over in silence or with meaningless statements equating the victims with the victimizers."

The more hysterical excuses that Moscow makes for its aggression are particularly creepy. Pravda accuses Saakashvili of committing "war crimes against humanity" and claims that Russia had no choice but to protect its citizens in South Ossetia from a "savage, brutal, criminal attack" by "the back-stabbing Georgians." There are echoes here of German spokesmen from the 1930s shedding crocodile tears over the supposed mistreatment of German minorities in nearby states. Those were the excuses that Hitler used to swallow Czechoslovakia and Poland.

The Nazi analogy may appear overwrought. Certainly no one is claiming that Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is another Hitler, a uniquely evil and reckless madman. But Putin does appear to have more than a passing resemblance to lesser autocrats such as Mussolini and the Japanese generals of the 1930s whose aggression nevertheless had tragic repercussions. Indeed, two other historical analogies that come to mind are the Japanese invasion of Manchuria in 1931 and the Italian invasion of Ethiopia in 1935. Both set the stage for World War II by revealing the impotence of the League of Nations and the unwillingness of the great powers to respond forcefully to aggression.
...

Sounding a bit like McCain, which I don't completely agree with regarding NATO:


...Likewise, the Russian attacks on Georgia, if left unchecked, could easily trigger more conflict in the future. The Kremlin has embarked on a campaign to destabilize not just pro-Western Georgia but other former Soviet satrapies that refuse to toe its line. Many of these states have their own Russian minorities whose alleged maltreatment provides the perfect excuse for Russian meddling. Today, Georgia; tomorrow, Ukraine; the day after, Estonia?

If there is one thing that has limited Russian action against the Baltic states to cyber-attacks, economic pressure and verbal bullying, it is that these countries are now part of NATO. NATO's refusal to give Georgia a “membership action plan” earlier this year was a blunder that emboldened Russian aggression. That is a mistake that urgently needs to be rectified.

The West must demand that Russia withdraw its troops from all of Georgia's soil, possibly to be replaced in South Ossetia and Abkhazia with international peacekeepers. If the Kremlin won't comply, the West should respond with sanctions such as withdrawing ambassadors from Moscow, kicking Russia out of the Group of 8 leading industrialized nations and freezing Russian bank accounts abroad...

...Sending American troops is out of the question, but we can send American equipment...

[Gaffer]

Nothing like holding a gun to someones head and demanding they sign an agreement.

[Kathianne]

Nothing like holding a gun to someones head and demanding they sign an agreement.

That's basically what Sarkozy via the EU, did. Europe never misses a chance to repeat.