Well, South Ossetian independance sure did not last long.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
Originally posted by: Specop 007
Want me to post all the times I've seen conservatives made fun of? Hell, I'd hit the character limit on a post! I'll start with "Bushwhackos"........
Why lower yourself to their standards? And since when have "Bushwhackos" been Conservatives?
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,581
5,742
126
Independent states can decide to join other states. Why is it surprising that they want to join Russia? They've been saying that for 15 years.
 

Specop 007

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
9,454
0
0
Originally posted by: senseamp
Independent states can decide to join other states. Why is it surprising that they want to join Russia? They've been saying that for 15 years.
Do you mean independent as in free state or state thats trying to remove itself from Georgia.....
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
77,872
36,034
136
Originally posted by: Specop 007
Originally posted by: eskimospy

Are you an idiot? The Russians loathe McCain. Did you ever stop for a minute and think why the Russians adopted the "i don't give a fuck" style of foreign policy starting in the last few years? It's because of retards in our government that think and act just like McCain. To start off his presidency Bush unilaterally withdrew from the ABM treaty. The Russians asked us not to, we told them to fuck off. We then decided to invade Iraq, Russia put it's clout on the table to try and get us to stop, we embarrassed them and then told them to fuck off. We install BMD missiles in the countries right next door to them and then when they complain we tell them to fuck off. We expand NATO, a treaty that was originally made explicitly to oppose Russia/Soviet Union, and we push member states right to their borders with the threat to keep expanding. They complain about it, we tell them to fuck off.

Gee, I have no idea why Russia might be taking measures against future NATO states on its borders and ignoring the US when we ask them to stop. We have antagonized them for the better part of a decade, and when they do something back we freak out and decide that the only solution is electing another moron who wants to fight them even more. And for what? For what fucking purpose? What did the US gain out of these moves!? A horrible mistake of a war? The comfort and security that comes from Lithuania being on our side in a war?
And of course the solution is appeasement. Vote in a liberal, gut the military and let Russia do whatever it wants because our liberal pussies dont have the balls to say stop?
Oh yeah, THAT sounds like a winning strategy.....
You have the understanding of a child. There are strategic options between escalation, antagonism, and appeasement. If Bush hadn't pursued his ridiculous foreign policy with regards to Russia in the first place, there is an extremely good chance that this issue would not have come up to begin with and if it had we would have had far better tools to oppose it. Bush's pointless antagonism has gained the US little and has contributed to the destabilization of the political situation along Russia's borders.

If you're actually interested in how Bush screwed up, how McCain will screw it up further, and a reasoned opinion about a better way to do things I will give you one, but you would have to promise to act like an adult for the rest of this thread in discussing it.
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
I don't understand why people respond to ProfJohn posts, no one intelligent should or does take him seriously, his bait and run is sad and predictable.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Specop 007

And of course the solution is appeasement. Vote in a liberal, gut the military and let Russia do whatever it wants because our liberal pussies dont have the balls to say stop?
Oh yeah, THAT sounds like a winning strategy.....
You have the understanding of a child.
That's totally uncalled for, he definitely shows the maturity and understanding of a young adolescent.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,216
126
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: eskimospy
Originally posted by: Specop 007

And of course the solution is appeasement. Vote in a liberal, gut the military and let Russia do whatever it wants because our liberal pussies dont have the balls to say stop?
Oh yeah, THAT sounds like a winning strategy.....
You have the understanding of a child.
That's totally uncalled for, he definitely shows the maturity and understanding of a young adolescent.
The testosterone level at least. We have the devil of a time managing a fifth rate country AKA Iraq and we're going to take on Russia in their back yard because of Georgia. Not very bright.
 

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,007
572
126
Originally posted by: Double Trouble
This has very little to do with not trusting Russia. The fact is that most of the people in South Ossetia want to be a part of Russia, and many of them are already Russians. This is not a case of Russia forcefully taking over some country and making it part of Russia against the will of the inhabitants, this is Russia annexing an area that wants to be a part of Russia. I don't see the issue as long as that's the will of the population of that area --- and by all accounts it is.
So we should absorb mexico.

And they call us Imperialists. I'm surprised Russia has the balls for just straight up annexation. In this day and age, no one plays by the "I conquer, I keep" rule. If we did this there'd be weeping and wailing around the world.
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: Atreus21
Originally posted by: Double Trouble
This has very little to do with not trusting Russia. The fact is that most of the people in South Ossetia want to be a part of Russia, and many of them are already Russians. This is not a case of Russia forcefully taking over some country and making it part of Russia against the will of the inhabitants, this is Russia annexing an area that wants to be a part of Russia. I don't see the issue as long as that's the will of the population of that area --- and by all accounts it is.
So we should absorb mexico.
Why would we want to do that?

 

Double Trouble

Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
9,272
103
106
Originally posted by: Atreus21
Originally posted by: Double Trouble
This has very little to do with not trusting Russia. The fact is that most of the people in South Ossetia want to be a part of Russia, and many of them are already Russians. This is not a case of Russia forcefully taking over some country and making it part of Russia against the will of the inhabitants, this is Russia annexing an area that wants to be a part of Russia. I don't see the issue as long as that's the will of the population of that area --- and by all accounts it is.
So we should absorb mexico.

And they call us Imperialists. I'm surprised Russia has the balls for just straight up annexation. In this day and age, no one plays by the "I conquer, I keep" rule. If we did this there'd be weeping and wailing around the world.
First, why the heck would we want to absorb that hellhole? No thanks.

Second, you fail to see the difference between "conquering" a place and keeping it, and being asked to come in then being asked to annex it. If you held a vote in south ossetia, you'd find that the vast majority are for becoming a part of Russia. So let them.

I have no problem calling a spade a spade, and Russia is certainly not doing this from the goodness of their hearts, it's a cold calculated play. Still, the fact that the south ossetians want to be a part of Russia makes the annexation a non-issue.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,872
4,216
126
Originally posted by: Double Trouble
Originally posted by: Atreus21
Originally posted by: Double Trouble
This has very little to do with not trusting Russia. The fact is that most of the people in South Ossetia want to be a part of Russia, and many of them are already Russians. This is not a case of Russia forcefully taking over some country and making it part of Russia against the will of the inhabitants, this is Russia annexing an area that wants to be a part of Russia. I don't see the issue as long as that's the will of the population of that area --- and by all accounts it is.
So we should absorb mexico.

And they call us Imperialists. I'm surprised Russia has the balls for just straight up annexation. In this day and age, no one plays by the "I conquer, I keep" rule. If we did this there'd be weeping and wailing around the world.
First, why the heck would we want to absorb that hellhole? No thanks.

Second, you fail to see the difference between "conquering" a place and keeping it, and being asked to come in then being asked to annex it. If you held a vote in south ossetia, you'd find that the vast majority are for becoming a part of Russia. So let them.

I have no problem calling a spade a spade, and Russia is certainly not doing this from the goodness of their hearts, it's a cold calculated play. Still, the fact that the south ossetians want to be a part of Russia makes the annexation a non-issue.
This.

Russia did this for their own reasons, just as we "liberated" Iraq for our own (whatever they were) purposes. In this case, the population wanted to be part of Russia. I'm not saying I approve of a military solution to the problem, however I understand that Ossentia isn't Poland and from THEIR perspective they approve and aren't the victims some would make them.
 

Specop 007

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
9,454
0
0
Originally posted by: eskimospy
You have the understanding of a child. There are strategic options between escalation, antagonism, and appeasement. If Bush hadn't pursued his ridiculous foreign policy with regards to Russia in the first place, there is an extremely good chance that this issue would not have come up to begin with and if it had we would have had far better tools to oppose it. Bush's pointless antagonism has gained the US little and has contributed to the destabilization of the political situation along Russia's borders.

If you're actually interested in how Bush screwed up, how McCain will screw it up further, and a reasoned opinion about a better way to do things I will give you one, but you would have to promise to act like an adult for the rest of this thread in discussing it.
You forget who we're talking about here. Russia wants nothing more then to restore itself to its former glory and pursue the Cold War again. Which means that all those other options that you think exist, do not.
 

fleshconsumed

Diamond Member
Feb 21, 2002
6,381
2,060
136
Originally posted by: Specop 007
Originally posted by: eskimospy
You have the understanding of a child. There are strategic options between escalation, antagonism, and appeasement. If Bush hadn't pursued his ridiculous foreign policy with regards to Russia in the first place, there is an extremely good chance that this issue would not have come up to begin with and if it had we would have had far better tools to oppose it. Bush's pointless antagonism has gained the US little and has contributed to the destabilization of the political situation along Russia's borders.

If you're actually interested in how Bush screwed up, how McCain will screw it up further, and a reasoned opinion about a better way to do things I will give you one, but you would have to promise to act like an adult for the rest of this thread in discussing it.
You forget who we're talking about here. Russia wants nothing more then to restore itself to its former glory and pursue the Cold War again. Which means that all those other options that you think exist, do not.
I think you have a "Russia always bad, US always good" problem.
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,581
5,742
126
Originally posted by: Specop 007
Originally posted by: senseamp
Independent states can decide to join other states. Why is it surprising that they want to join Russia? They've been saying that for 15 years.
Do you mean independent as in free state or state thats trying to remove itself from Georgia.....
Russia already recognized R.S.O. as an independent state, so from their point of view, it's a free state. US and EU can disagree, but it doesn't really matter since neither Russians or Ossetians care.
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
Russian troops are occupying ethnic Georgian territory outside South Ossetia:
from Time Magazine:
Russian troops remaining in Georgian territory are effectively preventing Georgians from returning to their homes, a U.N. representative said Saturday. Melita Sunjic, spokeswoman for the U.N. High Commissioner of Refugees in Georgia, said that although it was not clear if Russian soldiers were actually preventing refugees from returning, the warnings by the troops effectively block them. "If they say 'we can't guarantee your safety,' you don't go," she told The Associated Press.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
77,872
36,034
136
Originally posted by: Specop 007
Originally posted by: eskimospy
You have the understanding of a child. There are strategic options between escalation, antagonism, and appeasement. If Bush hadn't pursued his ridiculous foreign policy with regards to Russia in the first place, there is an extremely good chance that this issue would not have come up to begin with and if it had we would have had far better tools to oppose it. Bush's pointless antagonism has gained the US little and has contributed to the destabilization of the political situation along Russia's borders.

If you're actually interested in how Bush screwed up, how McCain will screw it up further, and a reasoned opinion about a better way to do things I will give you one, but you would have to promise to act like an adult for the rest of this thread in discussing it.
You forget who we're talking about here. Russia wants nothing more then to restore itself to its former glory and pursue the Cold War again. Which means that all those other options that you think exist, do not.
Even if you are right and Russia wants to reignite the Cold War which it DEFINITELY does not, as it saw the results the first time when it was in a much better position, in the middle of the Cold War those other options existed and were frequently used.

Read a book.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Russian troops are occupying ethnic Georgian territory outside South Ossetia:
from Time Magazine:
Russian troops remaining in Georgian territory are effectively preventing Georgians from returning to their homes, a U.N. representative said Saturday. Melita Sunjic, spokeswoman for the U.N. High Commissioner of Refugees in Georgia, said that although it was not clear if Russian soldiers were actually preventing refugees from returning, the warnings by the troops effectively block them. "If they say 'we can't guarantee your safety,' you don't go," she told The Associated Press.
So, I guess this is the 21st Century Russian version of 'ethnic cleansing'? Interesting.

Originally posted by: senseamp
Russia already recognized R.S.O. as an independent state, so from their point of view, it's a free state. US and EU can disagree, but it doesn't really matter since neither Russians or Ossetians care.
I bet the ethnic Georgians who used to live there care...
 

senseamp

Lifer
Feb 5, 2006
35,581
5,742
126
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Russian troops are occupying ethnic Georgian territory outside South Ossetia:
from Time Magazine:
Russian troops remaining in Georgian territory are effectively preventing Georgians from returning to their homes, a U.N. representative said Saturday. Melita Sunjic, spokeswoman for the U.N. High Commissioner of Refugees in Georgia, said that although it was not clear if Russian soldiers were actually preventing refugees from returning, the warnings by the troops effectively block them. "If they say 'we can't guarantee your safety,' you don't go," she told The Associated Press.
So, I guess this is the 21st Century Russian version of 'ethnic cleansing'? Interesting.

Originally posted by: senseamp
Russia already recognized R.S.O. as an independent state, so from their point of view, it's a free state. US and EU can disagree, but it doesn't really matter since neither Russians or Ossetians care.
I bet the ethnic Georgians who used to live there care...
That is TOO BAD, and maybe even borderline SO SAD. Maybe they should have thought about that before they went with Gamsakhurdia's "Georgia is for Georgians" policy 20 years ago, or this latest reincarnation under the tie chewer Saakashvili. Now Georgia IS for Georgians, just a smaller Georgia :)
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Russian troops are occupying ethnic Georgian territory outside South Ossetia:
from Time Magazine:
Russian troops remaining in Georgian territory are effectively preventing Georgians from returning to their homes, a U.N. representative said Saturday. Melita Sunjic, spokeswoman for the U.N. High Commissioner of Refugees in Georgia, said that although it was not clear if Russian soldiers were actually preventing refugees from returning, the warnings by the troops effectively block them. "If they say 'we can't guarantee your safety,' you don't go," she told The Associated Press.
So, I guess this is the 21st Century Russian version of 'ethnic cleansing'? Interesting.

Originally posted by: senseamp
Russia already recognized R.S.O. as an independent state, so from their point of view, it's a free state. US and EU can disagree, but it doesn't really matter since neither Russians or Ossetians care.
I bet the ethnic Georgians who used to live there care...
That is TOO BAD, and maybe even borderline SO SAD. Maybe they should have thought about that before they went with Gamsakhurdia's "Georgia is for Georgians" policy 20 years ago, or this latest reincarnation under the tie chewer Saakashvili. Now Georgia IS for Georgians, just a smaller Georgia :)
So you're down with ethnic cleansing? Interesting.

"so sad," indeed...
 

BackFlow

Banned
Aug 9, 2008
69
0
0
The writing is on the wall.

Just like the West, Putin re-nationalized Russia oil program is by cheating, stealing, and killing.

The fact is that most of the people in South Ossetia want to be a part of Russia, and many of them are already Russians.
I fail to see how the 1989 cencus, Russian at 2.1% would have change so much that there be more presently. Wait a minute, Russian population has gone up in South Ossetia because of the large number of Ruskie army that currently living there. And, most if not all Ossetian err... I mean Russian have Russian passport.

the facts are that the Georgian government attacked South Ossetia first.
Try Googling a little harder, and you might learn something different. And, should be able to come to a conclusion that the Russian invaded Georgia first, and the attack on South Ossetia by Georgian force was self defense, even if you can't see pass the smokes & mirrors.

Funny how the Russian happens to have such large well equipped troops station across the border and suddenly rolled across the border in less than 48 hours.

The Russian just finished an army exercise with their Asian neighbors and what better opportunity to have them invade a country that is the middleman between West & Caspian oil.

IMHO, Putin plan of annexing Georgia the minute the Caspian states wanted to sell their oil to the West.

 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: senseamp
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: CallMeJoe
Russian troops are occupying ethnic Georgian territory outside South Ossetia:
from Time Magazine:
Russian troops remaining in Georgian territory are effectively preventing Georgians from returning to their homes, a U.N. representative said Saturday. Melita Sunjic, spokeswoman for the U.N. High Commissioner of Refugees in Georgia, said that although it was not clear if Russian soldiers were actually preventing refugees from returning, the warnings by the troops effectively block them. "If they say 'we can't guarantee your safety,' you don't go," she told The Associated Press.
So, I guess this is the 21st Century Russian version of 'ethnic cleansing'? Interesting.

Originally posted by: senseamp
Russia already recognized R.S.O. as an independent state, so from their point of view, it's a free state. US and EU can disagree, but it doesn't really matter since neither Russians or Ossetians care.
I bet the ethnic Georgians who used to live there care...
That is TOO BAD, and maybe even borderline SO SAD. Maybe they should have thought about that before they went with Gamsakhurdia's "Georgia is for Georgians" policy 20 years ago, or this latest reincarnation under the tie chewer Saakashvili. Now Georgia IS for Georgians, just a smaller Georgia :)
So you're down with ethnic cleansing? Interesting.

"so sad," indeed...
Are they slaughtering whole villages of Georgians?

 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Are they slaughtering whole villages of Georgians?
it's certainly a less bloody version, but it's still ethnic cleaning nonetheless... Many innocent Georgians are having their homes taken from them and becoming displaced.

How is that even remotely justifiable!? :confused:

Or, are you on the same page as senseamp and believe that all Georgians are guilty and therefore deserve it?

Want to buy a bridge?
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: palehorse

it's certainly a less bloody version, but it's still ethnic cleaning nonetheless... Many innocent Georgians are having their homes taken from them and becoming displaced.

How is that even remotely justifiable!? :confused:

Or, are you on the same page as senseamp and believe that all Georgians are guilty and therefore deserve it?

Want to buy a bridge?
Want to pound salt?

I never said ethnic cleansing was justifiable but I always thought it involved murder and genocide. So according to your definition of ethnic cleansing the Israeli's did the same in some of their occupied territory. Well I was against that so I'm against it in Georgia.

 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: Red Dawn
Originally posted by: palehorse

it's certainly a less bloody version, but it's still ethnic cleaning nonetheless... Many innocent Georgians are having their homes taken from them and becoming displaced.

How is that even remotely justifiable!? :confused:

Or, are you on the same page as senseamp and believe that all Georgians are guilty and therefore deserve it?

Want to buy a bridge?
Want to pound salt?

I never said ethnic cleansing was justifiable but I always thought it involved murder and genocide. So according to your definition of ethnic cleansing the Israeli's did the same in some of their occupied territory. Well I was against that so I'm against it in Georgia.
As far as I know, ethnic cleansing is any occasion wherein people of a specific ethnicity are forcibly removed from a locale.

If it's not OK in Kosovo, Darfur, Israel, etc; then I don't see how it would be OK in South Ossetia simply because fewer bullets are being fired to make it happen.

But, senseamp thinks it is...
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY