It's time to screw Russia over [Archive]

Daniel

16th August 2008, 13:07

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article4543744.ece
I'm starting a new thread because the mindless "your president sucks!" and "No! YOUR president sucks" comments on the War thread are tiring and distract from the real issue.

I hate the US. The US is a bully and pushes little countries around.
I hate China. China treats it's own people badly but they realise that it's bad business sense to go screwing around too much in world politics.

But I ****ing hate Russia. I ****ing hate Vlad, and I hate the way they feel it's fine to make threats like the one above which is not just a warning to Poland but a warning to every nation on this planet.

**** Russia. Seriously if the west can become self reliant in regards to energy then Russia has nothing. We can go back to the halcyon days of the 80's and 90's when Russia couldn't even afford to fly it's air force, people had to queue around corners for bread and inflation was nice and high and their president was a fat guy who liked to dance.

Russia had the chance to do a China and be fairly friendly and make a crapload of money out of it. But they squandered it and chose to be evil. Let them suffer. We'll all be better off for it.

Seems this might not be too far from the truth.
http://www.tubearoo.com/articles/49604/The_Simpsons_Soviet_Union.html?autoplay=true

If people in power around the world realise that without oil and gas money Russia is nothing then we can start to invest in renewable energy and also cut comsumption enough to give Russia the finger.

Drew

16th August 2008, 17:31

Daniel

16th August 2008, 19:38

It's slightly harder to boycot Russia than it is Nestle. I mean how do you know where your electricity comes from, where your gas comes from and where your petrol comes from?

Having said that, f*** you Russia! (please keep sending the vodka, though ;) )
True.

But the thing is the consequences for us if we're dependant on Nestle for products is a bit less worrying than if we're dependant on the USSR for energy.

A.F.F.

16th August 2008, 19:59

Is this a petition??

I'm in :)

Tomi

16th August 2008, 20:20

I also swill stop buying those wood dolls that has a smaller one inside.

Camelopard

16th August 2008, 20:38

I stop watching any soccer matches involving teams owned by russian billionaires :)

Tomi

16th August 2008, 20:54

I stop watching any soccer matches involving teams owned by russian billionaires :)

good idea, i include Thai criminals to that too.

Jag_Warrior

16th August 2008, 21:36

I'm in too! When that big wooden crate arrives with the Russian twin sisters inside, who are going to be my wives, I'm sending it back!

I think the O/P has a point. But the Chinese have been propping up and playing footsie with some of the world's great dictatorships for decades. More recently, with all the Walmart shoppers' money in their pockets, the Chinese have done a pretty good job of watching out for Russia and Iran. Personally, I don't see the Russians as any more "evil" than the Red Coms in China. They just have a better PR department.

DonJippo

16th August 2008, 22:39

Is this a petition??

I'm in :)

:wave: where can I sign.

Daniel

16th August 2008, 22:52

I also swill stop buying those wood dolls that has a smaller one inside.
That's the attitude :up:

Seriously though something needs to be done.

P.S You're probably right jag :)

Tomi

16th August 2008, 23:08

Personally, I don't see the Russians as any more "evil" than the Red Coms in China. They just have a better PR department.

And you have a smart China strategie too by borrowing money from china so that you can afford to buy things from them.

Jag_Warrior

16th August 2008, 23:49

And you have a smart China strategie too by borrowing money from china so that you can afford to buy things from them.

Yeah, we've got 'em just where we want 'em now. They walked right into that one. Never saw it coming!

We have some other gems to our credit. We also take the money that the Chinese loan to us and let Israel "borrow" it. Years ago we passed a law that Israel is guaranteed future loans, that can be no less than what the payments are for the current loans. And you know, amazingly, they have never defaulted on a loan payment. Imagine that! :dozey:

Here's another one. We invaded Iraq (based on the excuse of the moment), and then our leader, the grown up version of the Mad Magazine kid, said that the Iraqi oil revenues would pay for the reconstruction. Well, the Iraqis have been banking their oil revenues and are up to over $70 billion in surpluses now. So, who is paying for the reconstructon? Our "friends" in China saw that we were in a tight spot, so they let us borrow a few hundred billion. Now Iraq is a little less of a mess than it was four years ago. Roads and bridges in the U.S. are falling apart. But what's important is, the ones in Iraq are looking good... til some Iranian or Syrian with a bomb and a bad attitude blows them up again. Like that matters to us: we'll build them back again! This is America, son! We can rebuild 'em as fast as they can blow 'em up. We don't care about the cost. China says they will keep loaning us money (as long as we keep buying their slave labor crap).

What's that you say? The Japanese can't be trusted to maintain a military force? I thought Tojo was dead. But if they can't be trusted, I guess they can't be trusted. So that's OK. Who might be a threat to Japan anyway? North Korea and/or China? Tell ya what, we'll borrow a few MORE billion every year from China to protect Japan from China. That sounds kinda funny, but I guess we gotta do what we gotta do. Should we ask Japan to pick up at least a part of the tab? Naaaaah, we'll take care of it. Best that they invest their money so that Toyota and Honda can go ahead and put the final bullet in GM's head.

With all of this money we're borrowing from China to keep our heads above water, what will happen if they begin to really flex their muscles? Well, they better not do that. If they do, then... well... we might just have to tell them to stop... or else! Or else what? Or else... we'll tell them to stop again.

Before the Chinese mess with us, they better talk to Mexico and learn what happens when you do things that threaten our sovereignty. If you send drugs, crime and poor people here to make things easier for yourself and harder for us, we won't put up with that. We'll use their drugs, stop arresting them for committing crimes and give them jobs, free educations, free housing and welfare so that they aren't poor anymore. So yeah, China better talk to Mexico. They don't want to poke us with a stick and get us wound up.

Anyway, the British Empire fell apart and you guys are doing OK now. I figure we'll be OK too. Our kids have talents too. Our girls can dance in more Girls Gone Wild videos - I bet those would sell like hotcakes in China (do they eat hotcakes in China???). Our boys can be international video game champions (they can't spell, add or subtract... maybe a Chinese kid could help keep score). So don't go thinking that we Americans don't have a plan to work our way out of this deepening hole.

The Romans figured out how to deal with the Huns. We'll figure out how to deal with the Chinese. The Romans did figure out how to deal with the Huns, didn't they? Didn't they???!!! :eek:

Sleeper

17th August 2008, 14:32

Russia seems to be flexing its muscels again, the Tsars are back.

Garry Walker

17th August 2008, 15:08

I also swill stop buying those wood dolls that has a smaller one inside.

Matryoshka dolls are what they are called.

Azumanga Davo

17th August 2008, 15:45

Russia, just a load of old cossacks... ;)

BDunnell

17th August 2008, 18:51

The major thing is to do something that would convince the Russian people that there is a better way — that Putin/Medvedev's growing alienation from the rest of the world is not desirable, that Russia ought to have more of a role in the world than supplying natural resources, that proper democracy and a free press are not that threatening or difficult to achieve, and so on. But they seem happy with what they have.

The way forward is surely not military action on Europe's doorstep, but financial sanctions.

markabilly

17th August 2008, 20:35

Yeah, we've got 'em just where we want 'em now. They walked right into that one. Never saw it coming!

We have some other gems to our credit. We also take the money that the Chinese loan to us and let Israel "borrow" it. Years ago we passed a law that Israel is guaranteed future loans, that can be no less than what the payments are for the current loans. And you know, amazingly, they have never defaulted on a loan payment. Imagine that! :dozey:

Here's another one. We invaded Iraq (based on the excuse of the moment), and then our leader, the grown up version of the Mad Magazine kid, said that the Iraqi oil revenues would pay for the reconstruction. Well, the Iraqis have been banking their oil revenues and are up to over $70 billion in surpluses now. So, who is paying for the reconstructon? Our "friends" in China saw that we were in a tight spot, so they let us borrow a few hundred billion. Now Iraq is a little less of a mess than it was four years ago. Roads and bridges in the U.S. are falling apart. But what's important is, the ones in Iraq are looking good... til some Iranian or Syrian with a bomb and a bad attitude blows them up again. Like that matters to us: we'll build them back again! This is America, son! We can rebuild 'em as fast as they can blow 'em up. We don't care about the cost. China says they will keep loaning us money (as long as we keep buying their slave labor crap).

What's that you say? The Japanese can't be trusted to maintain a military force? I thought Tojo was dead. But if they can't be trusted, I guess they can't be trusted. So that's OK. Who might be a threat to Japan anyway? North Korea and/or China? Tell ya what, we'll borrow a few MORE billion every year from China to protect Japan from China. That sounds kinda funny, but I guess we gotta do what we gotta do. Should we ask Japan to pick up at least a part of the tab? Naaaaah, we'll take care of it. Best that they invest their money so that Toyota and Honda can go ahead and put the final bullet in GM's head.

With all of this money we're borrowing from China to keep our heads above water, what will happen if they begin to really flex their muscles? Well, they better not do that. If they do, then... well... we might just have to tell them to stop... or else! Or else what? Or else... we'll tell them to stop again.

Before the Chinese mess with us, they better talk to Mexico and learn what happens when you do things that threaten our sovereignty. If you send drugs, crime and poor people here to make things easier for yourself and harder for us, we won't put up with that. We'll use their drugs, stop arresting them for committing crimes and give them jobs, free educations, free housing and welfare so that they aren't poor anymore. So yeah, China better talk to Mexico. They don't want to poke us with a stick and get us wound up.

Anyway, the British Empire fell apart and you guys are doing OK now. I figure we'll be OK too. Our kids have talents too. Our girls can dance in more Girls Gone Wild videos - I bet those would sell like hotcakes in China (do they eat hotcakes in China???). Our boys can be international video game champions (they can't spell, add or subtract... maybe a Chinese kid could help keep score). So don't go thinking that we Americans don't have a plan to work our way out of this deepening hole.

The Romans figured out how to deal with the Huns. We'll figure out how to deal with the Chinese. The Romans did figure out how to deal with the Huns, didn't they? Didn't they???!!! :eek:

yeah, the Romans let the Huns have their way with them, man woman and child, over and over again........No one appreciates George Washington, who probably did more for the rule of law over men rather than rule of a man over subjects, then anyone else in the history of the last several hundred years. And his best advice to America keeps getting ignored; stay out of europe and its bloody wars (as in real blood)

And over and over again, I hear the words that those who do not learn the lessons of history are doomed to keep repeating its mistakes

Eki

17th August 2008, 21:09

The major thing is to do something that would convince the Russian people that there is a better way — that Putin/Medvedev's growing alienation from the rest of the world is not desirable,
We couldn't even convince Americans that Bush/Cheney's growing alienation from the rest of the world was not desirable. And we speak (approximately) the same language as them!

Drew

17th August 2008, 23:10

The way forward is surely not military action on Europe's doorstep, but financial sanctions.

Unfortunetly economic sanctions only ever affect the people, almost never the government. Mugabe's still in power, Kim Jung Il's still in power, the Burman junta is still in power, Gaddafi's still there, Castro's still around, Saddam was there until he was forced out and countless other nations I've forgotten about. When have they worked?

BDunnell

18th August 2008, 00:15

Unfortunetly economic sanctions only ever affect the people, almost never the government. Mugabe's still in power, Kim Jung Il's still in power, the Burman junta is still in power, Gaddafi's still there, Castro's still around, Saddam was there until he was forced out and countless other nations I've forgotten about. When have they worked?

Never, you're quite right, but none of those countries are as economically significant as Russia, so I think they would have more effect applied to Russian firms.

Rudy Tamasz

18th August 2008, 08:39

PolePosition_1

18th August 2008, 09:38

I'll be honest, I haven't read all the posts in this topic, but just wanted to post my opinion on the current situation with Russia.

And I feel for Russia in this instance, Georgia stated it, Russia just went to defend their own people, and the USA are using it, twisting the truth and making Russia out to be the bad guys.

I'm normally a defender of the USA, but with regards to this, it highlights the power they have, and not just the economic power, but the 'brainwashing' power by their influence on the media, USA have decided that Russia is in the wrong, thats all that gets reported in the media, and the world then agrees with the USA.

I don't know, I do get bit depressed when I think about how the world is run, and I'm one of the fortunate ones who live in a nicely developed country called the UK, imagine how I'd feel if I had the bad luck of being born in a poor country defenceless to develop against the powers of the WB, WTO etc. I'd be suicidal probably!

BDunnell

18th August 2008, 11:44

Good morning folks! The party is over, the hangover is in, and it must be bloody disgusting to see the ugly creature you've just spent a night with. Wow, it took you Westerners a while to shake off that stupid fascination with blue-eyed chicks, vodka, Chelsea, F1 Midland and charming speeches of Russian leaders. Welcome to the real world.

I think I ought to point out that not everyone has been overly enamoured with Russia's behaviour for a number of years, so don't tar everyone with the same brush. And I still don't believe that out-and-out confrontation is the way forward.

gadjo_dilo

18th August 2008, 11:55

I hate the US. The US is a bully and pushes little countries around.
I hate China. China treats it's own people badly but they realise that it's bad business sense to go screwing around too much in world politics
But I ****ing hate Russia. I ****ing hate Vlad, ....... ..

And don't you worry about so much hatred in your ( still very young ) heart?
Isn't time to ask for some help? :laugh:

**** Russia. Seriously if the west can become self reliant in regards to energy then Russia has nothing. We can go back to the halcyon days of the 80's and 90's when Russia couldn't even afford to fly it's air force, people had to queue around corners for bread and inflation was nice and high and their president was a fat guy who liked to dance... It's not so simple. Since the times of Peter the Great Russia has been a powerful country that had a word to say in world's politics. And mind you, in those times nobody thought of energy problems. Russia's foreign policy hasn't changed during centuries, Peter's will might be a forgery, however it's still actual.

Russia had the chance to do a China and be fairly friendly and make a crapload of money out of it. But they squandered it and chose to be evil. Let them suffer. We'll all be better off for it...

Oh dear....As if we hadn't that long topic about the olympic torch and the rights of tibetans....

If people in power around the world realise that without oil and gas money Russia is nothing then we can start to invest in renewable energy and also cut comsumption enough to give Russia the finger.
Ha! For a moment I thought you're "Uncle's Nick" ( :laugh: ) reincarnation.Tell to big companies to cut consumption in order to give Russia the finger! I'm sure they'll be eager to reduce their production not to mention their profits..... Tell to people to turn off the light earlier and to go to bed at 9 o'clock! Cut the TV programms to 2 hours/day! Shall I remember you how poor Nick ended?

gadjo_dilo

18th August 2008, 12:21

Wow, it took you Westerners a while to shake off that stupid fascination with blue-eyed chicks, vodka, Chelsea, F1 Midland and charming speeches of Russian leaders. Welcome to the real world.
But a nation and its culture is not guilty for its leaders and their policy....After your saying I feel guilty because despite knowing that " from the russians comes the rain ", the easterner in me still has a stupid fascination with Dostoievski, Cehov, Tolstoi, Esenin, Bulgakov, Ilf&Petrov, Soljenitzin, Ceaikovski, Rahmaninov, Vladimir Vysotzki, Marc Chagall, Andrei Tarkovsky, Nikita Mihalkov, Andrei Mihalkov Koncealovski, Serghei Eisenstein, to name but a few. I love the work of these guys to bits but it doesn't mean I can't see the forest because of the trees.

Rudy Tamasz

18th August 2008, 13:27

I think I ought to point out that not everyone has been overly enamoured with Russia's behaviour for a number of years, so don't tar everyone with the same brush. And I still don't believe that out-and-out confrontation is the way forward.

Since the times of the Sugary Bill Clintn West tried to be lovey-dovey with Russia. Hell, people like Schroeder are on the Russian payroll now. And it was them who defined the foreign policy of Western countries.

Of course, I do not stand for out-and-out confrontation. I despise stupid anti-Russian escapades of populists like Lech Kaczynski, but the good ole' deterrence would be very efficient towards Russia. A bit of realpolitik never hurts.

ioan

18th August 2008, 15:29

I'll be honest, I haven't read all the posts in this topic, but just wanted to post my opinion on the current situation with Russia.

And I feel for Russia in this instance, Georgia stated it, Russia just went to defend their own people, and the USA are using it, twisting the truth and making Russia out to be the bad guys.

Those were not their own people, and if they were why were they in Georgia?!
What about China attacking your country when they judge that some of the chines immigrants are in some kind of danger.

Get your head straight, Russia was flexing it's muscles and waiting to see if their whores (i.e the European countries) will dare to stand up again. And they were right, we weren't strong enough.

ioan

18th August 2008, 15:34

But a nation and its culture is not guilty for its leaders and their policy....After your saying I feel guilty because despite knowing that " from the russians comes the rain ", the easterner in me still has a stupid fascination with Dostoievski, Cehov, Tolstoi, Esenin, Bulgakov, Ilf&Petrov, Soljenitzin, Ceaikovski, Rahmaninov, Vladimir Vysotzki, Marc Chagall, Andrei Tarkovsky, Nikita Mihalkov, Andrei Mihalkov Koncealovski, Serghei Eisenstein, to name but a few. I love the work of these guys to bits but it doesn't mean I can't see the forest because of the trees.

No really?!
Who puts them up there, and who keeps them up there, and who protects them KGB leaders?! That nation, with it's culture, because the culture of a nation isn't just their greatest and worldwide accepted artists, it's also the culture of the vodka drunken idiots! :rolleyes:

You can't say that Rachmaninoff's art outweighs the other hundreds of millions of idiots lack of culture and intelligence.

Daniel

18th August 2008, 15:57

And don't you worry about so much hatred in your ( still very young ) heart?
Isn't time to ask for some help? :laugh:

There's a time to love and a time to hate.

Oh dear....As if we hadn't that long topic about the olympic torch and the rights of tibetans....

Weren't you on the forum complaining how the West wasn't there for you in your countrys time of need when the Russians were opressing the crap out of your country?

Double standards? :laugh:

Ha! For a moment I thought you're "Uncle's Nick" ( :laugh: ) reincarnation.Tell to big companies to cut consumption in order to give Russia the finger! I'm sure they'll be eager to reduce their production not to mention their profits..... Tell to people to turn off the light earlier and to go to bed at 9 o'clock! Cut the TV programms to 2 hours/day! Shall I remember you how poor Nick ended?

It's simple. Russia's oil and gas is behind their resurgence. 15 years ago Russia was nothing. They couldn't have fought off an under 15's football team let alone a proper army. But thanks to the thirst in Europe for gas and oil they're now filthy rich and because their oil and gas is in such demand they can step on any toes they want and get away with it. Russia can turn off the gas and freeze you to death if they want. If Europe wants things to stay the way they are now we need to stop using oil and gas like we have an unlimited and consequence free supply of the stuff. I like my women with brown hair and my Russians queuing in the streets for bread and unable to fly their planes because they're frigging poor.

Laugh all you like. The stakes are much higher for you than I.

BDunnell

18th August 2008, 16:14

No really?!
Who puts them up there, and who keeps them up there, and who protects them KGB leaders?! That nation, with it's culture, because the culture of a nation isn't just their greatest and worldwide accepted artists, it's also the culture of the vodka drunken idiots! :rolleyes:

You can't say that Rachmaninoff's art outweighs the other hundreds of millions of idiots lack of culture and intelligence.

So no Soviet/Russian art of any form should be liked or praised, then, simply because of the actions of the country's leaders over time? You may as well say that we shouldn't like Charles Dickens because his works were often born out of times of filth and squalor. Again, your moral indignation is a bit hard for me to take.

BDunnell

18th August 2008, 16:15

It's simple. Russia's oil and gas is behind their resurgence. 15 years ago Russia was nothing. They couldn't have fought off an under 15's football team let alone a proper army. But thanks to the thirst in Europe for gas and oil they're now filthy rich and because their oil and gas is in such demand they can step on any toes they want and get away with it. Russia can turn off the gas and freeze you to death if they want. If Europe wants things to stay the way they are now we need to stop using oil and gas like we have an unlimited and consequence free supply of the stuff. I like my women with brown hair and my Russians queuing in the streets for bread and unable to fly their planes because they're frigging poor.

But, as has been said many times, the Russian armed forces are still in an awful state and lacking proper funding. Their capabilities may be enough to hit Georgia hard, but not a lot more than that. The money doesn't seem to be getting through to the military.

Tomi

18th August 2008, 16:19

But, as has been said many times, the Russian armed forces are still in an awful state and lacking proper funding. Their capabilities may be enough to hit Georgia hard, but not a lot more than that. The money doesn't seem to be getting through to the military.

yes, maybe the us should check how many lap dogs there is still left and start to prepaire a war.

BDunnell

18th August 2008, 16:21

yes, maybe the us should check how many lap dogs there is still left and start to prepaire a war.

I don't think that is really the answer. To be honest, I don't think anything much is.

ioan

18th August 2008, 16:23

So no Soviet/Russian art of any form should be liked or praised, then, simply because of the actions of the country's leaders over time?

I think you are completely misunderstanding what I posted.
Just because they had and have people who produced some of the most exceptional cultural bits, it doesn't mean that there are no people with low level or no culture at all, people who in this case are supporting a regime that is harmful for their citizens and for the rest of the world.

That's all, I never said that Russians or any other nation, shouldn't be praised for their cultural achievements. So please do not twist my words.

Tomi

18th August 2008, 16:28

I don't think that is really the answer. To be honest, I don't think anything much is.

Same here, actually there is nothing much but diplomacy that can be done, I understand that the ultra nationalist leader of Georgia had lost much of his popularity already before this incidence, after when Georgia gets a more moderate leader, I belive that also european countries will accept Georgias nato membership, if they still want it, and things will be back to normal.

ioan

18th August 2008, 16:32

I don't think that is really the answer. To be honest, I don't think anything much is.

To be honest, I think you are thinking the same way most West European politicians think, you, and implicitly them, do not know what should be done. Because of the lack of knowledge and because of the fear.

I do believe that there are few real politicians in western Europe at this moment, few people of the caliber of let's say Sir Winston Churchill.

So all they do is talk without converging towards an answer. Meanwhile the Russian get more powerful by the day. In the end we will be again saved by the USA.

ioan

18th August 2008, 16:42

Same here, actually there is nothing much but diplomacy that can be done, I understand that the ultra nationalist leader of Georgia had lost much of his popularity already before this incidence, after when Georgia gets a more moderate leader, I belive that also european countries will accept Georgias nato membership, if they still want it, and things will be back to normal.

Ultra nationalist leader? This is the most pro-European and NATO leader they ever had, and you call him an ultra-nationalist?!

Eki

18th August 2008, 17:46

Ultra nationalist leader? This is the most pro-European and NATO leader they ever had, and you call him an ultra-nationalist?!

So you believe that his motive is the hope that Georgia would help Europe and NATO, and not the hope that Europe and NATO would help Georgia? I'm quite sure his motives are mostly selfish. He wants more firepower against Russia.

BDunnell

18th August 2008, 17:50

Drew

18th August 2008, 19:28

Never, you're quite right, but none of those countries are as economically significant as Russia, so I think they would have more effect applied to Russian firms.

And then manage to decrease petrol and gas prices, by forcing the Russians to sell at a lower price? Interesting idea, if that's what you were meaning.

ioan

18th August 2008, 20:38

What is your answer, then?

And don't forget that Churchill got voted out as soon as the war was over, and for good reasons, so he was no panacea of political excellence. Moving on, had those in the Cold War who advocated, for example, a tough response to the Berlin crisis of 1961 held sway, the leaders of the time feared nuclear war and with good reason. Thankfully, wiser counsels prevailed and they will surely do so now, for armed conflict with Russia is not the answer.

Armed conflict? Who said we have to go to war with them?! I'm in no way advocating for WWIII.

What I meant to say is that the western powers should realize that every time that Russia does a "Georgia" or "Tchetchenia" we should not only condemn them because they don't even care about it.
We need to punish them. Throw them out of the G8, move the Winter Olympic Games to another place than Soci, suspend the right for Russian companies to operate outside of Russia. There is a need to show them that we are not afraid even if it's not the case.

And if someone thinks that such measures would trigger a nuclear war, than they are completely wrong. Russian leaders aren't stupid, they aren't working to get fantastically rich just to destroy everything with a war they know they can't win (GB, France or Germany, any of them can win a war against Russia anytime, not to mention USA).

Daniel

18th August 2008, 20:44

Armed conflict? Who said we have to go to war with them?! I'm in no way advocating for WWIII.

What I meant to say is that the western powers should realize that every time that Russia does a "Georgia" or "Tchetchenia" we should not only condemn them because they don't even care about it.
We need to punish them. Throw them out of the G8, move the Winter Olympic Games to another place than Soci, suspend the right for Russian companies to operate outside of Russia. There is a need to show them that we are not afraid even if it's not the case.

And if someone thinks that such measures would trigger a nuclear war, than they are completely wrong. Russian leaders aren't stupid, they aren't working to get fantastically rich just to destroy everything with a war they know they can't win (GB, France or Germany, any of them can win a war against Russia anytime, not to mention USA).
:up:

Tomi

18th August 2008, 21:43

We need to punish them. Throw them out of the G8, move the Winter Olympic Games to another place than Soci, suspend the right for Russian companies to operate outside of Russia. There is a need to show them that we are not afraid even if it's not the case.

Looks nice on paper, but i dont think 1-2 countries can throw 1 member out from G8, also the olympic movement is not a political movment, and would not move the games for this reason, but countries can boycott the games if they want, but I dont think they would, else they would not be in China now. Where Russian companies operate i think is every countries individual issue, so that would not work so well either.

ioan

19th August 2008, 07:50

So you believe that his motive is the hope that Georgia would help Europe and NATO, and not the hope that Europe and NATO would help Georgia? I'm quite sure his motives are mostly selfish. He wants more firepower against Russia.

Are you kidding? I hope so. :\

Ofcourse they want to be part of the EU and NATO because they would have plenty of advantages.
But to suggest that he id doing it for the sake of having more military power against Russia is stupid, simply because such a small country can't win a war against Russia, and nor the EU or the NATO will have a war with Russia either.

ioan

19th August 2008, 07:58

Looks nice on paper, but i dont think 1-2 countries can throw 1 member out from G8, also the olympic movement is not a political movment, and would not move the games for this reason, but countries can boycott the games if they want, but I dont think they would, else they would not be in China now. Where Russian companies operate i think is every countries individual issue, so that would not work so well either.

Really? The G8 counts 7 countries + Russia, not 1 or 2, democratic countries that should punish violent behavior.
The IOC is not a political movement? Dream on.
As for the individual countries where Russian companies operate, well most of these countries are the Western countries, countries that are based on democracy and who's people are against the kind of action that Russia is taking at the moment.

Looking at you post I see the paralytic state of the West, people who have the power to do something but are so afraid to move one finger against those who are the arch enemies of democracy.

Tell me, what do you think we should do against Russia. And don't be afraid just because you get all your gas from the Russians!

gadjo_dilo

19th August 2008, 08:02

There's a time to love and a time to hate..
No, that's insane. There's a need of a general equilibrum.

Weren't you on the forum complaining how the West wasn't there for you in your countrys time of need when the Russians were opressing the crap out of your country?
Double standards? :laugh: ..
Exactly, if they didn't do that then why should they do it now? Is Georgia more important than other nations?
BTW, talking about double standards, weren't you explaining that at that time the west did the right thing? :laugh:

It's simple. Russia's oil and gas is behind their resurgence. 15 years ago Russia was nothing. They couldn't have fought off an under 15's football team let alone a proper army. But thanks to the thirst in Europe for gas and oil they're now filthy rich and because their oil and gas is in such demand they can step on any toes they want and get away with it. Russia can turn off the gas and freeze you to death if they want. If Europe wants things to stay the way they are now we need to stop using oil and gas like we have an unlimited and consequence free supply of the stuff. I like my women with brown hair and my Russians queuing in the streets for bread and unable to fly their planes because they're frigging poor.:..
It's not a thirst of oil and gas, it's a NEED. Without them the prosperous economies of the west will be nothing. Personally I had the back luck to freeze to death, even without a russian turning off of these utilities. It was so awful that the guy who took the decision to freeze us ( ironically, the reason was also " to stop our dependence of foreign resources ") ended with a lot of bullets in his head.
If Russia was nothing 15 years ago then what was it back in 1968 when Cechoslovakia was invaded? What did the " democratic countries " except from some criticism?

Laugh all you like. The stakes are much higher for you than I.

Right. In the past, such typical westerner arrogance would have annoied me. Now all I can do is....laugh, and laugh and laugh. :laugh:

gadjo_dilo

19th August 2008, 09:18

We need to punish them. Throw them out of the G8, move the Winter Olympic Games to another place than Soci, suspend the right for Russian companies to operate outside of Russia. There is a need to show them that we are not afraid even if it's not the case.).
Are you sure these " punishments" are enough to change their foreign policy?

And if someone thinks that such measures would trigger a nuclear war, than they are completely wrong. Russian leaders aren't stupid, they aren't working to get fantastically rich just to destroy everything with a war they know they can't win (GB, France or Germany, any of them can win a war against Russia anytime, not to mention USA).

A war is a war and many of them finished with a surprising winner. I have serious doubts that an european country alone or in a coalition can win a war against Russia, Anyway, a war takes a long time and a lot of human lives so even if you may be sure you'll win it's better to avoid it. That's why diplomacy exists.
About the nuclear war...Theoratically, nobody has the interest to ever use a nuclear weapon, however an army who has it is better to be avoided.

Those were not their own people, and if they were why were they in Georgia?!

Let's not forget that things happened after Georgia attacked Ossetia. I bet that in that separatist country a lot of people have russian citizenship. Georgia is also a former SU country and I don't rule out a possible double citizenship of some guys.
BTW, when USA invaded Grenada the major justification for the invasion was the protection of American lives but the real reasons were of course different.

No really?!
Who puts them up there, and who keeps them up there, and who protects them KGB leaders?! That nation, with it's culture, because the culture of a nation isn't just their greatest and worldwide accepted artists, it's also the culture of the vodka drunken idiots!
You can't say that Rachmaninoff's art outweighs the other hundreds of millions of idiots lack of culture and intelligence.

Ioane, Ioane, I thought you know a thing or two about the elections in that part of the world. And about the candidates, too.
Anyway, intersetng point of view about the drunkers, but remember that you yourself belong to a nation that is more than friendly with the glass and who usually end up their boozing with an axe in the neighbour's head or with the rape of an old lady. :laugh: .
Your views on art are weird ( to use an euphemism :laugh: ), but what sensiblility should I expect from a "martial " guy like you? Don't remember that I ever said that russians are the best ( as if art can be measured ), their art just appeal to my soul and a nation that could create such masterpieces can't be ignored.
Lack of culture and intelligence is in fact a characteristic for the masses of a lot of civilised countries and just because you like to drink vodka it doesn't mean you're necessarily stupid. Neither whiskey nor beer would make you smarter. :laugh:

Daniel

19th August 2008, 09:36

Exactly, if they didn't do that then why should they do it now? Is Georgia more important than other nations?
BTW, talking about double standards, weren't you explaining that at that time the west did the right thing? :laugh:

It's not a thirst of oil and gas, it's a NEED. Without them the prosperous economies of the west will be nothing. Personally I had the back luck to freeze to death, even without a russian turning off of these utilities. It was so awful that the guy who took the decision to freeze us ( ironically, the reason was also " to stop our dependence of foreign resources ") ended with a lot of bullets in his head.
If Russia was nothing 15 years ago then what was it back in 1968 when Cechoslovakia was invaded? What did the " democratic countries " except from some criticism?

Right. In the past, such typical westerner arrogance would have annoied me. Now all I can do is....laugh, and laugh and laugh. :laugh:

As has been pointed out time and time again that at the end of WW2 the allies - Russia didn't have the strength to go fighting Russia and pushing them back to Moscow. Then there was this thing called the "Cold War" which involved the USSR and the US and a few other countries having nuclear weapons so the consequences of the US walking in and "liberating" you would have been pretty dire. But glossing over truths like this is fine for you I guess :rolleyes:

Thirst or need for oil.... whatever. It's the same thing. If you'd taken the time to read my post you would see that it doesn't need to be like this. If enough money is invested in renewables and there is a reduction in the amount of energy people waste the NEED for oil and gas will be a lot less and Russia won't be so pumped full of cash. But if your feelings towards Russia are in equilibrium then send your money Eastwards. I'm sure Russia will repay you handsomely :rolleyes: Yet again it would be a dumbarse move for the west to go head to head with Russia in a war, any solution will be one that involves economic sanctions and squeezing the money out of Russia. But if you prefer a nuclear war I'm sure that could also be arranged :)

You're a strange one. In previous threads you went on about the horrors of Soviet occupation. Yet now you're going on about my arrogance. Fine, I'm being arrogant! Of what consequence is this to you? Surely like Ioan you should be worried a bit more about things going back to the way they used to be? If something nasty happens I'll be off to Australia so fast, sadly you probably don't have that option so I hope your leaders aren't as ignorant of the clear and present danger as you are.

ShiftingGears

19th August 2008, 09:43

PolePosition_1

19th August 2008, 10:15

Those were not their own people, and if they were why were they in Georgia?!
What about China attacking your country when they judge that some of the chines immigrants are in some kind of danger.

Get your head straight, Russia was flexing it's muscles and waiting to see if their whores (i.e the European countries) will dare to stand up again. And they were right, we weren't strong enough.

Its my understanding that South Ossetia is a breakaway region. Georgia went in to try and re-take control of this region, starting the conflict.

Russia had to react as it had its peacekeeping forces in South Ossetian under an agreement in 1992.

Even the Human Rights Watch have said that eye-witness accounts lead to Georgian fire causing much of the damage in Tskhinvali.

In this instance, Russia is only guilty of being crap at playing the media game.

A.F.F.

19th August 2008, 10:30

Its my understanding that South Ossetia is a breakaway region. Georgia went in to try and re-take control of this region, starting the conflict.

Russia had to react as it had its peacekeeping forces in South Ossetian under an agreement in 1992.

Even the Human Rights Watch have said that eye-witness accounts lead to Georgian fire causing much of the damage in Tskhinvali.

In this instance, Russia is only guilty of being crap at playing the media game.

Surely there's more than meet the eye.

PolePosition_1

19th August 2008, 11:33

Surely there's more than meet the eye.

You may be right. I'm not going to pretend I know the inside out of this story, or that I'm an expect on international issues (albeit I do take an interest).

But thats the facts laid down straight and in a simple form. On paper to me it looks like Russia is in the right, but people think they're wrong because of the bad media coverage they've had, led by the USA.

Whether Russia has an alterative motive, who knows, they probably do to be fair, but nothing will change the fact that Georgia started it by trying to take control of the region. And surely they'd have known Russia would have had to react whilst they had troops there (through an agreement Georgia accepted).

A.F.F.

19th August 2008, 11:53

I'm sorry but where do you live PolePosition ? In what country?

Tomi

19th August 2008, 12:11

Really? The G8 counts 7 countries + Russia, not 1 or 2, democratic countries that should punish violent behavior.
The IOC is not a political movement? Dream on.
As for the individual countries where Russian companies operate, well most of these countries are the Western countries, countries that are based on democracy and who's people are against the kind of action that Russia is taking at the moment.

Looking at you post I see the paralytic state of the West, people who have the power to do something but are so afraid to move one finger against those who are the arch enemies of democracy.

Tell me, what do you think we should do against Russia. And don't be afraid just because you get all your gas from the Russians!

True 7+russia, but a few of those 7 depends on russian energy, well we see soon if they move the olympics, i say they wont do it.
Paralytic state of the west? Dont know about that, but im sure we will look after our own interest, like all the other countries will do.
I think we should use diplomacy to avoid conflicts, Im a fraid only of junkies and menthally ill people, because they are unpredictable, also I dont use gas anywhere. You seem to have big expectations about the west, some realism never hurts, at the end all countries look at their own intrest, and in Georgia there is very little to gain for the west.

PolePosition_1

19th August 2008, 12:26

I'm sorry but where do you live PolePosition ? In what country?

I live in the UK :) .

ioan

19th August 2008, 12:44

Are you sure these " punishments" are enough to change their foreign policy?

You might bet.
They are flexing their muscles and are expecting to see what we do about it. If we do nothing they'll do it again on a bigger scale. If we do something, like economical measures, they will know that we are not afraid of them.

Let's not forget that things happened after Georgia attacked Ossetia. I bet that in that separatist country a lot of people have russian citizenship. Georgia is also a former SU country and I don't rule out a possible double citizenship of some guys.
BTW, when USA invaded Grenada the major justification for the invasion was the protection of American lives but the real reasons were of course different.

I know what happened, and it happened that Osetians were attacking villages where the majority of the inhabitants were Georgians, and did this for quite some time. This was clearly their bid to produce a military confrontation with the Georgian Militia, and it ultimately happened, and than all of a sudden the Russians were ready to jump in, what a coincidence! ;)

And I condemn any country that get's involved in military actions in another sovereign country without having a UNO decision for it.

Ioane, Ioane, I thought you know a thing or two about the elections in that part of the world. And about the candidates, too.

That doesn't change the fact that the Russians as a whole don't do anything to change things into better.

Anyway, intersetng point of view about the drunkers, but remember that you yourself belong to a nation that is more than friendly with the glass and who usually end up their boozing with an axe in the neighbour's head or with the rape of an old lady. :laugh: .

You see this is exactly why I left the country 8 years ago and I do not intend to go back.

Your views on art are weird ( to use an euphemism :laugh: ), but what sensiblility should I expect from a "martial " guy like you? Don't remember that I ever said that russians are the best ( as if art can be measured ), their art just appeal to my soul and a nation that could create such masterpieces can't be ignored.

I appreciate art a lot, however I do not confound the art of a few individuals with the general lack of culture of the rest of a nation.

Lack of culture and intelligence is in fact a characteristic for the masses of a lot of civilised countries and just because you like to drink vodka it doesn't mean you're necessarily stupid. Neither whiskey nor beer would make you smarter. :laugh:

The difference, in this case, is in the percentage of drunkards reported to the whole population.

Mark

19th August 2008, 12:53

You might bet.
They are flexing their muscles and are expecting to see what we do about it. If we do nothing they'll do it again on a bigger scale. If we do something, like economical measures, they will know that we are not afraid of them.

It is quite worrying. There are parallels for this in history, especially where Germany made small moves to see what the world would do, and they did nothing, which left the door open for more.

Remember Germany's invasion of Czechoslovakia was supposely to protect the German population there.

gadjo_dilo

19th August 2008, 12:54

You're a strange one. In previous threads you went on about the horrors of Soviet occupation. Yet now you're going on about my arrogance. Fine, I'm being arrogant! Of what consequence is this to you? Surely like Ioan you should be worried a bit more about things going back to the way they used to be? If something nasty happens I'll be off to Australia so fast, sadly you probably don't have that option so I hope your leaders aren't as ignorant of the clear and present danger as you are.

I have the option to leave as well: I'm also a EU citizen , I also have a passport and I also saved some white money for black days. But running away is not my style, I'm "strange "and "ignorant" but not a coward.
Of course I worry about what happens, Russia was never a friendly neighbour but we've learned a bit from history about how to cope with its ambitions in the region. And the best solution is to don't transgrass on its tail if it's not the case, a lesson that Georgia should have known. Just because we have bad memories about russian occupation we try to avoid that this thing will happen again, that's why we joined NATO despite the fact that costs are huge, that's why in our foreign policy we look after the national interest and don't venture in declarations. We have our own problems related to Moldova and the separatist republic of Transnistria. Time and diplomacy will solve them but we'll never be so crazy to launch an attack, not even a verbal one against Russia.
I remember that in my ignorance I pulled the alarm signal when guys like you were happy to salute Kosovo's independence, I warned you about a lot of separatist republics from the ex-soviet space that will arise problems in the future and now you may see the results. And it was for the first time when I agreed with my leaders who took the wise decision to reject recognition.

ioan

19th August 2008, 12:56

well we see soon if they move the olympics, i say they wont do it.

I agree with you, they don't have the balls to do it.

Paralytic state of the west? Dont know about that, but im sure we will look after our own interest, like all the other countries will do.

Well, Georgia is the country through which the only non-Russian oil pipe passes towards Europe. The fact that the oil pipe was damaged during this little Russian escapade should push us to look after our interests a bit more.

And BTW the other non-Russian pipeline that was planed for the near future is going to pass through Georgia too. So again, we have all the interest to keep the country free.

As you see there are plenty of motives to help Georgia only to help ourselves by becoming less dependent of the Russian Gas and Oil, still we do nothing.
I call that paralysis!

I think we should use diplomacy to avoid conflicts,

Sure we should. But that doesn't mean that we should kiss their backsides instead of putting some economical and social pressure on them.

also I dont use gas anywhere.

You don't but your country does, for sure, and it's Russian gas. ;)

You seem to have big expectations about the west, some realism never hurts, at the end all countries look at their own intrest, and in Georgia there is very little to gain for the west.

How wrong, see above about the pipelines that pass through Georgia.
You see this is the nice part of a discussion, it gives you informations that you didn't know. ;)

ioan

19th August 2008, 12:59

It is quite worrying. There are parallels for this in history, especially where Germany made small moves to see what the world would do, and they did nothing, which left the door open for more.

Remember Germany's invasion of Czechoslovakia was supposely to protect the German population there.

Yep, I watched a very detailed documentary movie about Hitler only a few months ago.

Things look worryingly alike.

PS: There was also the part about how they were the hosts of Olympic Games shortly before the war. Russia will have theirs in a few years too.

ioan

19th August 2008, 13:09

I have the option to leave as well: I'm also a EU citizen , I also have a passport and I also saved some white money for black days. But running away is not my style, I'm "strange "and "ignorant" but not a coward.
Of course I worry about what happens, Russia was never a friendly neighbour but we've learned a bit from history about how to cope with its ambitions in the region. And the best solution is to don't transgrass on its tail if it's not the case, a lesson that Georgia should have known. Just because we have bad memories about russian occupation we try to avoid that this thing will happen again, that's why we joined NATO despite the fact that costs are huge, that's why in our foreign policy we look after the national interest and don't venture in declarations. We have our own problems related to Moldova and the separatist republic of Transnistria. Time and diplomacy will solve them but we'll never be so crazy to launch an attack, not even a verbal one against Russia.
I remember that in my ignorance I pulled the alarm signal when guys like you were happy to salute Kosovo's independence, I warned you about a lot of separatist republics from the ex-soviet space that will arise problems in the future and now you may see the results. And it was for the first time when I agreed with my leaders who took the wise decision to reject recognition.

You see, Romania walked on Russia tail in the past, and they couldn't do nothing about it.

Remember what happened in Prague? When the Russian tanks invaded Tchechoslovakia? When all the Communist countries but one were on the Soviet side?

That one country who was against them was Romania. As an answer they threatened us with military action, and I have it from good sources that there was a little confrontation on our eastern border, and they left as soon as they realized that they had little chance to win it.

Russia never had the military power to threaten the world, not even to threaten Europe. However now they found a new, stronger weapon, energy!

It's up to us all to do what is humanly possible to lessen our dependence on the Russian energy, and than turn our backs on them economically.
They have to understand that the time of the Czars, when they were dreaming of world domination has ended 100 years ago.

We need to show determination.

Why do you think that Sarkozy was the first European leader to criticize them? Because France is not as dependent on Russian energy as the rest of the European countries.
Germany is heavily dependent and it took them more than a week to say something about the matter, no doubt after having Putin's agreement, and this is sad.

ShiftingGears

19th August 2008, 13:09

Russia will have theirs in a few years too.

And you know this how?

Tomi

19th August 2008, 13:10

As you see there are plenty of motives to help Georgia only to help ourselves by becoming less dependent of the Russian Gas and Oil, still we do nothing.
I call that paralysis!

How wrong, see above about the pipelines that pass through Georgia.
You see this is the nice part of a discussion, it gives you informations that you didn't know. ;)

We have been working for some years already to become independent of russian energy, dont know what others has done.

I knew about the pipeline, but i dont think its enough to largen the conflict, there will be propably some cosmetic meaninless sanctions but thats it.

PolePosition_1

19th August 2008, 13:12

ioan

19th August 2008, 13:21

Ok, so clearly everyone feels Russia is in the wrong.

Take into account Russia had peacekeeping troops in this region, withs Georgia's consent. And Georgia decided to try and take this region.

What should Russia have done in everyones eyes?

Those regions were not independent region that Georgia decided to take over, those are separatist regions that were not granted independence by anyone but themselves, not even by the Russians.

And there are Georgians living in those regions too, and those were under fire from the Osetian separatists.

So if we decide to put facts on the table than it's fair to put them all, not just those who support a certain POV.

And if Russia was only there for peace keeping in those 2 regions, than why did they feel the urge to go deep into Georgia, attacking and destroying the town of Gori, also attacking Tbilissi. Killing a few journalists and so on?! Do you call that peace keeping?! :rolleyes:

Daniel

19th August 2008, 13:24

Ok, so clearly everyone feels Russia is in the wrong.

Take into account Russia had peacekeeping troops in this region, withs Georgia's consent. And Georgia decided to try and take this region.

What should Russia have done in everyones eyes?
Is this the first time you've watched the news since the Berlin wall came down? :confused:

Rudy Tamasz

19th August 2008, 13:35

Nobody is innocent in the conflict. Georgia just repeated a brutal crackdown on a secessionist region that Russia did earlier in Chechnya. Russia repeated the intervention to "save the civilians" that the U.S. previously did in Kosovo. Both sides look ugly. It's just the fact that Georgia's arrogance and aggression will not hurt the world as much as Russia's.

PolePosition_1

19th August 2008, 13:36

Those regions were not independent region that Georgia decided to take over, those are separatist regions that were not granted independence by anyone but themselves, not even by the Russians.

And there are Georgians living in those regions too, and those were under fire from the Osetian separatists.

So if we decide to put facts on the table than it's fair to put them all, not just those who support a certain POV.

And if Russia was only there for peace keeping in those 2 regions, than why did they feel the urge to go deep into Georgia, attacking and destroying the town of Gori, also attacking Tbilissi. Killing a few journalists and so on?! Do you call that peace keeping?! :rolleyes:

Ioan, I'm not saying Russia is the innocent party here. I'm just saying its not all poor Georgia and the baddie Russia.

They're both guilty parties, all three including the SO troops.

But I'm just looking at the facts, Georgia decided to get involved, this put 70,000 odd Russian civilians at risk, they were hardly going to let this happen without taking any action. And presumably Georgia knew this, therefore provoking the conflict.

Why have Russia gone in so deep? My understand is that they've gone into Georgia to take control of certain strategic towns (such as Tbilissi) to block off any Georgian troops entering SO from the eastern and western side.

That would make sense, but again, I stress, its highly likely they have other motives. But I'm just looking at the facts, and while Russia are not innocent, far from it, Georgia are more to blame than Russia, yet only Russia is getting the bad press.

So while I understand everyone's concerns, I'm just slightly puzzled as to why no one is laying into Georgia? I'm also slightly dismayed, as I am guessing much of this is because of the media coverage, and how unfair and biased the media is and influential on peoples opinions :(

19th August 2008, 13:41

I don't see how can the USA say stuff like, Russia is bullying Georgia, yet the USA invaded IRAQ, killed many more people than Russia did in Georgia, screwed up things much more and yet, it's ok for the USA to do what they do, but when someone else does it, it's not ok.

Surely wars aren't a nice thing, but I'm sick of this USA World domination view that everyone must respect, I'm glad that there are still countries in this world who don't have to obey the mighty USA.

and what about the initial attack launch by Georgia which killed people in the villages which were located in the breakaway regions? You could say what kind of a country launches an attack on it's own territory and its own people?

There is a lot more to this, but most people will see this on their news which is at the end controlled by the US propaganda machine, trying to make the Russian's look bad. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that they are doing nice things, but I think people need to take a different view to this instead of just being spoon fed by the media.

gadjo_dilo

19th August 2008, 13:56

They are flexing their muscles and are expecting to see what we do about it. If we do nothing they'll do it again on a bigger scale. If we do something, like economical measures, they will know that we are not afraid of them..
The aren't expecting anything because they already know nobody would dare to take economical measures against them. They're only showing what we'll get if we don't behave ourselves.

I know what happened, and it happened that Osetians were attacking villages where the majority of the inhabitants were Georgians, and did this for quite some time. This was clearly their bid to produce a military confrontation with the Georgian Militia, and it ultimately happened, and than all of a sudden the Russians were ready to jump in, what a coincidence! ;) ..
Well, with some different "belligerent forces" the script was similar in former Yugoslavia.

And I condemn any country that get's involved in military actions in another sovereign country without having a UNO decision for it. ..
Really? Don't remember your proposal for economic measures against USA and its allies at Iraq's invasion. :laugh:

That doesn't change the fact that the Russians as a whole don't do anything to change things into better...
You know it takes at least 20 years. :laugh: To pick up the right leader you need a base of selection. Good people aren't interested in politics.

You see this is exactly why I left the country 8 years ago and I do not intend to go back....
Nobody leaves a country because his fellow men drink too much. Be honest and say that you left for money. That's why everybody leaves.

I appreciate art a lot, however I do not confound the art of a few individuals with the general lack of culture of the rest of a nation.....
...but the authors are also the expression of a certain spirituality. Even the characters of a literary work are inspired by the contemporary people. And russian characters are really memorable

The difference, in this case, is in the percentage of drunkards reported to the whole population.
Sometimes british football teams have to face teams from Bucharest and their fans acompany them. I must confess I've never seen a larger crowd of drunk people at early hours.

ioan

19th August 2008, 14:20

Nobody leaves a country because his fellow men drink too much. Be honest and say that you left for money. That's why everybody leaves.

That's bullcrap, I could have a very high pay in Romania any day, I could live like a king from a financial POV, but I'm not interested to live my whole life with people who's intellectual and social level is lower than that of a stray dog.
Don't get me wrong, there are exceptional people in Romania too, but they are way to few compared to the whole.

You see there is more to life than just money, but you need to see the bigger picture than that of Bucharest in order to understand that. ;)

ioan

19th August 2008, 14:22

gadjo_dilo

19th August 2008, 14:25

That one country who was against them was Romania. As an answer they threatened us with military action, and I have it from good sources that there was a little confrontation on our eastern border, and they left as soon as they realized that they had little chance to win it..
No offence but I think that you took for granted one of those jokes about Radio Erevan. Anyway, it was probably a good joke as I can't stop laughing at the thought of the red army scared by our glorious army with its guns from the independence war.
When I have time I'll tell you some funny facts about the days of 1989 revolution. About how some people in Bucharest reacted when we were announced that FSN asked for help from Moscow.

Russia never had the military power to threaten the world, not even to threaten Europe.
Then it's a shame it could never be defeated. And it's awful that despite its weakness managed to spread the falimentary ideal of communism on half of Europe.

It's up to us all to do what is humanly possible to lessen our dependence on the Russian energy, and than turn our backs on them economically.
They have to understand that the time of the Czars, when they were dreaming of world domination has ended 100 years ago.
We need to show determination.
Another Uncle's Nick reincarnation.... Catchy slogans without practical possibilities.

Why do you think that Sarkozy was the first European leader to criticize them? Because France is not as dependent on Russian energy as the rest of the European countries..
In my opinion because France is dreaming to have again a leading role in Europe.

19th August 2008, 14:47

hehe, no I'm not paid to write this stuff, this is just my personal opinion and I just turned on the TV and saw that live conference from NATO and a journalist asked, will Georgia join NATO one day and the answer was yes. As expected, this is an important position for the USA, since Georgia is close to the middle east and Russia and more importantly has the oil pipeline from Caspian Sea.

It's sad the the new cold war battlefield between USA and Russia is in Georgia, but this is always the case that they take the war somewhere away from home.

PolePosition_1

19th August 2008, 14:48

gadjo_dilo

19th August 2008, 14:59

That's bullcrap, I could have a very high pay in Romania any day, I could live like a king from a financial POV, but I'm not interested to live my whole life with people who's intellectual and social level is lower than that of a stray dog. ;)
That's what I call a real patriot! Aferim, Ioane maica....Fighting for democracy, human rights, freedom of Georgia but dispraising his own nation.
You reached such a high ( ?!!? ) intellectual level ( ironically, with a little help of romanian schools ) that you can't live with the plebe.

Don't get me wrong, there are exceptional people in Romania too, but they are way to few compared to the whole.. ;)
Noooo....I don't get you wrong. I imagine yourself as a sort of Emil Cioran or Eugen Ionesco in a french exile. :laugh:
But as kings aren't paid I still don't believe you.

You see there is more to life than just money, but you need to see the bigger picture than that of Bucharest in order to understand that. ;)
Yeah, for the first time I agree with you: it's more than just money. It's a gipsyland but it's mine and I want to survive here even if I'll always be a " gadjo".

Tomi

19th August 2008, 15:03

In my opinion because France is dreaming to have again a leading role in Europe.

Agree, also its France 6 months now, so he is the one who is supposed to take stand.

ioan

19th August 2008, 15:24

That's what I call a real patriot! Aferim, Ioane maica....Fighting for democracy, human rights, freedom of Georgia but dispraising his own nation.
You reached such a high ( ?!!? ) intellectual level ( ironically, with a little help of romanian schools ) that you can't live with the plebe.

You have to ask yourself why others can't reach the same level in the same schools. Ironically it's not the school that is most important, it's the individual.

Noooo....I don't get you wrong. I imagine yourself as a sort of Emil Cioran or Eugen Ionesco in a french exile. :laugh:

Well, I'm not a philosopher nor an artist! ;)

Yeah, for the first time I agree with you: it's more than just money. It's a gipsyland but it's mine and I want to survive here even if I'll always be a " gadjo".

I love my family and the land where I grew up, and that is the only reason I go back once a year (I just came back last Sunday), but I can't stand that society for more than a week (and I'm not even talking about Bucharest, I'm talking about a little charming Transylvanian town).

gadjo_dilo

19th August 2008, 16:07

You have to ask yourself why others can't reach the same level in the same schools. Ironically it's not the school that is most important, it's the individual.)
But in every country there are kids who learn and kids who don't and leave the school very early. No offence but even the US people aren't quite strong at general knowledge. In a jokey way, just show me a country except ours where all the crap pop singers have graduated law, psychology, political sciences, theatre, film academy and have 2-3 masters.

Well, I'm not a philosopher nor an artist! ;) .)
I know but when you keep talking about your intellectual level you act as if you are one of them. Isn't your nose too high?

I love my family and the land where I grew up, and that is the only reason I go back once a year (I just came back last Sunday), but I can't stand that society for more than a week (and I'm not even talking about Bucharest, I'm talking about a little charming Transylvanian town).
Now, no offence, but you suffer of provincial frustration. I hate guys like you who come back and everything is stinking for them. The "society "should be your family and friends, you grew with them, they should be like you.

ioan

19th August 2008, 16:10

And you know this how?

I thought it was common knowledge that the 2014 Winter Olympic games will be held in Russia.

ioan

19th August 2008, 16:17

I know but when you keep talking about your intellectual level you act as if you are one of them. Isn't your nose too high?

I didn't mention my intellectual level, I just said I could have earned lots of money in Romania too. :rolleyes:

Now, no offence, but you suffer of provincial frustration. I hate guys like you who come back and everything is stinking for them.

Not everything, but most of the things. As for hating people who despise a rotten society, you are free to do it, if you like the said society.
I was disgusted last week by those whom I elected 4 years ago (well I always did my duty as a citizen, even if I was not in Romania). DO you thin k I should like the way they are doing things?!

The "society "should be your family and friends, you grew with them, they should be like you.

:?:

Not at all, society is the whole of the people who make up the entity that you have social interactions with. That includes, the bus driver, the girl that sells you the bread, the milk and so on, the policeman, the teachers from your child's school and so on.

A.F.F.

19th August 2008, 17:45

I live in the UK :) .

Alright.

I'm not saying you haven't studied Russia before this Georgia incident ( which I unfortunately feel ;) ) but it's different than sharing a borderline with them and having to eat e they are offering monthly basis.

When Putin was made a tzar, things really got ****ed up :mark:

BDunnell

19th August 2008, 20:32

BDunnell

19th August 2008, 20:35

To pick up the right leader you need a base of selection. Good people aren't interested in politics.

I think that's a bit offensive to the many good people who are involved in politics, including many friends of mine.

BDunnell

19th August 2008, 20:37

I think you are completely misunderstanding what I posted.
Just because they had and have people who produced some of the most exceptional cultural bits, it doesn't mean that there are no people with low level or no culture at all, people who in this case are supporting a regime that is harmful for their citizens and for the rest of the world.

That's all, I never said that Russians or any other nation, shouldn't be praised for their cultural achievements. So please do not twist my words.

I wasn't twisting your words, but misunderstanding them. There is a big difference. I apologise, though.

BDunnell

19th August 2008, 20:39

And then manage to decrease petrol and gas prices, by forcing the Russians to sell at a lower price? Interesting idea, if that's what you were meaning.

It could be one consequence. What I was really meaning was that none of the countries in your list have such close and significant economic ties with the West as does Russia through its natural resources. Thus, economic sanctions directed at Russia would have a greater impact.

Tomi

19th August 2008, 20:54

Talking about good leaders, who do you think that will be Georgias next president after Saakashvili resigns?

F1boat

19th August 2008, 21:38

Interesting topic, but I want to remind people that everything began when USA approved Kosovo's independence. It created a precedent and South Ossetia and Abhazia decided to use it.
Then Saakashvili, who is a pro-western dictator and not a true democrat was foolish enough to attack the Empire.
And the Empire striked back.
It has the reason - to protect Russian citizens in South Ossetia againts the Georgian aggression.
It had the precedent - Kosovo.
And technically it is right. After all the USA did, theu have little or no right to talk about South Ossetia and Abhazia.
About Georgia, it made the mistake made by Slobo - removed Abhazia and Ossetia's autonomy (spelling) and the results are logically similar. The situation is obviously the same as Kosovo, or as Tibet.
Kosovo was supported as independent state.
Chinese were blamed for oppressing Tibet.
Georgians is supported in their desire to opress Ossetians.
A perfect trap, set by the Empire, and they used it well.
So the West seems illogical and weak. Its actions against the Empire should be less unconvincing talk and more action - not military, God forbid, but find the way to make oil cheaper and you have your solution.
BTW, in this war the only true losers were the poor people from Ossetia and Georgia, who was murdered. They were completely innocent, just caught in complex geopolitical games.
While worldwide politics showed that they suck big time.

BDunnell

19th August 2008, 21:41

Interesting topic, but I want to remind people that everything began when USA approved Kosovo's independence. It created a precedent and South Ossetia and Abhazia decided to use it.

I think it's also true to say that Germany created a precedent when it recognised the independence of Slovenia and Croatia in 1991, possibly rather too soon in the eyes of some.

F1boat

19th August 2008, 21:46

I was too young back then, I don't remember ;)

Eki

20th August 2008, 06:49

Then Saakashvili, who is a pro-western dictator and not a true democrat was foolish enough to attack the Empire.
And the Empire striked back.
.
Is Saakashvili even more stupid than George W Bush, or was he just being honest in an interview for awhile:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,405722,00.html

CAVUTO: Mr. President, there are reports that our country and others had warned before you moved on South Ossetia week that the Russians were -- had a huge response planned, in other words, that this move would be a mistake, and that you ignored that advice.

SAAKASHVILI: Absolutely.

CAVUTO: Is that true?

SAAKASHVILI: No, wait a minute. Wait a minute. We did not move on South Ossetia. We responded to Russians moving in. That's exactly what they were saying, that there is a Russian buildup over the border. That's exactly what we were saying as well.

gadjo_dilo

20th August 2008, 08:53

I think that's a bit offensive to the many good people who are involved in politics, including many friends of mine.
It wasn't meant to be offensive at all. It was a reply to Ioan and was related to the elections in Russia and eastern Europe in general. In our country's elections we have to choose from a very colourful base of selection. It includes different kind of singers ( folkloric, gypsy-style, etc.) former football coaches, corrupted heads of football teams/associations, local corrupted barons, ancient agents of Ceausescu's secret service, sons of former communist leadrers, poets who glorified the communist regime,etc.

I was disgusted last week by those whom I elected 4 years ago (well I always did my duty as a citizen, even if I was not in Romania). DO you thin k I should like the way they are doing things?!.
Quod erat demonstrandum!!!!!!Maybe russians were also disgusted by the guys who won elections. What I meant is that even if we want to vote we don't have proper options and the results are always the same. That's why I generally refuse to " do my duty as a citizen ". Sometimes I vote only in the second tour when one of the candidates is really getting on my nerves. That's why I voted for the actual mayor of the city who surprisingly is doing a good job.

I didn't mention my intellectual level, I just said I could have earned lots of money in Romania too.
But you mentioned that money is not important and you simply can't live among guys with such low intelectual and social level ...It means that your level is too high. If guys like Plesu, Liiceanu or Patapievici can live here without complaints then you must be above them....

Not at all, society is the whole of the people who make up the entity that you have social interactions with. That includes, the bus driver, the girl that sells you the bread, the milk and so on, the policeman, the teachers from your child's school and so on..
Ahaaa.. That's the society you couldn't stand more than a week....I wonder what these guys whose intelectual level shouldn't be so high have done to annoy you ( as if you were obliged to have a conversation with them ) : the bus driver had shut the doors before you could get on, the girl who sells bread refused to serve you until you asked her in hungarian, the milk man broke a bottle of milk on your trousers on purpose, the policeman was too nosey, the teacher was angry that you didn't send him a post card after all the things he did for you, etc.

gadjo_dilo

20th August 2008, 09:03

Talking about good leaders, who do you think that will be Georgias next president after Saakashvili resigns?

A guy who'll be obedient to Russia. :laugh:

Rudy Tamasz

20th August 2008, 09:46

A guy who'll be obedient to Russia. :laugh:

Yeah, right. There's no stronger beast than cat. Russia will subdue everybody.

Except it won't.

Russia is a regional power, indeed. Technically it can bomb the crap out of its every neighbour and strangle everybody by stopping the supply of oil and gas. But the modern day world is tightly interconnected and Russians know that an open confrontation with the rest of the world will backfire on them. The gov't knows it especially well. Where will they keep their money if not in Switzerland? Where will they educated their kids if not in Oxbridge? Where will they have vacation with underaged nymphettes if not in Courchavel?

So they have their hard power, but its use is limited. And they terribly lack soft power in the shape of technologies, culture etc. Their current model of state is very inattractive and corrupt to the core. One has to be insane to be willingly obedient to such a country.

F1boat

20th August 2008, 09:49

Or well paid, Rudy.
Or well paid...

ioan

20th August 2008, 10:13

I wasn't twisting your words, but misunderstanding them. There is a big difference. I apologise, though.

I'm sorry for being to harsh on your post.

ioan

20th August 2008, 10:21

That's why I generally refuse to " do my duty as a citizen ".

You see, you gave me the perfect reason why I hate the Romanian society and I don't want to go back. You people continuously cry about everything, still you don't use your right to change your life in better.
It's appalling that people far from the country often travel hundreds or thousands of kilometers in order to use their vote and fulfill their duty as citizens, yet people living in Romania will sh!t on it. :rolleyes:

You lot don't know what democracy means, and that almost 20 years after so many died for it. :\

harsha

20th August 2008, 10:51

You lot don't know what democracy means, and that almost 20 years after so many died for it. :\

well what is Democracy Ioan :?:

and what makes you so sure that the country where you are residing in CAN be called a democracy???

ioan

20th August 2008, 11:06

well what is Democracy Ioan :?:

and what makes you so sure that the country where you are residing in CAN be called a democracy???

Democracy:

Democracy is a system of government by which political sovereignty is retained by the people and exercised directly by citizens. In modern times it has also been used to refer to a constitutional republic where the people have a voice through their elected representatives.

The country where I live since I left Romania is France, maybe you want to dispute the fact that France id democratic. :rolleyes:

harsha

20th August 2008, 11:22

it seems that you can state what Democracy stands for but you don't have any notion about it's meaning

gadjo_dilo

20th August 2008, 12:03

Their current model of state is very inattractive and corrupt to the core. One has to be insane to be willingly obedient to such a country.
I'm confused. I admit I don't have much knowledge on this issue but doesn't " your " ( mind the " ", I'm sure you didn't support him ) Aleksandr Lukasenko have a pro-Russia orientation? Am I wrong if I ever heard of a possible union with the Russian Federation?

If I'm wrong please accept my apologise.

ioan

20th August 2008, 12:29

it seems that you can state what Democracy stands for but you don't have any notion about it's meaning

What's your problem exactly? Did you sleep bad? Woke up on the wrong side? Are you in need of petty squabbling?

I told you what democracy is, what part of it didn't you understand?
Or maybe you are one of those who believe that Democracy = free to do whatever you want?! Sorry to disappoint you, but it isn't the case.

And given that you are such a big democracy connoisseur why don't you explain us what it is?

555-04Q2

20th August 2008, 12:33

it seems that you can state what Democracy stands for but you don't have any notion about it's meaning

Democracy is defined as = the result of the majority of idiots in a said population voting for the idiot they feel most relates to their needs.

While democracy is the currently the best form of goverment as it reflects the majority of a populations views, it is still a flawed system.

PolePosition_1

20th August 2008, 12:44

Alright.

I'm not saying you haven't studied Russia before this Georgia incident ( which I unfortunately feel ;) ) but it's different than sharing a borderline with them and having to eat e they are offering monthly basis.

When Putin was made a tzar, things really got ****ed up :mark:

All due respect, but thats a very ignorant view to take. If I understand correctly your judging me on where I live?

gadjo_dilo

20th August 2008, 12:53

You see, you gave me the perfect reason why I hate the Romanian society and I don't want to go back. You people continuously cry about everything, still you don't use your right to change your life in better.
It's appalling that people far from the country often travel hundreds or thousands of kilometers in order to use their vote and fulfill their duty as citizens, yet people living in Romania will sh!t on it. :rolleyes:

You lot don't know what democracy means, and that almost 20 years after so many died for it. :\
Ioane, I've told you I'm fed up with slogans.
And stop touching the emotional chord with old cliches like " so many died for it " They'll probably turn around in their graves if they see who are today's peolple's democratic choices. Not to mention that living in a democracy doesn't mean you're automatically a happy person.
When did you see me crying for everything? Who shall I vote for a better life? PNlL ( ha!!), PSD ( ha, ha ) , PDL ( don't tell me! ), PC ( I always had a weakness for Felix the Cat but I can't stand the security guys ), PRM ( I adore pamphlets but everything has a limit ), PNG ( perfect choice: I'm aromanian and I'm a crazy Steaua Bucharest fan ), UDMR ( I can't , I'm rather nationalist) ?
According to our constitution to vote is a right not a duty. If you think it's a duty than it also implies an obligation: to do it with reason. If my intellect ( well, that's the way I call my only one left neuron :laugh: ) says that any option is bad what shall I do? The distance to the voting booth is irelevant, the results of the elections counts. You voted from miles away and you're disgusted although the guys you voted won. I didn't, I have a rather tough life ( it's fair to say it's my fault, I can't blame society) but I'm not that unhappy to leave the country. Advantage.....?

ioan

20th August 2008, 13:55

Ioane, I've told you I'm fed up with slogans.
And stop touching the emotional chord with old cliches like " so many died for it " They'll probably turn around in their graves if they see who are today's peolple's democratic choices. Not to mention that living in a democracy doesn't mean you're automatically a happy person.
When did you see me crying for everything? Who shall I vote for a better life? PNlL ( ha!!), PSD ( ha, ha ) , PDL ( don't tell me! ), PC ( I always had a weakness for Felix the Cat but I can't stand the security guys ), PRM ( I adore pamphlets but everything has a limit ), PNG ( perfect choice: I'm aromanian and I'm a crazy Steaua Bucharest fan ), UDMR ( I can't , I'm rather nationalist) ?
According to our constitution to vote is a right not a duty. If you think it's a duty than it also implies an obligation: to do it with reason. If my intellect ( well, that's the way I call my only one left neuron :laugh: ) says that any option is bad what shall I do? The distance to the voting booth is irelevant, the results of the elections counts. You voted from miles away and you're disgusted although the guys you voted won. I didn't, I have a rather tough life ( it's fair to say it's my fault, I can't blame society) but I'm not that unhappy to leave the country. Advantage.....?

You had the chance to change this when the referendum for the uni-nominal elections was held last year. Let me remind you that only 18% of the people of with voting rights from Bucharest turned up for it, and under 50% for the whole country.

There were also a few counties where the presence was much higher (around 80%), and not surprisingly these are Transylvanian counties.

The uni-nominal electoral system would have given you the chance to elect a local candidate for the parliament, instead of a list of candidates of a certain political party.

That was your chance for having a direct representative in the parliament, and you missed it big time, mainly because of people like you who believe that voting is only a right and not a duty.

The day you will understand that everything depends on you and not on someone else, will be the day when you will be able to move forward. Until you manage that I see no reason for you to judge me, and say that I left for more money.

PS: And no the distance to the voting booth isn't irrelevant at all for those who care about the vote, it is only for those who don't go and instead chose to stay and watch some soap opera on the TV.

gadjo_dilo

20th August 2008, 15:02

You had the chance to change this when the referendum for the uni-nominal elections was held last year. Let me remind you that only 18% of the people of with voting rights from Bucharest turned up for it, and under 50% for the whole country.
There were also a few counties where the presence was much higher (around 80%), and not surprisingly these are Transylvanian counties.
The uni-nominal electoral system would have given you the chance to elect a local candidate for the parliament, instead of a list of candidates of a certain political party.
That was your chance for having a direct representative in the parliament, and you missed it big time, mainly because of people like you who believe that voting is only a right and not a duty.
The day you will understand that everything depends on you and not on someone else, will be the day when you will be able to move forward. Until you manage that I see no reason for you to judge me, and say that I left for more money.
PS: And no the distance to the voting booth isn't irrelevant at all for those who care about the vote, it is only for those who don't go and instead chose to stay and watch some soap opera on the TV.

Aceeasi Marie, cu alta palarie. :laugh: And uni-nominal my a**
First of all I HAVE this chance cos the uni-nominal system WILL work in this autumn elections.
And yes not only I'll have the chance to vote a local ( as "local" as Nastase can be in Mizil and Geoana in Dabuleni :laugh: - and remember that they are not independent they still represent a party ) candidate but also ironically we'll get more exotic choices than ever. Already confirmed : the first romanian in cosmos, a telenovela actress well-known for her bad mouth and TV scandals, a world champion in box, a folk singer, a doctor in canibalism, and so on.
The comedy show will be perfect and the performance for free. For guys like you ( in diaspora ) PSD is courting 2 surprise-candidates: Ilie Nastase and Nadia Comaneci :laugh: It's sad that you'll go again a thousand miles to vote a guy who was a great tennis champion but is not able to tie 2 words. But I'm sure he'll be able to change things and will come with new law projects.

angie1313

20th August 2008, 15:21

harsha

20th August 2008, 15:52

Democracy is defined as = the result of the majority of idiots in a said population voting for the idiot they feel most relates to their needs.

While democracy is the currently the best form of goverment as it reflects the majority of a populations views, it is still a flawed system.

very true.... :cheese:

if you want a bigger example,check out India..the so called "largest" democracy around...

the elections are still won by the "caste/religion" route.The policies are very often pro-poor which results in a large amount of Tax Burden to be borne by the guys with the white-collar jobs(the Middle-class)...ironically the middle class has very less voting power(as they currently are a minority-even though they contribute most of the taxes)

i've seen so many governments catering to the minorities...why,cause it's those fools who win them the elections,the middle class people are just bystanders...

as in the government,there is no alternate government....i mean there is no other force in the Country which is worth supporting.What do u expect when the MP's are bought for cash for their vote in a nuclear deal.

I would rather have a dictatorship government like the government of Singapore...

Oh well,one thing i'm glad of that i'm in India is atleast i know the truth(or some semblance of it)...you wouldn't know that's the case judging by some of the posts of the American Members...

ioan

20th August 2008, 20:10

First of all I HAVE this chance cos the uni-nominal system WILL work in this autumn elections.

No it won't, because it will be only a mixed system, not a 100% uninominal, and the same communists that destroyed the country for the latest 19 years will be elected again on their party's lists even if no one wants them in the parliament again.

BDunnell

20th August 2008, 20:38

You see, you gave me the perfect reason why I hate the Romanian society and I don't want to go back. You people continuously cry about everything, still you don't use your right to change your life in better.

That doesn't necessarily mean leaving for somewhere else. Others may want to stay and make the best of it. They may not have the opportunities to do anything else.

You lot don't know what democracy means, and that almost 20 years after so many died for it. :\

That really is a very patronising comment indeed.

F1boat

20th August 2008, 20:59

Then what type of system works better? Monarchs, Communist states, Dictatorships? They've all worked so well.

Wasn't Chruchill who said that democracy is an awful way of ruling, yet all other forms are even worse?

TOgoFASTER

20th August 2008, 22:37

^I think it's just what 555-04Q2 said as well. :)

A.F.F.

20th August 2008, 22:43

All due respect, but thats a very ignorant view to take. If I understand correctly your judging me on where I live?

Yes, that's what it sounds when you put it out like that. But all due respect, I didn't mean it like that.

What I meant it's not as easy to see all the things Russia do if you don't have the ringside seats as we do.

I said yourself:

You may be right. I'm not going to pretend I know the inside out of this story, or that I'm an expect on international issues (albeit I do take an interest).

But thats the facts laid down straight and in a simple form. On paper to me it looks like Russia is in the right, but people think they're wrong because of the bad media coverage they've had, led by the USA.

Whether Russia has an alterative motive, who knows, they probably do to be fair, but nothing will change the fact that Georgia started it by trying to take control of the region. And surely they'd have known Russia would have had to react whilst they had troops there (through an agreement Georgia accepted).

On paper it can look anything or people may say anything about USA's involment etc. But it's just very black and white. I bet you could have a different view if you'd have a history and their shadow over your shoulders all the time.

My point is that Russia has for years and years done the **** they do and they always seem to get away with it. And it pisses me off. They really are bullies like some already said. Their idea of diplomacy is to scare people silent. Now the opposition here in Finland is whining about our politics that it's way too much against Russia and it's risky. Apparently we have the weakest Russia relation since the WWII :eek: Well dippidii duu. If Russia's idea of relation is; "if you're not with us, you're against us" it's pretty hard to please them... unless you kiss their ***** like these conservative opposition parlament members would like.

I'm not sure whether I like the media novadays? or not It's true we get the news quicker and the whole world is able to see what they've done. But we also get that propaganda so people won't know what part to believe :mark:

Bummer I guess.

Anyway, the point for this post was sorry, didn't mean to be ignorant to you.

555-04Q2

21st August 2008, 07:32

Then what type of system works better? Monarchs, Communist states, Dictatorships? They've all worked so well.

There is no better system, Democracy is still the best form of governance. However, as I stated, it is still a flawed system. I dont think there will ever be a perfect system where all parties are catered for. Human nature does not allow for it.

555-04Q2

21st August 2008, 07:34

very true.... :cheese:

if you want a bigger example,check out India..the so called "largest" democracy around...

the elections are still won by the "caste/religion" route.The policies are very often pro-poor which results in a large amount of Tax Burden to be borne by the guys with the white-collar jobs(the Middle-class)...ironically the middle class has very less voting power(as they currently are a minority-even though they contribute most of the taxes)

i've seen so many governments catering to the minorities...why,cause it's those fools who win them the elections,the middle class people are just bystanders...

as in the government,there is no alternate government....i mean there is no other force in the Country which is worth supporting.What do u expect when the MP's are bought for cash for their vote in a nuclear deal.

I would rather have a dictatorship government like the government of Singapore...

Oh well,one thing i'm glad of that i'm in India is atleast i know the truth(or some semblance of it)...you wouldn't know that's the case judging by some of the posts of the American Members...

Sadly.....we have the same problem here :(

gadjo_dilo

21st August 2008, 07:53

No it won't, because it will be only a mixed system, not a 100% uninominal, and the same communists that destroyed the country for the latest 19 years will be elected again on their party's lists even if no one wants them in the parliament again.

AGAIN ????!!!!You use the word " AGAIN "? Who was the one who voted and now is disappointed by his choice? Me or you? Stop voting the communist and the guys from "securitate" and then come here to pull my ears. Even the uninominal vote will bring the same candidates + some "notorious" people who don't know anything about politics like Adrian-the Wonder Kid.
Now let's stop this useless dispute. It's not related to the topic and we risk to bore the others.

Rudy Tamasz

21st August 2008, 08:34

I'm confused. I admit I don't have much knowledge on this issue but doesn't " your " ( mind the " ", I'm sure you didn't support him ) Aleksandr Lukasenko have a pro-Russia orientation? Am I wrong if I ever heard of a possible union with the Russian Federation?

If I'm wrong please accept my apologise.

It is a complicated issue indeed and it is not what it seems. It is very far from the picture that the newspapers paint. "Lukashenko is pro-Russian and will sell Belarus the moment Russians come up with a decent bid." Not.

First, Lukashenko is a power freak and he used to nurse an idea of merging Belarus and Russia into a single state and becoming its president. When it did not work he decided to settle for ruling Belarus. Now he does just that and there is no way he is going to cede his power and state sovereignty Russians or anybody else. He tries to be an ally of Russia and does that pretty successfully. The word is that Belarus is dependent on Russian gas and oil, but it is only a part of the whole truth. Belarus has huge oil refineries where Russian oil get processed and the products are sold to the whole world, mostly Europe. The profits get split between Belarus and Russia and that is being done in a clandestine way. I.e. Belarus is an offshore zone for Russian tycoons. Same thing with arms trade. Russia will not sell arms to Sudan, but Belarus will. So Russia sells arms to Belarus at half price. Belarus sells it at full price and profits are shared again. It's a goldmine and this is Lukashenko's leverage against Russians. We are also the only remaining Russia's military ally and we have one of the most capable armies in the Eastern Europe and Russians have no choice but to pay a price for that. Lukashenko's is a rural type of guy, uneducated and ugly but cunny and armed with a set of animal instincts. He knows his trump cards and manipulates Russia pretty well. He also has an exit strategy. Once his relations Russia go sour, he only needs to let the opposition take part in the eletions and maybe win a couple sits, and EU and the U.S. will have to start talking to him. So it's like that no merger with Russia is envisaged any time soon.

Although I would frankly prefer Belarus to be a neutral state, on good terms with both East and West but not being a satellite of either. Oh yeah, and I still dislike Lukashenko. ;)

gadjo_dilo

21st August 2008, 08:56

Thank you Rudy. But still....we can say he's obedient to Russia, can't we?

Tomi

21st August 2008, 09:10

It is a complicated issue indeed and it is not what it seems. It is very far from the picture that the newspapers paint. "Lukashenko is pro-Russian and will sell Belarus the moment Russians come up with a decent bid." Not.

First, Lukashenko is a power freak and he used to nurse an idea of merging Belarus and Russia into a single state and becoming its president. When it did not work he decided to settle for ruling Belarus. Now he does just that and there is no way he is going to cede his power and state sovereignty Russians or anybody else. He tries to be an ally of Russia and does that pretty successfully. The word is that Belarus is dependent on Russian gas and oil, but it is only a part of the whole truth. Belarus has huge oil refineries where Russian oil get processed and the products are sold to the whole world, mostly Europe. The profits get split between Belarus and Russia and that is being done in a clandestine way. I.e. Belarus is an offshore zone for Russian tycoons. Same thing with arms trade. Russia will not sell arms to Sudan, but Belarus will. So Russia sells arms to Belarus at half price. Belarus sells it at full price and profits are shared again. It's a goldmine and this is Lukashenko's leverage against Russians. We are also the only remaining Russia's military ally and we have one of the most capable armies in the Eastern Europe and Russians have no choice but to pay a price for that. Lukashenko's is a rural type of guy, uneducated and ugly but cunny and armed with a set of animal instincts. He knows his trump cards and manipulates Russia pretty well. He also has an exit strategy. Once his relations Russia go sour, he only needs to let the opposition take part in the eletions and maybe win a couple sits, and EU and the U.S. will have to start talking to him. So it's like that no merger with Russia is envisaged any time soon.

Although I would frankly prefer Belarus to be a neutral state, on good terms with both East and West but not being a satellite of either. Oh yeah, and I still dislike Lukashenko. ;)

What do you think will Russia place missiles in Belarus, now when Poland agreed to take the us missiles on their soil?

Rudy Tamasz

21st August 2008, 09:10

Thank you Rudy. But still....we can say he's obedient to Russia, can't we?

Junior partner, yes. Obedient, no. In time of disagreement with Russia he indluges in such anti-Russian rhetoric, it would make Saakashvili go green of envy.

F1boat

21st August 2008, 09:44

gadjo_dilo

21st August 2008, 10:19

I am asking because the name of Belarus sounds a lot like "White Russia".

Or like " Beautiful Russia " for latins.

Tomi

21st August 2008, 10:23

I am asking because the name of Belarus sounds a lot like "White Russia".

or more like a tractor :)

Rudy Tamasz

21st August 2008, 10:43

What do you think will Russia place missiles in Belarus, now when Poland agreed to take the us missiles on their soil?

My guess is no. The furthest it gets will be the inegrated anti-aircraft defense system. But then I've often been wrong with my predictions and this has the likelihood of 50%, either yes, or, well, no.

Tomi

21st August 2008, 10:47

My guess is no. The furthest it gets will be the inegrated anti-aircraft defense system. But then I've often been wrong with my predictions and this has the likelihood of 50%, either yes, or, well, no.

Ahaa, the miltary experts here thinks its likely they will place in Belarus or in Kronstadt or in both.

Rudy Tamasz

21st August 2008, 11:03

Rudy, if it is not annoying to you, can you tell me (us) more about Belarus and it's people and the differences between you and the Russians. I am asking because the name of Belarus sounds a lot like "White Russia".
Thank you in advance.

The very name 'Belarus' is a derivative of Rus'. Rus' was an early mediaeval state between Baltic and Black seas. It was founded in 9th century as a political compromise between the local Slavic, Baltic and Finnic communities and the companies of Scandinavians pirates and traders that were wandering there. Those Scandinavians called themselves 'rots' that meant 'rowers' and in Slavic dialects it mutated to 'rus'. Since the first ruling dynasty was Scandinavian, the name stuck to the whole region. In Latin it was spelled as 'Russia' or 'Ruthenia'. Rus' disintegrated very soon and mediaeval scholars had to distingush between its different regions, which they did using colour symblolics. Parts of modern day Belarus were called 'Ruthenia Alba', or White Rus (Bielaja Rus in Belarusian) as early as 14 century. So initially it was just a geographic name. But by early 17 century when most of the elements of the emerging Belarusian ethnie were in place, the scholarly name was picked to indicate a new people. And in early 20 century when the Russian Empire broke up and Belarusians became a political nation, it was used as a name for the whole country.

Russia kinda privatized the Latinized version of the name 'Rus' but ironically they do not use the original version in their language other than poeticallypreferring a Hellenized version 'Rossiya' instead.

Historically the path of Belarus was different from Russia's. After the breakup of Rus' Belarusians felt pretty comfortable with the Grand Duchy of Lithuania and Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth

Rudy Tamasz

21st August 2008, 11:13

...(continued, sorry)... ;) and then were forcefully occupied by Russia. However, by early 20 century Belarusians lost their elites, assimilated by stronger neighbours and became a nation of farmers. Because of that many Belarusians accepted the leftist ideas managed to turn the leftist modernization in the Soviet Union to their favor. Belarusians did pretty well in the USSR and still keep much of the Soviet heritage including cultural achievements, industrial potential, welfare state and decent infrastructure. Here lie the roots of the current pro-Russian policies of the Belarus' govt.

Ethnically we are different from Russians with a separate language, a unique folk culture and psychological dispositions. We are much more rational, cold-blooded and reserved. Diligent workers, but not very creative. Disciplined implementers but lack leadrship skills. Very practical, economical and thorough, but sometimes let small details get in the way of the bigger picture. Still growing up as a nation. :)

PolePosition_1

21st August 2008, 11:58

Yes, that's what it sounds when you put it out like that. But all due respect, I didn't mean it like that.

What I meant it's not as easy to see all the things Russia do if you don't have the ringside seats as we do.

I said yourself:

On paper it can look anything or people may say anything about USA's involment etc. But it's just very black and white. I bet you could have a different view if you'd have a history and their shadow over your shoulders all the time.

My point is that Russia has for years and years done the **** they do and they always seem to get away with it. And it pisses me off. They really are bullies like some already said. Their idea of diplomacy is to scare people silent. Now the opposition here in Finland is whining about our politics that it's way too much against Russia and it's risky. Apparently we have the weakest Russia relation since the WWII :eek: Well dippidii duu. If Russia's idea of relation is; "if you're not with us, you're against us" it's pretty hard to please them... unless you kiss their ***** like these conservative opposition parlament members would like.

I'm not sure whether I like the media novadays? or not It's true we get the news quicker and the whole world is able to see what they've done. But we also get that propaganda so people won't know what part to believe :mark:

Bummer I guess.

Anyway, the point for this post was sorry, didn't mean to be ignorant to you.

Yeah, sorry just thought it came across as harsh, if you didn't mean it to come across that way apology accepted and no hard feelings :) .

I agree and accept Russia aren't the good guys, as I've said in seveal posts. I'm just pointing out the obvious. Plus they're not as much as bullies as America.

And to be fair, bullying is part of world politics, we'd never agree on anything if we all depended on conversation and negotiation. Pressure and incentives have to be used, and they're a form of bullying. Biggest world bullies in my eyes is America.

But back to this case, I don't particularly see what Russia is meant to have done. They probably do have another motive other than protecting their own people, but Georgia went in knowing it would force Russia into action.

This doesn't make Russia the good guys, but it definately doesn't make Russia the evil monstors (in this instance) in the wrong in this instant like the media (led by USA) would have us believe.

Roamy

21st August 2008, 17:23

doesn't make Russia the evil monstors

Well why don't you go tour the country and get back to us on the evil???

F1boat

21st August 2008, 19:19

ioan

21st August 2008, 20:19

Ahaa, the miltary experts here thinks its likely they will place in Belarus or in Kronstadt or in both.

Kronstadt?!

ioan

21st August 2008, 20:24

Yeah, sorry just thought it came across as harsh, if you didn't mean it to come across that way apology accepted and no hard feelings :) .

I agree and accept Russia aren't the good guys, as I've said in seveal posts. I'm just pointing out the obvious. Plus they're not as much as bullies as America.

And to be fair, bullying is part of world politics, we'd never agree on anything if we all depended on conversation and negotiation. Pressure and incentives have to be used, and they're a form of bullying. Biggest world bullies in my eyes is America.

But back to this case, I don't particularly see what Russia is meant to have done. They probably do have another motive other than protecting their own people, but Georgia went in knowing it would force Russia into action.

This doesn't make Russia the good guys, but it definately doesn't make Russia the evil monstors (in this instance) in the wrong in this instant like the media (led by USA) would have us believe.

Russia was supposed to retreat from Georgia already a week ago, according to a treaty they signed with the mediation of the French president, yet they are still in Georgia and today they captured retained a French minister for 3 hours?!

Now, tell me again that they aren't the bad ones in this story! :rolleyes:

BTW, Russia announced today that they are freezing their cooperation with NATO.

Tomi

21st August 2008, 20:55

Kronstadt?!

Not Braşov, the other one.

Tomi

21st August 2008, 21:20

Ahaa, the miltary experts here thinks its likely they will place in Belarus or in Kronstadt or in both.
and also to Köningsberg = Kaliningrad

ioan

21st August 2008, 21:36

Not Braşov, the other one.

OK, I was a bit worried there! ;)

PolePosition_1

22nd August 2008, 10:03

Russia was supposed to retreat from Georgia already a week ago, according to a treaty they signed with the mediation of the French president, yet they are still in Georgia and today they captured retained a French minister for 3 hours?!

Now, tell me again that they aren't the bad ones in this story! :rolleyes:

BTW, Russia announced today that they are freezing their cooperation with NATO.

Russia today announced they're moving all combat troops from Georgia.

Georgia went in and killed civilians on the 7th of August.

I'm not saying Russia is the good guy, but I'm saying Georgia isn't the good guy either.

Surely you can see the difference in how the media is portraying Russia and Georgia?

ioan

22nd August 2008, 10:17

Russia today announced they're moving all combat troops from Georgia.

They announced the same thing 1 week ago.

Georgia went in and killed civilians on the 7th of August.

Or at least that is what Russia is saying.
What Georgia did is counter the Osetian movements. And those were not civil but guerrilla fighters supported by Russia.

Surely you can see the difference in how the media is portraying Russia and Georgia?

Yep, and I think that they are right. Russia attacked an independent and sovereign country, Georgia didn't. Surely you can see the difference.

PolePosition_1

22nd August 2008, 11:18

They announced the same thing 1 week ago.

Or at least that is what Russia is saying.
What Georgia did is counter the Osetian movements. And those were not civil but guerrilla fighters supported by Russia.

Yep, and I think that they are right. Russia attacked an independent and sovereign country, Georgia didn't. Surely you can see the difference.

My understanding was that they agreed to move back into OS, and they moved back, but remained in Georgia in the buffer regions to protect themselves.

Russia and Tbilisi agree on plan, however USA and Nato reject this.

I read interesting articule on BBC website abuot eyewitness accounts, saying Georgia killed many civilians, but I can't find it atm, but will keep looking and find you a link :)

You claiming SO is an independent and sovereign country?

ioan

22nd August 2008, 13:31

My understanding was that they agreed to move back into OS, and they moved back, but remained in Georgia in the buffer regions to protect themselves.

Against who or what?!

Russia and Tbilisi agree on plan, however USA and Nato reject this.

:confused:

You claiming SO is an independent and sovereign country?

I was talking about Georgia. :rolleyes:
Not to mention that South Osetia is also part of Georgia.

PolePosition_1

22nd August 2008, 13:36

Against who or what?!

:confused:

I was talking about Georgia. :rolleyes:
Not to mention that South Osetia is also part of Georgia.

Against Georgian troops.

Yep, Russia and Tbili agreed on a peace plan.

Officially SO isn't independent. But majority of people there class themselves as Russian.

ioan

22nd August 2008, 16:17

Against Georgian troops.

:laugh: The menacing Georgian troops! :laugh:

Yep, Russia and Tbili agreed on a peace plan.

I know, what I want to know is what were you blabbering about the uSA and NATO not agreeing with it! Common, spit the beans.

Officially SO isn't independent. But majority of people there class themselves as Russian.

I was talking about Georgia being independent, not about SO, why do you continuously go back to talking about SO and it's independence?!

Drew

22nd August 2008, 17:21

Officially SO isn't independent. But majority of people there class themselves as Russian.

No, the Russian government purposefully gave them Russian passports in order to "justify" an invasion of Georgian territory to protect "its people". They are no more Russian than the Georgian volleyball teams are Georgian.

Now Russia wants to keep 2000 troops in Georgia. Make of that waht you will..

PolePosition_1

22nd August 2008, 17:34

:laugh: The menacing Georgian troops! :laugh:

I know, what I want to know is what were you blabbering about the uSA and NATO not agreeing with it! Common, spit the beans.

I was talking about Georgia being independent, not about SO, why do you continuously go back to talking about SO and it's independence?!

Yeah, the Georgian troops killing people. Same as Russian troops.

Because Nato and USA rejected their proposal. The Russian and Tbili proposal seemed like a reasonable compromise, while the one proposed by France was totally in favour of Georgia.

Because the issue is all about SO. It has some importance to the situation.

PS: Why be so agressive and patronising in your posts? Whats wrong with disagreeing and discussing it maturely? Can I ask your age?

PolePosition_1

22nd August 2008, 17:36

No, the Russian government purposefully gave them Russian passports in order to "justify" an invasion of Georgian territory to protect "its people". They are no more Russian than the Georgian volleyball teams are Georgian.

Now Russia wants to keep 2000 troops in Georgia. Make of that waht you will..

Could you source that for me Drew?

In all I've read about this, I have not come across this. All I've come across is that majority of people see themselves as Russian.

Drew

22nd August 2008, 17:39

Could you source that for me Drew?

In all I've read about this, I have not come across this. All I've come across is that majority of people see themselves as Russian.

Are you asking me to source about the Russians giving the people in South Ossetia and Abkhazia Russian passports or about Russia maintaining 2000 troops in Georgia?

F1boat

22nd August 2008, 22:31

I hope that SO and Abhazia get what they want, independence, and then I hope that Georgia will be free to do what it wants with its country.
There are only losers in wars.

Roamy

23rd August 2008, 00:48

I hope that SO and Abhazia get what they want, independence, and then I hope that Georgia will be free to do what it wants with its country.
There are only losers in wars.
hopefully but then probably california would want theirs too

Mikeall

23rd August 2008, 02:01

It makes sense to use overwhelming force to finish a dispute quickly and ends up better for both sides as less casualties will be endured and less money spent.

F1boat

23rd August 2008, 07:20

hopefully but then probably california would want theirs too

I hope not ;) Still Kosovo created a dangerous precedent. Hopefully more people will understand that in global world it is better not to have borders at all, then to make stupid wars in the style of the 19th century.

A.F.F.

23rd August 2008, 11:24

hopefully but then probably california would want theirs too

Don't worry. Schwarzenegger was elected to lead, not to read :)

Daniel

23rd August 2008, 15:06

There was a demonstration here Gdansk today. Seems some poles don't want the missiles here.

Tomi

23rd August 2008, 15:13

There was a demonstration here Gdansk today. Seems some poles don't want the missiles here.

Why would they? What are you doing there?

Daniel

23rd August 2008, 15:20

Here for a wedding. You could argue that it gives them some protection from Russia and means support will come from the US. Or you could say it makes them more of a target.

Roamy

23rd August 2008, 16:28

actually I oppose the missiles as well. you guys should defend yourselves if you think you need it. I don't need to be paying higher taxes for this sh!t. Plus they would just build nuclear cruise missiles which wouldn't be shot down. We can pick off a ICBM as it approaches our country. This is stupid and only causes more world tension.

Eki

23rd August 2008, 17:40

No, the Russian government purposefully gave them Russian passports in order to "justify" an invasion of Georgian territory to protect "its people".
Do you think they didn't want a Russian passport? I find it unlikely that anyone can give passports of another nation to someone who doesn't want it.

BDunnell

23rd August 2008, 17:58

There was a demonstration here Gdansk today. Seems some poles don't want the missiles here.

I think the Polish leadership has played this quite well. After all, the current government was elected in part because the previous administration was perceived to have been thoughtlessly pro-American and aligned the nation too closely with American foreign and defence policies. I'm sure the government under Donald Tusk, which had previously stated some degree of opposition to hosting the missiles, will have extracted some other concessions from the US during the negotiations — the promise of a good deal on some more F-16 fighters, perhaps?

Daniel

23rd August 2008, 20:24

No idea. Perhaps I should have asked some people at the wedding. Or not :)

Rudy Tamasz

26th August 2008, 15:39

janneppi

26th August 2008, 17:19

thus completing what the West started in Kosovo: destroying the world order that had existed since WWII.
In way it's natural, Europe and Asia is made out of countless small nations, often the smaller ones have had very little say in which bigger country they in any given time belong to. I doubt you'll find many, if not any countries in Eurasia that don't have any ethnic tensions going back decades, or even hundreds of years.
The borders that were drawn after WW2 are just as artificial as the ones drawn after the first world war, or the dozens of skirmishes before that.

All it takes is a bit ethnic prejudice and a charismatic nutcase and things go to the toilet in five years. :)

ioan

26th August 2008, 18:08

Russia has just recognized the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, thus completing what the West started in Kosovo: destroying the world order that had existed since WWII. Hold tight guys, we are in for a big turmoil.

This could get nasty!

Anyone has knowledge of a vacant place in a scientific expedition to the South Pole, for a few years at least?! I'll be happy to join. :D

ioan

26th August 2008, 18:14

All it takes is a bit ethnic prejudice and a charismatic nutcase and things go to the toilet in five years. :)

You're very optimistic, sometimes a few months are more than enough.

BDunnell

26th August 2008, 20:15

The sad thing about this is that Russia presents little military threat, except to smaller countries with small armed forces — such as Georgia. Putin and Medvedev's appeal is based largely on making the Russian public think that their nation is a great power again. By managing to run riot through Georgia in this way, Russia's leaders have done something that appeals to their electoral base, providing them with more justification for anti-Western rhetoric which also goes down well — and all this based on what is in effect a lie, namely that Russia's forces are powerful and well-equipped. In the same way, without doing anything to really justify it, Russia has made the West look weak and, with particular reference to Iraq, hypocritical.

Eki

26th August 2008, 22:01

Russia has made the West look weak and, with particular reference to Iraq, hypocritical.
Not to mention Kosovo. If the "West" can recognize Kosovo's independence, why couldn't Russia recognize independence of Southern Ossetia and Abhasia?

Daniel

26th August 2008, 22:10

Two wrongs don't make a right.

F1boat

27th August 2008, 08:18

Not to mention Kosovo. If the "West" can recognize Kosovo's independence, why couldn't Russia recognize independence of Southern Ossetia and Abhasia?

I agree. I don't like Russia, but if Ossetians and Abhazians do not like to live with the Georgians, they have the right to be independent.

Rudy Tamasz

27th August 2008, 08:58

I agree. I don't like Russia, but if Ossetians and Abhazians do not like to live with the Georgians, they have the right to be independent.

And that's exactly what every bearded guerilla in the jungle or in the mountains thinks with an AK in his hand: Hell, now I can do this!

I really have a sympathy for smaller peoples who unsuccessfully tried to establish an independent state for centuries, but if everybody declares independence that will really upset the apple cart.

leopard

27th August 2008, 09:26

I think they have their own reasons why would Ossetians and Abkhazians do not like to live with the Georgians. If the independence was promoted by reasons of they are historically different and logically acceptable, then they deserve of it. What was their fault so that we do not like certain people, Russians or anything else?

BDunnell

27th August 2008, 11:05

And that's exactly what every bearded guerilla in the jungle or in the mountains thinks with an AK in his hand: Hell, now I can do this!

I really have a sympathy for smaller peoples who unsuccessfully tried to establish an independent state for centuries, but if everybody declares independence that will really upset the apple cart.

:up:

And a lot of the time there is little reason to call for independence. If your country is seriously oppressed or had a long tradition of independence interrupted forcibly, for instance, then fine.

Garry Walker

27th August 2008, 14:16

To be honest, I think you are thinking the same way most West European politicians think, you, and implicitly them, do not know what should be done. Because of the lack of knowledge and because of the fear.

I do believe that there are few real politicians in western Europe at this moment, few people of the caliber of let's say Sir Winston Churchill.

So all they do is talk without converging towards an answer. Meanwhile the Russian get more powerful by the day. In the end we will be again saved by the USA.

The politicians in western europe currently are all weak and pathetic. Someone like Reagan would be good now, but hey, we have Brown and Merkel, those 2 superb and successful leaders.

Armed conflict? Who said we have to go to war with them?! I'm in no way advocating for WWIII.

What I meant to say is that the western powers should realize that every time that Russia does a "Georgia" or "Tchetchenia" we should not only condemn them because they don't even care about it.
We need to punish them. Throw them out of the G8, move the Winter Olympic Games to another place than Soci, suspend the right for Russian companies to operate outside of Russia. There is a need to show them that we are not afraid even if it's not the case.

And if someone thinks that such measures would trigger a nuclear war, than they are completely wrong. Russian leaders aren't stupid, they aren't working to get fantastically rich just to destroy everything with a war they know they can't win (GB, France or Germany, any of them can win a war against Russia anytime, not to mention USA).

Of course I agree with this, even though I would have gotten even more extreme with actions against Russia.

Those regions were not independent region that Georgia decided to take over, those are separatist regions that were not granted independence by anyone but themselves, not even by the Russians.

And there are Georgians living in those regions too, and those were under fire from the Osetian separatists.

So if we decide to put facts on the table than it's fair to put them all, not just those who support a certain POV.

And if Russia was only there for peace keeping in those 2 regions, than why did they feel the urge to go deep into Georgia, attacking and destroying the town of Gori, also attacking Tbilissi. Killing a few journalists and so on?! Do you call that peace keeping?! :rolleyes:
Good post, again.

Ioan, I'm not saying Russia is the innocent party here. I'm just saying its not all poor Georgia and the baddie Russia.

They're both guilty parties, all three including the SO troops.

But I'm just looking at the facts, Georgia decided to get involved, this put 70,000 odd Russian civilians at risk, they were hardly going to let this happen without taking any action. And presumably Georgia knew this, therefore provoking the conflict.

Why have Russia gone in so deep? My understand is that they've gone into Georgia to take control of certain strategic towns (such as Tbilissi) to block off any Georgian troops entering SO from the eastern and western side.

That would make sense, but again, I stress, its highly likely they have other motives. But I'm just looking at the facts, and while Russia are not innocent, far from it, Georgia are more to blame than Russia, yet only Russia is getting the bad press.

So while I understand everyone's concerns, I'm just slightly puzzled as to why no one is laying into Georgia? I'm also slightly dismayed, as I am guessing much of this is because of the media coverage, and how unfair and biased the media is and influential on peoples opinions :(

Are you trolling?

Russia today announced they're moving all combat troops from Georgia.

Georgia went in and killed civilians on the 7th of August.

I'm not saying Russia is the good guy, but I'm saying Georgia isn't the good guy either.

Surely you can see the difference in how the media is portraying Russia and Georgia?

Have you followed this topic at all, do you have any understanding of this conflict or how this came on at all?
Read some of Ioans posts.

Can I ask your age?
I think we all are dying to know yours too.

Eki

27th August 2008, 21:34

Two wrongs don't make a right.
But one wrong makes a precedent that others might like to follow.

Daniel

27th August 2008, 21:35

But one wrong makes a precedent that others might like to follow.
And after your post two wrongs STILL don't make a right!

Eki

27th August 2008, 21:41

And after your post two wrongs STILL don't make a right!
No, but your post causes me to post one more time. Right or wrong. It's not about right or wrong, but about who gets the last word and gets to be the "King of the Hill".

gloomyDAY

27th August 2008, 23:39

I'm laughing about this entire situation.

1) Georgia provokes Russia by combating separatists. I'm sure the Georgian's believed that America would back their cause and give them more than just humanitarian aid. Unfortunately, America is caught up in two separate wars.

2) Europe has done nothing but talk. Do European diplomats do anything besides talk? Russian's do NOT understand anything besides force. Must be unsettling knowing that a less powerful country, in terms of military and economic force, are able to bully Western Europe.

Anyone mind posting solutions? Too bad the Ruskies have nuclear weapons or else a nice little bombing run in the middle of Stalingrad would do the trick.

Tomi

27th August 2008, 23:47

Do European diplomats do anything besides talk?
What does diplomats elsewhere do then?

ioan

28th August 2008, 00:10

2) Europe has done nothing but talk. Do European diplomats do anything besides talk? Russian's do NOT understand anything besides force. Must be unsettling knowing that a less powerful country, in terms of military and economic force, are able to bully Western Europe.

It's always been like this. They chicken out and hope the USA comes to rescue. A few years after they just show the finger to the US and after a few more years the cycle starts again. Boring huh?

gloomyDAY

28th August 2008, 03:08

What does diplomats elsewhere do then?Call for action.

For example, "Russia has decided to be uncooperative with our terms. Therefore, [insert consequences] will be imposed."

Also, you're a Finn! Being complacent about the Russians flying their helicopters over your border's is unbelievable. How about shooting their planes down? The Russians enter Finnish sovereign territory and all the Finn's can do is shake a finger at the Ruskies.

It's always been like this. They chicken out and hope the USA comes to rescue. A few years after they just show the finger to the US and after a few more years the cycle starts again. Boring huh?Yes, this is more repetitive than NASCAR.

Doesn't anyone feel insecure with such a hostile nation on Europe's heels?

Tomi

28th August 2008, 05:35

Also, you're a Finn! Being complacent about the Russians flying their helicopters over your border's is unbelievable. How about shooting their planes down? The Russians enter Finnish sovereign territory and all the Finn's can do is shake a finger at the Ruskies.

Lol, well a civiliced country dont shoot down foreign planes that for short moments are on the wrong side of the border, they only are reported and dealt in other ways in 99% of the countries in the world.

Eki

28th August 2008, 06:22

Must be unsettling knowing that a less powerful country, in terms of military and economic force, are able to bully Western Europe.

As far as I know, Georgia is not in Western Europe, and Russia has done nothing to Western Europe.

gloomyDAY

28th August 2008, 07:00

Lol, well a civiliced country dont shoot down foreign planes that for short moments are on the wrong side of the border, they only are reported and dealt in other ways in 99% of the countries in the world.These may seem as meaningless encroachments, but over time just gives Russia more time to build confidence and assert its power. A civilized nation defends its people.

As far as I know, Georgia is not in Western Europe, and Russia has done nothing to Western Europe.I never mentioned that Georgia is part of Western Europe. I did mention that Russia is on your heels! Russia can direct that force onto countries a stones throw away from Georgia.

How can you say Russia has done nothing to Western Europe? The Ruskies are holding Western Europe hostage with their barrels of oil. Cut that bargaining chip immediately and watch them fall.

Tomi

28th August 2008, 07:08

A civilized nation defends its people..

I dont recall that we should have been attaced in long time, btw how many us planes has Mexico shot down because of same reasons, or even reported?

gloomyDAY

28th August 2008, 07:21

I dont recall that we should have been attaced in long time, btw how many us planes has Mexico shot down because of same reasons, or even reported?I shudder at the thought of a Mexican combat helicopter crossing into the American border. The end result probably wouldn't be delightful. There hasn't been any incidents reported about American planes straying into Mexican airspace either.

Most air traffic is civilian. Also, the American and Mexican government have been known to share tactical information, via air reconnaisance, to tackle drug problems.

Tomi

28th August 2008, 07:48

I shudder at the thought of a Mexican combat helicopter crossing into the American border. The end result probably wouldn't be delightful. There hasn't been any incidents reported about American planes straying into Mexican airspace either.

Most air traffic is civilian. Also, the American and Mexican government have been known to share tactical information, via air reconnaisance, to tackle drug problems.

Here those happens usually in the Finnish gulf, where the airspace is very narrow, I think they cross often the Estonian airspace as well, but as I said earlier its common everywhere where the airspace is narrow, everyone does just not report the issues, but handle it the diplomatic way or have somekind of agreements, I dont think the Finnish people loose their sleep because of thiskind of things.

gloomyDAY

28th August 2008, 08:11

Here those happens usually in the Finnish gulf, where the airspace is very narrow, I think they cross often the Estonian airspace as well, but as I said earlier its common everywhere where the airspace is narrow, everyone does just not report the issues, but handle it the diplomatic way or have somekind of agreements, I dont think the Finnish people loose their sleep because of thiskind of things.
You're not understanding my point. Russia has recently cultivated enough power to have a few bargaining chips in the world. After going bankrupt, being humiliated and ransacked of its former nations that made up the Warsaw Pact, the Russians now feel obliged to stop the push of the West into Russia. Where is the initial resistance? Georgia.

Georgia is a nation that decided to stop separatists. Russia tried to do the same with Chechnya (yes, the irony). Now read this part of my argument very carefully: Georgia is a nation that is completely democratic and was within its own right to reclaim land it rightfully owns. No one should have played a role in this besides the unlawful separatists and the Georgian government. Russia overstepped its bounds by using military force to subjugate a neighboring nation for its own gain.

How does this relate to you? Well Finland and other Nordic nations are going to begin competing for oil resources against Russia (maybe this can make you lose some sleep). This means that tension may rise significantly in the near future. Therefore, putting on a strong face now may inhibit the Russians from further expansion of their little game of roulette.

gadjo_dilo

28th August 2008, 08:12

It's always been like this. They chicken out and hope the USA comes to rescue. A few years after they just show the finger to the US and after a few more years the cycle starts again. Boring huh?
Always, always, always....However Europe has a bit of history while USA is quite "young". On the other hand USA never come to rescue, they just follow their political and economic interests like any other powerful country.

Being complacent about the Russians flying their helicopters over your border's is unbelievable. How about shooting their planes down? The Russians enter Finnish sovereign territory and all the Finn's can do is shake a finger at the Ruskies.
Those who had the bad luck to share a border with russians use to be wise enough to avoid them. Even when they are "invited " they forget to leave ( see the Afghanistan episode ) :laugh:

How can you say Russia has done nothing to Western Europe? The Ruskies are holding Western Europe hostage with their barrels of oil. Cut that bargaining chip immediately and watch them fall..
Ha! That's what every normal country does on a free market economy. Aren't also a lot of undeveloped countries financially and economic dependant on western economies? What is Russia supposed to do? Ignore its main resource and do humanitarian acts? Like :come on, Europe, we have plenty of gas and it's for free!

gloomyDAY

28th August 2008, 08:26

Ha! That's what every normal country does on a free market economy. Aren't also a lot of undeveloped countries financially and economic dependant on western economies? What is Russia supposed to do? Ignore its main resource and do humanitarian acts? Like :come on, Europe, we have plenty of gas and it's for free!This is probably the reason why America went to war with Iraq. OPEC is a cartel that would just choke the United States out of its oil resources, so America just went out of its way to find some sludge. Was it unjust? Sure. Was it strategically beneficial to the sustenance of the American economy? Yes!

Camelopard

28th August 2008, 08:32

Was it unjust? Sure. Was it strategically beneficial to the sustenance of the American economy? Yes!

Try telling that to the families and the loved ones of the 4,000 plus US servicemen killed, not to mention those that have been injured. :mad:

But hey, anything that makes the value of my Halliburton shares increase is good news to me. :rolleyes:

gloomyDAY

28th August 2008, 08:39

Try telling that to the families and the loved ones of the 4,000 plus US servicemen killed, not to mention those that have been injured. :mad:

But hey, anything that makes the value of my Halliburton shares increase is good news to me. :rolleyes: Tough pill to swallow.

This why America is such a juggernaut. Callousness is an advantage.

Tomi

28th August 2008, 08:46

How does this relate to you? Well Finland and other Nordic nations are going to begin competing for oil resources against Russia (maybe this can make you lose some sleep). This means that tension may rise significantly in the near future. Therefore, putting on a strong face now may inhibit the Russians from further expansion of their little game of roulette.

Well, I belive we buy our oil just like before, just like most of the countries have to do, but I agree the tension will rise atleast for awhile.
What comes to Georgias democracy, I think we soon will see how it works, if it works, I think everyone can agree that Saakhasvili did a major missjudgement, that took his country in big problems, wonder what the opposition has to say about that.
Im more worried about some of theese former east-european EU member countries going behind EU's back to seek personal revenge by hinder desition making, and by that way making EU a hostage, there has been signs of that already.

Camelopard

28th August 2008, 08:50

This why America is such a juggernaut. Callousness is an advantage.

Yep, your economy is a real juggernaut at the moment, going backwards :) . How many more banks will be bailed out by the federal reserve? How does that work in a capitalist free market society?
Sounds namby pamby leftest talk to me, should just let them die after all it is a business for them and if they make bad loans, tough titties?

What's the US current account deficit at the moment? How many more companies moving the labour intensive factories to Mexico? How's your balance of payments with the PRC at the moment, need I go on?

gloomyDAY

28th August 2008, 08:52

Well, I belive we buy our oil just like before, just like most of the countries have to do, but I agree the tension will rise atleast for awhile.
What comes to Georgias democracy, I think we soon will see how it works, if it works, I think everyone can agree that Saakhasvili did a major missjudgement, that took his country in big problems, wonder what the opposition has to say about that.
Im more worried about some of theese former east-european EU member countries going behind EU's back to seek personal revenge by hinder desition making, and by that way making EU a hostage, there has been signs of that already.Saakashvili, oh what an idiot. He really did make a mess out of this entire situation. As I stated before, Georgia probably thought that America would be there to help against any Russian resistance. Fortunately, I think we have hit rock bottom. We can only go up from here as countries realize the importance of a peaceful region in the Caucasus.

Can you present an example of EU member stalling legislation?

Tomi

28th August 2008, 08:58

[I]Can you present an example of EU member stalling legislation?

Poland, in the EU-Russian WTO negotiations.

gloomyDAY

28th August 2008, 08:58

Yep, your economy is a real juggernaut at the moment, going backwards :) . How many more banks will be bailed out by the federal reserve? How does that work in a capitalist free market society?
Sounds namby pamby leftest talk to me, should just let them die after all it is a business for them and if they make bad loans, tough titties?

What's the US current account deficit at the moment? How many more companies moving the labour intensive factories to Mexico? How's your balance of payments with the PRC at the moment, need I go on?Go ahead. Keep on talking.

The ramifications of a poor America will be seen the world over. Most nations currency is based on the U.S. dollar, therefore, it would be in everyone's interest for America to prosper.

1) American economy going backwards? No, there is still growth. America is fighting inflation and that is an issue non-unique to the States.

2) Banks need to be bailed out because so much capital is invested within those companies. Fannie and Fred owe Americans for their spare chance, but if those companies tanked trillions of dollars in assets would have gone down with them. These economic occurrences happen! Prosperity cannot be met without hurdles along the way.

3) I typically chuckle at the argument with the PRC. Where would China be without America? Digging trash out of wheelie bins. America's capital runs the nation of China and expect those deficits to erode over time.

gloomyDAY

28th August 2008, 09:02

Poland, in the EU-Russian WTO negotiations.You really think that comes down to vendetta? I thought they had a reasonable argument. No one wants to be blackmailed nor stand up against a resurgence of an Eastern European bloc.

Eki

28th August 2008, 09:58

I never mentioned that Georgia is part of Western Europe. I did mention that Russia is on your heels! Russia can direct that force onto countries a stones throw away from Georgia.
If they had a reason. Currently they don't have. As long as Western Europe keeps on buying their oil, it's more use for them to have peace with Western Europe.

gadjo_dilo

28th August 2008, 09:59

This is probably the reason why America went to war with Iraq. OPEC is a cartel that would just choke the United States out of its oil resources, so America just went out of its way to find some sludge. Was it unjust? Sure. Was it strategically beneficial to the sustenance of the American economy? Yes!

Oh really? Do you mean that all that " war against terrorism " was only dust in our eyes? :laugh:

Anyway, intersesting questions, cynical answers. It's still one more question that you omitted: If the reason is the one you mentioned was it fair to imply so many other countries in a war for US's own interests? If your answer will be again "Yes", then I want to know why.

This why America is such a juggernaut. Callousness is an advantage!
This is why more and more people have an antiamerican attitude.

Daniel

28th August 2008, 10:01

If they had a reason. Currently they don't have. As long as Western Europe keeps on buying their oil, it's more use for them to have peace with Western Europe.
The other forum Finn's didn't seem to think all was good as long as Russia was at war with Finland or someone else.

ioan

28th August 2008, 13:09

Call for action.

For example, "Russia has decided to be uncooperative with our terms. Therefore, [insert consequences] will be imposed."

Also, you're a Finn! Being complacent about the Russians flying their helicopters over your border's is unbelievable. How about shooting their planes down? The Russians enter Finnish sovereign territory and all the Finn's can do is shake a finger at the Ruskies.

Yes, this is more repetitive than NASCAR.

Doesn't anyone feel insecure with such a hostile nation on Europe's heels?

Western European countries never had direct rough contact with the Russians (excepting eastern Germans), they know that there is a buffer between them and the reds, so they try to do what is better for their economies at this moment, i.e. nothing.

Who care is Russia will disrupt Ukraine or Moldavia, Lithuania, Estonia or even Poland? As long as they don't show up on Germany's or France's door step these won't budge at all.

Finland is living 100% on Russian gas, so they won't say anything either.

ioan

28th August 2008, 13:12

This is why more and more people have an antiamerican attitude.

And I call those people idiots and invite them to move to Russia, cause with such a stupid attitude they will be living in Russia soon enough anyway.

gadjo_dilo

28th August 2008, 13:52

And I call those people idiots and invite them to move to Russia, cause with such a stupid attitude they will be living in Russia soon enough anyway.
Well, I reckon some people of the forum could be ofended but at the end of the day who cares of your opinion? :laugh:

Who care is Russia will disrupt Ukraine or Moldavia, Lithuania, Estonia or even Poland? As long as they don't show up on Germany's or France's door step these won't budge at all..
There's no need to come at their door step. They MUST care if Russia disrupt Lithuania, Estonia or Poland. They have a thing in common:are NATO members. But I admit nobody will care about " our brothers across the Prut ".

Eki

28th August 2008, 16:58

The other forum Finn's didn't seem to think all was good as long as Russia was at war with Finland or someone else.
Did I say all is good? I don't think so. I said things could be worse. Right now Russia IS NOT at war with Finland, and I'll be happy if it stays that way. The most stupid thing we could do is to start a war with Russia by ourselves, like the Georgians did. The Georgians screwed up their relations with Russia, and now they are paying for it. Just like Saddam's Iraq screwed its relations with the US in the early 1990s and paid for it later.

schmenke

28th August 2008, 17:53

...3) I typically chuckle at the argument with the PRC. Where would China be without America? Digging trash out of wheelie bins. America's capital runs the nation of China and expect those deficits to erode over time.

:mark:

America needs Chinese resources FAAAAAR more than China needs America. Like Camelopard said, have you checked the current trade imbalance between the two countries lately? :mark:

gloomyDAY

28th August 2008, 18:17

Oh really? Do you mean that all that " war against terrorism " was only dust in our eyes? :laugh: The war against terrorism was legitimate in Afghanistan. As you can see today Al-Qaeda cells have almost evaporated. I've always been a disbeliever with the connection of terrorism to Iraq and in my view initially was an unjust war. What I am saying now is that 'the ends justify the means.' The Iraq War in the future may be seen as a war of survival. Resources over human lives.

Anyway, intersesting questions, cynical answers. It's still one more question that you omitted: If the reason is the one you mentioned was it fair to imply so many other countries in a war for US's own interests? If your answer will be again "Yes", then I want to know why.

This is why more and more people have an antiamerican attitude.The option was on the table for other countries to participate in Iraq. What was bound to happen is that all of the naysayers are now going to want a piece of the pie when it comes to Iraq's oil. America can deny this, but hasn't and already other foreign countries, aside from the U.S., have been investing money into Iraq.

Also, do you really think Americans care if anyone is anti-American? This is a nation built on a platform of failure after the Revolutionary War. All of the brains in Europe believed that America was doomed to fail and now the United States is eating their lunch.

:mark:

America needs Chinese resources FAAAAAR more than China needs America. Like Camelopard said, have you checked the current trade imbalance between the two countries lately? :mark: No, they're equal trading partners. At no time will China cut off America because that would spell disaster for their economy and vice versa. As long as both companies can trade, then there will be peace.

Daniel

28th August 2008, 18:32

Did I say all is good? I don't think so. I said things could be worse. Right now Russia IS NOT at war with Finland, and I'll be happy if it stays that way. The most stupid thing we could do is to start a war with Russia by ourselves, like the Georgians did. The Georgians screwed up their relations with Russia, and now they are paying for it. Just like Saddam's Iraq screwed its relations with the US in the early 1990s and paid for it later.

I meant to say "as long as Russia wasn't at war with Finland"

schmenke

28th August 2008, 19:08

...
No, they're equal trading partners. ...

:mark: While a bilateral trade agreement exists, you may want to check recent immport/export figures between the two countries :mark:

ioan

29th August 2008, 00:17

:mark:

America needs Chinese resources FAAAAAR more than China needs America. Like Camelopard said, have you checked the current trade imbalance between the two countries lately? :mark:

And whom would China sell all the sh!t they produce? Africa? India? They don't have enough money! Not even Europe can consume as much as the US! :rolleyes:

Tomi

29th August 2008, 00:44

And whom would China sell all the sh!t they produce? Africa? India? They don't have enough money! Not even Europe can consume as much as the US! :rolleyes:

The funny thing is that us borrow money from china to buy chineese products.

Daniel

29th August 2008, 00:58

The funny thing is that us borrow money from china to buy chineese products.
Those Chinese are rather helpful aren't they :D

Tomi

29th August 2008, 01:02

Those Chinese are rather helpful aren't they :D

They sure are :)

Camelopard

29th August 2008, 08:24

And whom would China sell all the sh!t they produce? Africa? India? They don't have enough money! Not even Europe can consume as much as the US! :rolleyes:

You don't seem to realise that the PRC isn't just selling to the US. The PRC it's self has a huge population and consumerism is booming, when you have 1.3 billion people to buy stuff do you really think they care if the US stops buying from them?

"Not even Europe can consume as much as the US!"

I'm not sure where you get this from, do you have any more information? ie just what are they consuming more of? I've seen lots of ''crap" made in the PRC being sold in Europe. The computer you are using at the moment, where was it made? My Compaq laptop was made in the PRC.

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Europe

"In 2005 the population of Europe was estimated to be 728 million according to the United Nations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations), which is slightly more than one-ninth of the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World)'s population."

Latest figure for the US is just over 300 million and I dare say that most economies in Europe are in far better shape than the US.

Glad I have my Halliburton shares....

gadjo_dilo

29th August 2008, 08:46

The war against terrorism was legitimate in Afghanistan. As you can see today Al-Qaeda cells have almost evaporated. I've always been a disbeliever with the connection of terrorism to Iraq and in my view initially was an unjust war. What I am saying now is that 'the ends justify the means.' The Iraq War in the future may be seen as a war of survival. Resources over human lives..
I see....The ends justify the means...Maybe russians have the same reason.... Maybe what they do now is illegal but what they'll get at the end....

The option was on the table for other countries to participate in Iraq. What was bound to happen is that all of the naysayers are now going to want a piece of the pie when it comes to Iraq's oil. America can deny this, but hasn't and already other foreign countries, aside from the U.S., have been investing money into Iraq...
Ha! I won't speak in the name of other countries but mine. What options did we have when USA wanted the war and our aim was to enter NATO ?

Also, do you really think Americans care if anyone is anti-American? This is a nation built on a platform of failure after the Revolutionary War. All of the brains in Europe believed that America was doomed to fail and now the United States is eating their lunch.

I don't think they care, I think they SHOULD care. :laugh:

ioan

29th August 2008, 12:55

You don't seem to realise that the PRC isn't just selling to the US. The PRC it's self has a huge population and consumerism is booming, when you have 1.3 billion people to buy stuff do you really think they care if the US stops buying from them?

So tell us how can an economy grow if they produce only for themselves?! Where do they get the extra money for growth?

"Not even Europe can consume as much as the US!"

I'm not sure where you get this from, do you have any more information? ie just what are they consuming more of? I've seen lots of ''crap" made in the PRC being sold in Europe.

Ofcourse there are Chinese products sold in Europe, however Europeans on average earn significantly less money than Americans and they also pay much more for food, rent, cars, computers and fuel. So their possibilities to buy Chinese stuff is way less than for Americans.

The computer you are using at the moment, where was it made? My Compaq laptop was made in the PRC.

Mine says it was made in Ireland! :D

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Europe

"In 2005 the population of Europe was estimated to be 728 million according to the United Nations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations), which is slightly more than one-ninth of the world (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World)'s population."

Latest figure for the US is just over 300 million and I dare say that most economies in Europe are in far better shape than the US.

Glad I have my Halliburton shares....

Take a look at how much money they earn and you'll see what I mean.

ioan

29th August 2008, 13:04

I see....The ends justify the means...Maybe russians have the same reason.... Maybe what they do now is illegal but what they'll get at the end....

You mean that slavery and dictatorship would justify what they do now?! :rolleyes:

Ha! I won't speak in the name of other countries but mine. What options did we have when USA wanted the war and our aim was to enter NATO ?

No to go to war, and thus waiting a bit more for the NATO integration?
Do you think that they didn't want us in the NATO as much as we wanted it?!

I don't think they care, I think they SHOULD care. :laugh:

Why should they care?
Do you care about what people you don't know think about you? I sure don't.

ioan

29th August 2008, 13:14

Edited double post

BDunnell

29th August 2008, 14:31

ioan

29th August 2008, 21:09

Well, one question now is whether Russia will go through with restricting oil supplies to the West. If it does, will it not effectively be imposing economic sanctions on itself? I don't know the extent to which Russian oil producers would start feeling the pinch if they lose their Western customers.

Their incomes will go downhill on a steep slope.
Since the whole Georgian incident started, their biggest company, Gazprom lost 50% of it's value!

Tomi

29th August 2008, 22:01

Their incomes will go downhill on a steep slope.
Since the whole Georgian incident started, their biggest company, Gazprom lost 50% of it's value!

You understand maybe that it is ostensible market value, and Gazproms biggest owner is I guess Russian federation, so how will it make their economy go downhill? Please explain.

Drew

30th August 2008, 01:40

gloomyDAY

30th August 2008, 07:18

I see....The ends justify the means...Maybe russians have the same reason.... Maybe what they do now is illegal but what they'll get at the end....Sure, you're right. The only difference is the Georgia is a free and democratic nation as opposed to Iraq, which I'm sure you'll agree, was ruled by a cruel dictator who loved to torture and kill thousands of people.

Ha! I won't speak in the name of other countries but mine. What options did we have when USA wanted the war and our aim was to enter NATO ?First I have to know where you're from to comment further.

I don't think they care, I think they SHOULD care. :laugh: No, America should not care what others think. How would that be productive? The U.S. has always been different in just about every aspect in regards to Europe and that individuality is what makes it a beacon of success.

gloomyDAY

30th August 2008, 07:25

Can we get back on topic?

Georgia has cut off ties with Russia. I don't blame the Georgians since Russia decided to side with the separatists, oh, I almost forgot, and break international law. I'm sure Russia would probably be upset as well if Chechnya were suddenly recognized and funded by a more powerful foreign entity.

Also, the U.N has taken splendid photos of Georgians being wiped out in South Ossetia. I'm still curious if anyone will defend Russia since ethnic cleaning has now been initiated.

PolePosition_1

30th August 2008, 18:58

Are you asking me to source about the Russians giving the people in South Ossetia and Abkhazia Russian passports or about Russia maintaining 2000 troops in Georgia?

The passports. Sorry for slow reply.

Eki

30th August 2008, 22:17

Can we get back on topic?

Georgia has cut off ties with Russia. I don't blame the Georgians since Russia decided to side with the separatists, oh, I almost forgot, and break international law.
Do you think it was OK when Saddam went after the Kurdish separatists or when the Chinese go after the Tibetan separatists, or does your approval of separatists depend on who they are against?

Drew

31st August 2008, 16:59

The passports. Sorry for slow reply.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/georgia/2651836/South-Ossetian-police-tell-Georgians-to-take-a-Russian-passport-or-leave-their-homes.html

At a compulsory interview a new Russian appointed chief of police gives people a stark and simple choice: take a Russian passport, or leave the town.

Passports are a vital plank in Russia's strategy of securing a toehold in democratic Georgia. By issuing citizenship to South Ossetians, Russia gained a pretext to invade in early August, claiming to be defending its own from Georgian attacks.

http://www.russiatoday.com/news/news/28676

I am sorry to say that, Moscow and the entire West because now Russia is basically protecting its clients and its own citizens. Up to 80 per cent of South Ossetian population have Russian passports

http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/international_politics/qa+the+south+ossetia+conflict/2394567

South Ossetia in Georgia shares a border with North Ossetia in Russia, as the two halves were divided following the Russian Revolution. However, recently many South Ossetians took up the offer to hold Russian passports.

Believe what you want, but Russia has been clever. Give Russian passports to local people and you can claim that you're protecting your citizens whilst invading and extending your sphere of influence. Very clever :)

gloomyDAY

31st August 2008, 18:27

Do you think it was OK when Saddam went after the Kurdish separatists or when the Chinese go after the Tibetan separatists, or does your approval of separatists depend on who they are against?Of course.

Saddam, as I stated earlier, is an evil dictator who made Kurdish people's lives very miserable. China decided to take over Tibet on a whim and subjugate everyone is sight. Both of these instances are ripe for revolt.

Now let's take Quebec as an example. Should they gain independence from the Canadian government? No! There isn't a single person being oppressed and no one can claim that the Canadian government is aiming to take away any of the Quebecan's rights.

Eki

31st August 2008, 18:55

Of course.

Saddam, as I stated earlier, is an evil dictator who made Kurdish people's lives very miserable. China decided to take over Tibet on a whim and subjugate everyone is sight. Both of these instances are ripe for revolt.

Now let's take Quebec as an example. Should they gain independence from the Canadian government? No! There isn't a single person being oppressed and no one can claim that the Canadian government is aiming to take away any of the Quebecan's rights.
If the people of Quebec want to be independent, but they aren't allowed to, isn't that itself oppression? Was that right when Finland declared itself independent in 1917, when they were an autonomous part of Russia, and weren't particularily oppressed by the Russians?

BDunnell

31st August 2008, 19:07

If the people of Quebec want to be independent, but they aren't allowed to, isn't that itself oppression? Was that right when Finland declared itself independent in 1917, when they were an autonomous part of Russia, and weren't particularily oppressed by the Russians?

I think one has to draw the line somewhere. More important, surely, is whether the likes of Quebec, Scotland, Corsica, etc are actually being disadvantaged by being part of the countries to whom they belong.

Eki

31st August 2008, 20:07

I think one has to draw the line somewhere. More important, surely, is whether the likes of Quebec, Scotland, Corsica, etc are actually being disadvantaged by being part of the countries to whom they belong.
But where should that line be drawn? And how do you define advantage and disadvantage? It's been said that China tries to modernize Tibet by building new infrastructure, but the Tibetans want to preseve their own culture and old customs. Is modernizing an advantage or a disdvantage, is preserving your culture and customs an advantage or a disadvantage?

Some in the more prosperous Northern Italy want Northern Italy to become independent from the less prosperous south. Economically it could be an advantage to them, but should they be allowed?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_League_(Italy)

After its success in the 1996 general election (10.1%, 59 deputies and 27 senators), the party announced that its aim was the secession of Northern Italy under the name Padania, an expression previously referring to the Po River valley, but to which Lega Nord gave a geographically broader usage that has steadily gained currency, at least among its followers. The party even organized a referendum on independence as well as elections for a "Padanian Parliament" (with no international recognition).

In later years the League have deemphasised demands for independence and focused rather on devolution, while remaining within the framework of Italy, as in its original goal: not to secede from Italy but to transform it into a federal state.

Daniel

31st August 2008, 23:47

All hail our new Russian overlords!

http://english.pravda.ru/main/18/87/347/16401_TopolM.html
http://www.dailytech.com/Russia+Tests+New+Nuclear+Missile/article12818.htm

I wonder what the history books will list as the official start date of the 2nd cold war? lets just hope it stays a cold war :)

Daniel

1st September 2008, 01:29

Gordon Brown is calling for measures to reduce Europe's dependancy on Russia for oil and gas. Good stuff. And in other news a guy who ran an anti-kremlin site was accidently shot by police.

gadjo_dilo

1st September 2008, 08:32

Sure, you're right. The only difference is the Georgia is a free and democratic nation as opposed to Iraq, which I'm sure you'll agree, was ruled by a cruel dictator who loved to torture and kill thousands of people..
Dear GloomyDAY, I think it's time for you to understand that no country in the world should be allowed to play the " universal gendarme " role and to decide for others. Democratic or tyranic, any country's sovereignity must be respected.

No, America should not care what others think. How would that be productive? The U.S. has always been different in just about every aspect in regards to Europe and that individuality is what makes it a beacon of success.
Why not? Is America alone on earth? If you have to share the globe with other countries shouldn't you have relationships based on respect with them?
But that's the main differnce between America and Europe. Americans must always be " productive ". We, europeans, (still ) have a bit of morals. :laugh:

No to go to war, and thus waiting a bit more for the NATO integration?..
Were we in the position to wait? :laugh:

Do you think that they didn't want us in the NATO as much as we wanted it?!
I don't think anything, I just remember we were waiting much enough. It was always a national tragedy when we were rejected. We were admitted only after we were degrading servile to their interests.

cali

1st September 2008, 10:25

Well, how many of You were living in Soviet Union or the countries under the reign of SU. Ioan knows waht he is talking about. This Georgian incident reminded me a little bit of estonian Bronze soldier thing, which was clearly provoked by Russia's authotrities. They are stretching their muscles and at the moment just trying to see how West would react. And take a very good notice for the fact that most of the big European countries are now dependent - like Germany for example. Luckily our military did not came and tried to force local "stupid" russians (were only about 3000-5000 people) - Putin would've invaded us immediately. Putin was very upset and humiliated when SU was destroyed and he now tries to bring back this monster regime by using different methods. Let's do not forget that he is ex KGB guy, so he knows all the tricks needed.

I think that Western countries do need to decrease their dependence of gas, oil etc, which would make them politically weaker. Diplomacy is needed. We do not want separate them, but need to co-exist together.
Boris Jeltsin was a great leader, Putin is just like Stalin - idolized by his people, but cruel, bully and willing to sacrifice own nation to persuade his own dreams & goals.

ioan

1st September 2008, 11:51

Dear GloomyDAY, I think it's time for you to understand that no country in the world should be allowed to play the " universal gendarme " role and to decide for others. Democratic or tyranic, any country's sovereignity must be respected.

And that goes for Russia too!

gadjo_dilo

1st September 2008, 12:24

And that goes for Russia too!

Of course it does and it's a shame. But if "one" powerful country ( no names, important "person" :laugh :) is permitted to do such things then Russia may think they have the same right. I'm not a hypocrite to pretend that one part acts for humanitarian reasons and the other is evil. I'm talking about principles.

cali

1st September 2008, 15:14

Of course it does and it's a shame. But if "one" powerful country ( no names, important "person" :laugh :) is permitted to do such things then Russia may think they have the same right. I'm not a hypocrite to pretend that one part acts for humanitarian reasons and the other is evil. I'm talking about principles.

Hey, you're right btw! I've always been thinking that why people cannot be nice towards other ppl and other nations? Always somebody wants to be conqueror and a great warrior or a great leader. And then we have situation like this... ugly, isn't it?

But in this case Russia wants to have their power restored in ex USSR countries and the ones who are not agreeing with them are being terrorized or affected in some ways - Baltics, Poland, Ukraine and Georgia are just a few examples. They are forcing their strict politics and expecting others to obey. This is the reason why Russia has not had good relations with most of their neighbours.
Would you obey your neighbour if he would tell you in a one fine day that he has occupied your house and you have to pay rent for it onwards?? :eek:

Eki

1st September 2008, 18:13

Well, how many of You were living in Soviet Union or the countries under the reign of SU.
Yes, but Romanians got rid of their dictator on their own, because they wanted it bad enough. They didn't need (probably didn't even want to) Americans to "liberate" them by bombing their country to stone age, like in Iraq or Serbia.

Eki

1st September 2008, 18:20

Sure, you're right. The only difference is the Georgia is a free and democratic nation as opposed to Iraq, which I'm sure you'll agree, was ruled by a cruel dictator who loved to torture and kill thousands of people.

So? George Bush's dogs of war have been killing thousands of people in Iraq and Afghanistan, and tortured many too, in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay. Why should Bush have more right to kill and torture people than Saddam or Putin/Medjedev?

The main difference between Bush and Saddam is that Bush mainly kills foreigners on the other side of the World (if we forget those death penalties he has approved in the US) but Saddam mainly killed his neighbors and his own.

cali

1st September 2008, 18:48

Yes, but Romanians got rid of their dictator on their own, because they wanted it bad enough. They didn't need (probably didn't even want to) Americans to "liberate" them by bombing their country to stone age, like in Iraq or Serbia.

Ofcourse, thats why told that ioan does know what he is talking about.

ioan

1st September 2008, 19:00

Yes, but Romanians got rid of their dictator on their own, because they wanted it bad enough.

You think so?! Well we are not yet sure enough of that after almost 20 years! :laugh:

They didn't need (probably didn't even want to) Americans to "liberate" them by bombing their country to stone age, like in Iraq or Serbia.

Maybe it was the Americans who supported the Romanian revolution. There is no proof however, not for nor against it.

ioan

1st September 2008, 19:02

Sorry, double post.

Eki

1st September 2008, 20:12

Maybe it was the Americans who supported the Romanian revolution. There is no proof however, not for nor against it.
Moral support is another thing than dropping bombs and missiles on you.

BDunnell

1st September 2008, 22:02

Maybe it was the Americans who supported the Romanian revolution. There is no proof however, not for nor against it.

Certainly, the CIA and other agencies will have been active in countries like Romania at the time. However, there is no comparison between the assistance rendered during/after the Cold War and what happened in Iraq.

Also, it would be wrong, as I'm sure you would agree, to overstate the role of the US and others in the overthrows of those Communist regimes. This could also be said of Serbia in 1999 — it wasn't the NATO bombing that brought the Milosevic regime to its absolute end, but the people rising up against him. I don't think it's helpful for every nation that has become a democracy as a result of actions involving the US to have to remain eternally grateful for its support.

BDunnell

1st September 2008, 22:05

gadjo_dilo

2nd September 2008, 10:51

You think so?! Well we are not yet sure enough of that after almost 20 years! :laugh: .
I didn't need 20 years. It was obvious we didn't do it on our own. :laugh:

Maybe it was the Americans who supported the Romanian revolution. There is no proof however, not for nor against it.
I''m sure there are proofs but " somebody up there " has no interest to make them public. In fact you seem to be the only person who still has doubts.
For the record, it's generally accepted that both CIA and KGB offered a helping hand. See? Sometimes they even work hand in hand. The result was a Mosfilm production with a script made in Hollywwod. :laugh: Broadcasted live on CNN.
Seems that KGB had also a word to say in the "velvet revolution" of Cechoslovakia.

They didn't need (probably didn't even want to) Americans to "liberate" them by bombing their country to stone age, like in Iraq or Serbia..
Probably none of you know that in the " fire of revolution " when we were shot on the streets by God knew who, the guy who claimed the leadership of the country appeared on TV and said that it was established a contact with SU embassy and SU was asked for help. I'm still laughing when I remember the panic that they'd come to bomb us.

ioan

2nd September 2008, 12:45

I didn't need 20 years. It was obvious we didn't do it on our own. :laugh:

I''m sure there are proofs but " somebody up there " has no interest to make them public. In fact you seem to be the only person who still has doubts.
For the record, it's generally accepted that both CIA and KGB offered a helping hand. See? Sometimes they even work hand in hand. The result was a Mosfilm production with a script made in Hollywwod. :laugh: Broadcasted live on CNN.
Seems that KGB had also a word to say in the "velvet revolution" of Cechoslovakia.

Probably none of you know that in the " fire of revolution " when we were shot on the streets by God knew who, the guy who claimed the leadership of the country appeared on TV and said that it was established a contact with SU embassy and SU was asked for help. I'm still laughing when I remember the panic that they'd come to bomb us.

:up: :rotflmao:

ioan

2nd September 2008, 12:47

BTW, yesterday the European Council decided not to do anything. First they will wait for the Russians to retreat to the pre August 6 positions, and than they will decide what to do.
I think tey will have to wait for quite some time, maybe this will help them get to a better conclusion next time. :laugh:

gadjo_dilo

2nd September 2008, 13:10

Yeah, I like statements like " EU will stay vigilent ". :laugh:

BrentJackson

2nd September 2008, 15:41

Yeah, EU and "vigilant" is a bit odd, ain't it? If you guys are so "vigilant", why do you still have American troops stationed there? ;)

Russia, long and short, is teaching those uppity Georgians what happens when they try to think for themselves rather than follow Moscow's line. Russia's foreign minister ain't even hiding now that his goal is to topple Saakashvili. They won't EVER retreat to the August 6 position, because they want to annex South Ossetia - which of course would put Tbilisi within Russian artillery range.

The West has lots of oil, they just can't pump it out as easily as they can with Russian and Arab energy supplies. How about things get done right - start putting our money into producing our own crude from coal, oil shale, tar sands, et cetera, and reduce consumption. Cellulosic ethanol, more efficient vehicles, electrified railways, trolley buses, better mass transit.