[Arctic_Menace]

Okay, good, because I've heard people on TV, radio and even the internet screw up and call him the President...

[Zipperfish]

Hmmm, this could be interesting. According to Bush's official news centre (FOX News), the US will be sending military planes and personnel to the area for "humanitarian aid" and Rice will visit Tbilisi to show belated "unwavering support" for Saakashvili.

It'll be interesting to see Putin's response. I have a feeling it will be the South Ossetians who will be paying the price ultimately. Russia stepped in save them from being overrun by Georgia, but, in typical Russian fashion, it was a strategic move more driven by realpolitic than ideology or alliance.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,402982,00.html

[martin14]

little late, dont ya think ??

I dont think Putin will be too worried about it, although US ships in the Black Sea
hanging around Georgian ports prolly wont make him too happy.

Rice to Saakashvili : thanks for taking one for the team, heres some money

[Scape]

Georgian president to McCain: Move 'from words to deeds'

In the famous words of Ash (Housewares) It's a trap, get an AX!

He may be trying to call in a few favors it seems: McCain adviser got money from Georgia

Oh well, as long as it isn't the last call he takes before making a major policy announcement he should be ok.

FT: Why Russia’s response to Georgia was right

$1:

For some of those witnessing the fighting in the Caucasus over the past few days, the narrative is straightforward and easy. The plucky republic of Georgia, with just a few million citizens, was attacked by its giant eastern neighbour, Russia. Add to this all the stereotypes of the cold war era, and you are presented with a truly David and Goliath interpretation – with all its accompanying connotations of good and evil. While this version of events is being written in much of the western media, the facts present a different picture.

Let me be absolutely clear. This is not a conflict of Russia’s making; this is not a conflict of Russia’s choosing. There are no winners from this conflict. Hours before the Georgian invasion, Russia had been working to secure a United Nations Security Council statement calling for a renunciation of force by both Georgia and South Ossetians. The statement that could have averted bloodshed was blocked by western countries.

Last Friday, after the world’s leaders had arrived at the Beijing Olympics, Georgian troops launched an all-out assault on the region of South Ossetia, which has enjoyed de facto independence for more than 16 years. The majority of the region’s population are Russian citizens. Under the terms of the 1992 agreement to which Georgia is a party, they are afforded protection by a small number of Russian peacekeeping soldiers. The ground and air attack resulted in the killing of peacekeepers and the death of an estimated 1,600 civilians, creating a humanitarian disaster and leading to an exodus of 30,000 refugees. The Georgian regime refused to allow a humanitarian corridor to be established and bombarded a humanitarian convoy. There is also clear evidence of atrocities having been committed – so serious and systematic that they constitute acts of genocide.

There can be little surprise, therefore, that Russia responded to this unprovoked assault on its citizens by launching a military incursion into South Ossetia. No country in the world would idly stand by as its citizens are killed and driven from their homes. Russia repeatedly warned Tbilisi that it would protect its citizens by force if necessary, and its actions are entirely consistent with international law, including article 51 of the UN charter on the right of self-defence.

Russia has been entirely proportionate in its military response to Georgia’s attack on Russian citizens and peacekeepers. Russia’s tactical objective has been to force Georgian troops out of the region, which is off limits to them under international agreements. Despite Georgia’s assertion that it had imposed a unilateral ceasefire, Russian peacekeepers and supporting troops remained under continued attack – a fact confirmed by observers and journalists in the region. Russia had no choice but to target the military infrastructure outside the region being used to sustain the Georgian offensive. Russia’s response has been targeted, proportionate and legitimate.

Russia has been accused of using the conflict to try to topple the government and impose control over the country. This is palpable nonsense. Having established the safety of the region, the president has declared an end to military operations. Russia has no intention of annexing or occupying any part of Georgia and has again affirmed its respect for its sovereignty. Over the next few days, on the condition that Georgia refrains from military activity and keeps its forces out of the region, Russia will continue to take the diplomatic steps required to consolidate this temporary cessation of hostilities.

Mikheil Saakashvili, Georgia’s president, has stated that “unless we stop Russia, unless the whole world stops it, Russian tanks will go to any European capital tomorrow”, adding on a separate occasion that “it’s not about Georgia any more. It’s about America”. It is clear that Georgia wants this dispute to become something more than a short if bloody conflict in the region. For decision-makers in the Nato countries of the west, it would be worth considering whether in future you want the men and women of your armed services to be answerable to Mr Saakashvili’s declarations of war in the Caucasus.

Russia is a member of the Security Council, of the Group of Eight leading industrialised nations and partner with the west on issues as varied as the Middle East, Iran and North Korea. In keeping with its responsibilities as a world power and the guarantor of stability in the Caucasus, Russia will work to ensure a peaceful and lasting resolution to the situation in the region.

The writer is minister of foreign affairs of the Russian Federation

Russian forces sink Georgian ships

[saturn_656]

Arctic_Menace Arctic_Menace:

Okay, good, because I've heard people on TV, radio and even the internet screw up and call him the President...

Freudian Slip, Putin still pulls the strings, everyone knows it, not too many talk about it... open secret.

[Zipperfish]

I'd like to see the evidence Russia has for certain Georgian activities such as targetting Russian peacekeepers, bombing a humanitarian convoy and and atrocities. If true, all they need to do is throw in Georgian torture of children and I'm sure Bush and his neo-con cohorts will be behind Georgia 100%.

I see old PNAC hack Robert Kagan has emerged from the sewers on the issue (Robert Kagan: Russia, not the West, is pushing too hard). I guess helping to orchestrate an invasion based on a bunch of lies which has killed hundreds of thousands of civilians is not enough blood for Mr. Kagan. He trots such gems as:

$1:

The details of who did what to precipitate Russia's war against Georgia are not very important.

Spoken like a true idealogue, Mr. Kagan.

[Robair]

U.S. to take control of Georgian ports: Saakashvili

Probably not what Russia had in mind...

$1:

TBILISI (Reuters) - President George W. Bush's pledge to send aid to Georgia means that the U.S. military will take control of the ex-Soviet state's ports and airports, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili said on Wednesday.

"You have heard the statement by the U.S. president that the United States is starting a military-humanitarian operation in Georgia," Saakashvili said in a television address.


"It means that Georgian ports and airports will be taken under the control of the U.S. defense ministry in order to conduct humanitarian and other missions. This is a very important statement for easing tension."

[Scape]

Matt Yglesias, blogging from his ultra-leftist new digs at the Center for American Progress, takes a shot at sensible moderate Bill Kristol over his column about the war in Georgia.

$1:

In a sense, I don't blame conservatives for their mixed reaction to events. As egregious has Russia's actions have been, there really is some "wider context" that makes it hard to fully sympathize with Georgia. But as Matt points out, that just makes the bellicose rhetoric even harder to take. If you favor war and think that liberals are a bunch of neo-Chamberlains for objecting, fine. Go ahead and make your case. But if you don't think we should go to war, the implications of treachery are a little hard to take.

[Zipperfish]

Robair Robair:

U.S. to take control of Georgian ports: Saakashvili

Probably not what Russia had in mind...

$1:

TBILISI (Reuters) - President George W. Bush's pledge to send aid to Georgia means that the U.S. military will take control of the ex-Soviet state's ports and airports, Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili said on Wednesday.

"You have heard the statement by the U.S. president that the United States is starting a military-humanitarian operation in Georgia," Saakashvili said in a television address.


"It means that Georgian ports and airports will be taken under the control of the U.S. defense ministry in order to conduct humanitarian and other missions. This is a very important statement for easing tension."

Probably not what the US had in mind either. They probably aren't crazy about Saakashvili liberally interpreting American statements on television.

Regardless, I don't think Russia will be in Georgia proper by the time the US arrives with its "humanitarian aid." But I wonder if US "humanitarian aid workers" will go into South Ossetia.

[Zipperfish]

Scape Scape:

Matt Yglesias, blogging from his ultra-leftist new digs at the Center for American Progress, takes a shot at sensible moderate Bill Kristol over his column about the war in Georgia.

$1:

In a sense, I don't blame conservatives for their mixed reaction to events. As egregious has Russia's actions have been, there really is some "wider context" that makes it hard to fully sympathize with Georgia. But as Matt points out, that just makes the bellicose rhetoric even harder to take. If you favor war and think that liberals are a bunch of neo-Chamberlains for objecting, fine. Go ahead and make your case. But if you don't think we should go to war, the implications of treachery are a little hard to take.

Ooh. Not just leftist, but ultra-leftist. And neo-conservative and PNAC hack Bill Kristol is "moderate." Yeah, OK. I'm two lines into your column and I already know what you're going to say.

[Scape]

Russia no longer content to swallow its bitterness

$1:

"What they are saying is that ignoring Russia's interests is going to come at a price, and they've said it in a pretty brutal way," said James Collins, a former U.S. ambassador to Moscow.

With a strong, popular leader in Mr. Putin, a growing economy and a new sense of national vigour, Moscow is no longer content merely to swallow its bitterness over Western moves that it sees - rightly or wrongly - as hostile.

"The Kremlin's message is crystal clear: 'Don't tread on me,' " wrote Dmitri Trenin, an expert with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, for Radio Free Europe.

A related message: Don't try to push your Western democracy on us. Moscow is especially eager to teach Georgia a lesson because it is the site of the Rose Revolution, the populist 2003 uprising that led to the rise of pro-Western president Mikheil Saakashvili. The Orange Revolution in Ukraine followed, and that is more than enough colour for a Russian regime that believes those movements represent an attempt to subvert it from within.

Tread very carefully Mr. Bush.

[CommanderSock]

$1:

Tread very carefully Mr. Bush.

I take every chance to bash the US when it comes to it's neocon administrations. Now, the USA isn't the only power to abuse what is has.

Russia however is no stranger to aggressive behavior, outright invasions, usually with very little or no explanation, torture and massacres of civilian populations in the millions (i.e. Genocide, see Ukraine, Gulags, Civil War) and brutal occupations. Russia will kill your citizens, Russia will kill its own citizens, Russia will butcher, torture, rape, and pillage mercilessly. Russian soldiers will rape anything with a skirt, and rob anything they perceive as wealth. Russia, in tough times, will throw everything, including the kitchen sink; they'll even throw Russian civilians if possible at their enemies. If you read Russian history and understand Russia's psyche, you would come to a conclusion that this is a country that sometimes acts very illogically.

Tread carefully Mr. Bush, is an understatement.

[Chumley]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

They probably aren't crazy about Saakashvili liberally interpreting American statements on television.

Probably more like deliberately misinterpreting American statements.
I doubt they misunderstood. They may be crazy, but they aren't stupid.
It can put the U.S in a difficult spot.

[Scape]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

C.M. Burns C.M. Burns:

$1:

War Nerd: South Ossetia, The War of My Dreams
By Gary Brecher
.

Read the complete article at the THE EXILED

That was a fantastic read. I'm going to add that site to my weekly reading list. Thanks.

The new one is out:
The CNN effect

[C.M. Burns]

Scape Scape:

The new one is out:
The CNN effect

Big suprise!
CNN is using footage of Georgia's destruction in S. Ossetia and claiming it's the Russian's work in Georgia.
This little war will set the new high water mark in propaganda!