West urges end to South Ossetia fighting

[dilloduck]

Really? Russia can't intervene when Georgia attacks a semi-autonomous province which contains a great many Russian citizens?

Russia is using hugely disproportionate force, but assuming that Georgia initiated this conflict (details are still a bit sketchy), it seems like Russia does have a legitimate interest in the region. This, of course, does NOT give them the right to use the force that they are using, and they need to agree to the cease-fire immediatelly.

Oh...and as for comparisons to Iraq, the legitimacy of Russias "invasion" is exponentially greater than the United States into Iraq. So those who cheered war in Iraq can shut the hell up about rebuking Russia.

So your stance is that they have a right to intervene, they just can't use guns ? I don't think Georgia was going to capitulate to verbal warnings or UN resolutions. Iraq sure didn't.

 

[BrianH]

Really? Russia can't intervene when Georgia attacks a semi-autonomous province which contains a great many Russian citizens?

Russia is using hugely disproportionate force, but assuming that Georgia initiated this conflict (details are still a bit sketchy), it seems like Russia does have a legitimate interest in the region. This, of course, does NOT give them the right to use the force that they are using, and they need to agree to the cease-fire immediatelly.

Oh...and as for comparisons to Iraq, the legitimacy of Russias "invasion" is exponentially greater than the United States into Iraq. So those who cheered war in Iraq can shut the hell up about rebuking Russia.

Georgia initiated this conflict??? LOL...what a moron. You justify insurgents fighting the U.S. because we're in they're country...yet, you won't justify a country fighting when Russia is killing their citizens in their own country. You're fresh man.

Russia is in another country bombing civilians...whether this is compatible to Iraq is irrelevant. Just because our country is in Iraq doesn't mean that all American citizens approve of it.

Georgia has been relatively peaceful for the last few years. Russia has done the same typical invasion in Afghanistan and Czechoslovakia...claimining their on peace-keeping missions to protect minorities. What a load of crap.
And IMO, RGS called you on your shitty logic. According to this, any country has the right to invade the U.S. because they have citizens here. Keep playing grab-ass with your own retarded logic.

 

[Larkinn]

So your stance is that they have a right to intervene, they just can't use guns ? I don't think Georgia was going to capitulate to verbal warnings or UN resolutions. Iraq sure didn't.

1) Georgia isn't Iraq. They would capitulate to UN resolutions. Georgia is trying very hard to become an accepted member of the international community, and wants very badly to be a NATO member.

2) Learn the difference between "any force" and "disproportionate force".

 

[BrianH]

Right, because thats the only difference. Who was sending troops into Iraq that we needed to defend the Iraqis from again?



And exactly what danger are these Mexican nationals in, while residing in the US?

Pesky little facts which you consistently miss, eh RGS?

Iraq is not the same thing as Georgia....they are not even remotely the same. Russia is not invading Georgia on the premise of finding WMDs or ousting a ruthless dictator. Georgia is a democratic country in which the U.S. is allied with. Georgia plans (planned) to join NATO...which pisses of Russia (who doesn't want NATO to spread any further east.) Georgia attacked Russian troops who crossed the border INTO Georgia. For the last few months, Russia has been massing troops on the border and running televised training exercises. The Georgian president has pled to western nations in the last few months/weeks to help them based on intelligence they'd received about a possible Russian invasion. Do you think Georgia is stupid enough to attack a country 30 times larger in population?? Georgia only attacked Russian troops when they rolled 150 tanks across the border. Georgia is not at fault here. If 150 Mexican tanks rolled across the border on a "peace-keeping" mission, you bet your ass they'd shot at also. You are ignoring facts here.

 

[Larkinn]

Georgia initiated this conflict??? LOL...what a moron. You justify insurgents fighting the U.S. because we're in they're country...yet, you won't justify a country fighting when Russia is killing their citizens in their own country. You're fresh man.

Yes, Georgia initiated the conflict.

Russia sent tanks and warplanes into the former Soviet republic of Georgia on Friday after Georgia launched a military offensive to retake its breakaway province, South Ossetia.

Georgia-Russia Conflict Escalates Over Separatists : NPR

Georgia initiated the conflict with South Ossetia, and then Russia intervened. Georgia started this mess.

Russia is in another country bombing civilians...whether this is compatible to Iraq is irrelevant.

Yes they are, and they need to stop. However that does not mean that they had no right to intervene in a situation where Georgia starts shelling a semi-autonomous province that contains a great many Russian citizens.

Just because our country is in Iraq doesn't mean that all American citizens approve of it.

Umm, ok then.

Georgia has been relatively peaceful for the last few years. Russia has done the same typical invasion in Afghanistan and Czechoslovakia...claimining their on peace-keeping missions to protect minorities. What a load of crap.

Except for the whole shelling South Ossetia and the whole beating up demonstrators thing.

And IMO, RGS called you on your shitty logic. According to this, any country has the right to invade the U.S. because they have citizens here. Keep playing grab-ass with your own retarded logic.

Your retarded. I already explained the difference. The words too big for your simple, addled mind?

 

[BrianH]

1) Georgia isn't Iraq. They would capitulate to UN resolutions. Georgia is trying very hard to become an accepted member of the international community, and wants very badly to be a NATO member.

2) Learn the difference between "any force" and "disproportionate force".

What the hell are you talking about. You're previous posts imply that you are for Russian intervention. Then you turn around and post this...which implies that you are in favor of Georgia.

As far as a disproportianate force...what does it matter? Russia sent troops across the border into a country that does not belong to them.

 

[Larkinn]

Iraq is not the same thing as Georgia....they are not even remotely the same. Russia is not invading Georgia on the premise of finding WMDs or ousting a ruthless dictator.

Your right, they aren't the same. Russias actions are FAR more legitimate than the US's actions were.

Georgia is a democratic country in which the U.S. is allied with. Georgia plans (planned) to join NATO...which pisses of Russia (who doesn't want NATO to spread any further east.) Georgia attacked Russian troops who crossed the border INTO Georgia. For the last few months, Russia has been massing troops on the border and running televised training exercises. The Georgian president has pled to western nations in the last few months/weeks to help them based on intelligence they'd received about a possible Russian invasion. Do you think Georgia is stupid enough to attack a country 30 times larger in population?? Georgia only attacked Russian troops when they rolled 150 tanks across the border. Georgia is not at fault here. If 150 Mexican tanks rolled across the border on a "peace-keeping" mission, you bet your ass they'd shot at also. You are ignoring facts here.

You do know that this conflict started when Georgia started shelling and attacking South Ossetia, yes?

 

[Larkinn]

What the hell are you talking about. You're previous posts imply that you are for Russian intervention. Then you turn around and post this...which implies that you are in favor of Georgia.

I'm not "in favor" of either of them. Both of them did stupid things. But this whole "Georgia never did anything wrong" line is a bunch of crap. They DID start this little adventure.

As far as a disproportianate force...what does it matter? Russia sent troops across the border into a country that does not belong to them.

And sending troops across the border into a country that does not belong to them is ALWAYS a no-no, eh?

Russia has a right to protect their citizens, even if they are NOT in the sovreign territory of Russia. These citizens were being attacked. This does NOT give Russia the right to take over the province and start bombing pipelines, and other random shit. But it does give them the right to take some action.

 

[BrianH]

Yes, Georgia initiated the conflict.



Georgia-Russia Conflict Escalates Over Separatists : NPR

Georgia initiated the conflict with South Ossetia, and then Russia intervened. Georgia started this mess.



Yes they are, and they need to stop. However that does not mean that they had no right to intervene in a situation where Georgia starts shelling a semi-autonomous province that contains a great many Russian citizens.



Umm, ok then.



Except for the whole shelling South Ossetia and the whole beating up demonstrators thing.



Your retarded. I already explained the difference. The words too big for your simple, addled mind?

This is not frickin different than your argument against states seceding from the union. South Ossieta is a province of GEORGIA...NOT RUSSIA. Georgia has the right to suppress surrections in their own country. Russia does not have the right to intervene in someone elses affairs. That would be like the United States rolling into Russia if Russia attacks Chechnya. If Texas broke away from the U.S., Mexico would not have the right to invade Texas because they have alot of citizens here. Georgia mounted an offensive on seperatists in South Ossieta...NOT RUSSIA.

My simple, "addled" mind is much better than your oversized head. I bet you do a flip when you tie your shoes.

Tell me again how Russia has the right to invade a country who is mounting an offensive against a province trying to separate from it? South Ossieta is not apart of Russia...as much as you'd like to think it is. Russia is keeping Chechnya from separating...why is it not ok for Georgia to keep South Ossieta from separating? Kind of a double standard don't you think??

 

[BrianH]

I'm not "in favor" of either of them. Both of them did stupid things. But this whole "Georgia never did anything wrong" line is a bunch of crap. They DID start this little adventure.

By controlling their own country?? I see. A supporter of Anarchy "eh"?



And sending troops across the border into a country that does not belong to them is ALWAYS a no-no, eh?

That's right. It is a no no...however, if you do such a thing, don't bitch and moan about getting your ass attacked in the country you entered.

Russia has a right to protect their citizens, even if they are NOT in the sovreign territory of Russia. These citizens were being attacked. This does NOT give Russia the right to take over the province and start bombing pipelines, and other random shit. But it does give them the right to take some action.

Russia has the right to get their citizens out if they are in there. If there are American citizens in another nation during a war...the U.S. sends troops to extract the citizens...not start bombing the countries residential areas. Ex: When lebanon went to hell last year, we sent marines to retrieve American citizens. You did not see air-force planes engaging Hezbollah and conducting combat operations. Russia has the right to get their citizens out if anthing. According to your logic, any country can invade any country if they have citizens living there--to protect them.

 

[Larkinn]

This is not frickin different than your argument against states seceding from the union. South Ossieta is a province of GEORGIA...NOT RUSSIA. Georgia has the right to suppress surrections in their own country. Russia does not have the right to intervene in someone elses affairs. That would be like the United States rolling into Russia if Russia attacks Chechnya. If Texas broke away from the U.S., Mexico would not have the right to invade Texas because they have alot of citizens here. Georgia mounted an offensive on seperatists in South Ossieta...NOT RUSSIA.

From Wiki:

A part of it[South Ossetia] has been de facto independent from Georgia since it declared independence as the Republic of South Ossetia early in the 1990s during the Georgian-Ossetian conflict. The capital of the region is Tskhinvali.

Not quite the same as states. And Mexico WOULD have the right to invade Texas if the US started massacring Mexicans in Texas. They wouldn't, but it would be legitimate.

And lmfao at saying Russia does not have the right to intervene in someone elses affairs. State sovreignity suddenly matters SO much when we are talking about US ally, eh?

Tell me again how Russia has the right to invade a country who is mounting an offensive against a province trying to separate from it? South Ossieta is not apart of Russia...as much as you'd like to think it is. Russia is keeping Chechnya from separating...why is it not ok for Georgia to keep South Ossieta from separating? Kind of a double standard don't you think??

You didn't understand the first 5 times? You want me to explain to you again that most South Ossetians have Russian citizenship?

And yes, its a double standard. Welcome to the world.

 

[Larkinn]

By controlling their own country?? I see. A supporter of Anarchy "eh"?

Right, because South Ossetia was just an anarchistic paradise before Georgian troops moved in.

That's right. It is a no no...however, if you do such a thing, don't bitch and moan about getting your ass attacked in the country you entered.

Who exactly is bitching and moaning about being attacked?

Russia has the right to get their citizens out if they are in there. If there are American citizens in another nation during a war...the U.S. sends troops to extract the citizens...not start bombing the countries residential areas. Ex: When lebanon went to hell last year, we sent marines to retrieve American citizens. You did not see air-force planes engaging Hezbollah and conducting combat operations. Russia has the right to get their citizens out if anthing. According to your logic, any country can invade any country if they have citizens living there--to protect them.

Oh, well then Russia will just bring almost all of the population of South Ossetia into Russia

 

[BrianH]

From Wiki:

What a dumbass...had anything I said been from wiki, I would have posted a link for it. UNlike your stupid ass, I'll post sources if I've used something from it.


Not quite the same as states. And Mexico WOULD have the right to invade Texas if the US started massacring Mexicans in Texas. They wouldn't, but it would be legitimate.

Newsflash, Georgians were not massacring Russians. They'd had problems yes...but like I said, Georgia had been relatively peaceful until then. Not to mention that Russia ALREADY had troops in South Ossieta before Georgia ever mounted this last offensive.

And lmfao at saying Russia does not have the right to intervene in someone elses affairs. State sovreignity suddenly matters SO much when we are talking about US ally, eh?

You like to strawman don't you.

You didn't understand the first 5 times? You want me to explain to you again that most South Ossetians have Russian citizenship?

Who cares? Alot of people have dual citizenships, that doesn't mean the country you were born in has the right to invade the country you live in.

And yes, its a double standard. Welcome to the world.

Kiss my ass. It's obvious you have flawed thinking abilities...let me name a couple off the top of my head.

1: "Some racism isn't bad"

2. "Mexico has the right to invade Texas."

LOL....So I guess the U.S. had the right to invade Mexico because we have citizens there?? LOL.

 

[BrianH]

Right, because South Ossetia was just an anarchistic paradise before Georgian troops moved in.

Read a little, it was getting ALOT better.


Who exactly is bitching and moaning about being attacked?

UH....RUSSIA. They're the ones slaughtering Georgians because Georgians attacked Russian troops INVADING their country.

Oh, well then Russia will just bring almost all of the population of South Ossetia into Russia

That's right....if they want to protect their citizens---and their citizens want to be back in Russia, then that's exactly what they can do. By your logic, the majority of Texas is made up of Mexican ethnicity, therefore, the Mexican/Texas citizens can ask Mexico to invade Texas--because they want to be part of Mexico again.

 

[Ravi]

I think Larkinn's logic is good on this topic. Not sure why anyone would think the USA wouldn't invade anyone that started killing off its civilians.

This is some messed up stuff...if we back Georgia that means we are being hostile to Russia...not a good thing.

 

[Larkinn]

What a dumbass...had anything I said been from wiki, I would have posted a link for it. UNlike your stupid ass, I'll post sources if I've used something from it.

Its pretty fucking obvious where I got it from, moron. You want someone to wipe your ass too?

Newsflash, Georgians were not massacring Russians. They'd had problems yes...but like I said, Georgia had been relatively peaceful until then. Not to mention that Russia ALREADY had troops in South Ossieta before Georgia ever mounted this last offensive.

Newsflash, Georgia INVADED South Ossetia and launched a military offensive, which started this whole mess. And yes, it WAS peaceful until Georgia did this.

And Russia had internationally sanctioned peacekeeping troops in South Ossetia.

You like to strawman don't you.

You said:

Russia does not have the right to intervene in someone elses affairs.

I responded with:

And lmfao at saying Russia does not have the right to intervene in someone elses affairs

Do explain exactly how what I said was a strawman of what you said. I'm quite curious, considering it was pretty much a verbatim quote.

Who cares? Alot of people have dual citizenships, that doesn't mean the country you were born in has the right to invade the country you live in.

Who cares? International Law cares. You have a right to protect your own citizens. And you accused me of making a strawman? Moron.

Kiss my ass. It's obvious you have flawed thinking abilities...let me name a couple off the top of my head.

1: "Some racism isn't bad"

2. "Mexico has the right to invade Texas."

LOL....So I guess the U.S. had the right to invade Mexico because we have citizens there?? LOL.

Oh, yes, my thinking abilities are so flawed. Somehow I'm of the incredibly flawed opinion that me saying that

And Mexico WOULD have the right to invade Texas if the US started massacring Mexicans in Texas.

is nothing similar to saying that

LOL....So I guess the U.S. had the right to invade Mexico because we have citizens there?? LOL.

considering that said citizens aren't being massacred. But, you know, thats just me. I'm sure with your brilliant cognitive capabilities you'll be able to explain how what I said before was a strawman, and this isn't.

Good luck with that.

 

[BrianH]

I think Larkinn's logic is good on this topic. Not sure why anyone would think the USA wouldn't invade anyone that started killing off its civilians.

This is some messed up stuff...if we back Georgia that means we are being hostile to Russia...not a good thing.

It doesn't matter what is and isn't a good thing. It matters what is right Rav. Russia has no right invading Georgia. Georgia is only guilty of controlling itself. They had a violent seperatist province they were trying to control. You would view this differently if one U.S. state were separating and had separatist soldiers. I don't understand why many posters here don't believe it was legal and right for the South to secede from the Union (and backed the Union supressing the rebellion, but then turn around and condemn Georgia from doing the same thing--repressing a rebellion.

Russia has constantly had it's hands in Georgian affairs. In September of last year...Georgian special forces raid a seperatist military training camp in in the break away province. Two russian military instructors were killed. They were there training seperatists.

I'm telling you, this is typical of Russia. They did the same thing in Afghanistan and Czechoslovakia. Claiming Russian citizens were in danger and protecting the minority.

 

[Larkinn]

Read a little, it was getting ALOT better.

Umm, what? You said it was anarchistic because they didn't want Georgia to have control of them. Georgia, in fact, did NOT have control of them and it was NOT anarchy.

And as for South Ossetia getting a lot better, you do know that much of their support came from Russia, right? And that Georgia cut off all their electricity? And that 99% of South Ossetians wanted to secede? And that, in fact, Georgia did not exercise control over South Ossetia?

UH....RUSSIA. They're the ones slaughtering Georgians because Georgians attacked Russian troops INVADING their country.

Russia is not complaining that Georgian troops are attacking them. I don't know where you got that weird tidbit from.

That's right....if they want to protect their citizens---and their citizens want to be back in Russia, then that's exactly what they can do. By your logic, the majority of Texas is made up of Mexican ethnicity, therefore, the Mexican/Texas citizens can ask Mexico to invade Texas--because they want to be part of Mexico again.

Amazingly you missed, yet again, the part about Georgia shelling South Ossetia. But, no surprise there.

 

[BrianH]

Its pretty fucking obvious where I got it from, moron. You want someone to wipe your ass too?

I don't want you anywhere near my ass queer. (personal fetish?)


Newsflash, Georgia INVADED South Ossetia and launched a military offensive, which started this whole mess. And yes, it WAS peaceful until Georgia did this.

SOUTH OSSIETA--WHICH IS PART OF GEORGIA

And Russia had internationally sanctioned peacekeeping troops in South Ossetia.

Russian Peacekeeping in the Caucasus - New York Times

I'm sure all the other nations were thrilled when Russia wanted to "peace-keep" on their own.

You said:



I responded with:



Do explain exactly how what I said was a strawman of what you said. I'm quite curious, considering it was pretty much a verbatim quote.

Forgive me, I misread. I've got my ass cheeks spread if you're ready to whipe...



Who cares? International Law cares. You have a right to protect your own citizens. And you accused me of making a strawman? Moron.

You have a right to get your citizens out of the warzone. Not to completely invade another country and start bombing residential areas.



Oh, yes, my thinking abilities are so flawed. Somehow I'm of the incredibly flawed opinion that me saying that



is nothing similar to saying that



considering that said citizens aren't being massacred. But, you know, thats just me. I'm sure with your brilliant cognitive capabilities you'll be able to explain how what I said before was a strawman, and this isn't.

Good luck with that.

The rest is all crap...

 

[BrianH]

Umm, what? You said it was anarchistic because they didn't want Georgia to have control of them. Georgia, in fact, did NOT have control of them and it was NOT anarchy.

And as for South Ossetia getting a lot better, you do know that much of their support came from Russia, right? And that Georgia cut off all their electricity? And that 99% of South Ossetians wanted to secede? And that, in fact, Georgia did not exercise control over South Ossetia?



Russia is not complaining that Georgian troops are attacking them. I don't know where you got that weird tidbit from.



Amazingly you missed, yet again, the part about Georgia shelling South Ossetia. But, no surprise there.

Oh I don't know...maybe it's int he form of bombing civilians and invading another country.

Let me make it clear for you once again. South Ossieta is a PROVINCE of Georgia. It declared it's independence and were basically fighting against Georgia for it. It's no different than the south claiming independence and the North fighting them to keep them in the nation is it not???? The South controlled itself when it seceded...but you still seem to think it was ok for the Union to invade to restore it's union. But you change your tune when it's about Georgia trying to restore it's regions. Typical of you though.

Tell me again why it is not ok for a country to fight to keep it's lands....I'm curious. I don't agree with ethinic fighting...but this is about territory. Georgia had a breakaway province they were trying to keep...