Ignore all the pro russian trolls on this board
They get paid to post on this and other boards....its sad but true
shareAnd the georgian trolls do it for free :)
shareunfortunately you just showed your ignorance of the situation. Of course Georgians would defend themselves against paid trolls. It is a war on line, and the Kremlin uses all resources to attack its enemies, and belittle them. Hence, every honest, free man must stand up and be counted
shareGeorgians thinks they are the enemies of the Kremlin? Don't you trolls think too highly of yourselves nowadays? I've said it before and I'll say it again - if Russia wanted to take over Georgia they would've done it without breaking a sweat.
share"I've said it before and I'll say it again - if Russia wanted to take over Georgia they would've done it without breaking a sweat."
I love that argument - It makes one very basic point and completely ignores the reality of the situation. Yes Russia DOES possess the military strength to decimate Georgia anytime they feel like it if they really want to - However you're forgetting one very important little thing here, what was it called again... Oh yes, international law, and the United Nations, of which Russia is a member.
Yes they COULD take over Georgia without breaking a sweat in theory - In reality however they need to be able to justify their actions to the rest of the world to protect themselves from political backlash. Why do you think the US faked UN reports prior to the Iraq war to try and justify it? Hell why do you think there's conflicting stories about how this incident even unfolded? With Russia claiming Georgia started it by attacking South Ossetia, and Georgia saying the complete opposite?
Yes it is obvious that someone is lying to justify what they did - Now lets look at this more realistically - You already made the point that Russia can take Georgia any day they like, so with that in mind, I think its a bit hard to believe that Georgia would've intentionally started a conflict they know they cant possibly win, particularly when they seek to join NATO and the EU and would hence need to have concrete justification for any military action they took that wasnt defensive, not to mention the fact that the entire Georgian army is what, maybe 10% the size of the Russian army? Seriously think it through.
I have thought it through. Russia has no reason to attack South Ossetia (which they don't even consider part of Georgia) And it makes more sense for Georgia to start that war because they know (according to you) that they can get away with it once Russia starts pounding them and they call it quits. Georgia wants to distance itself from Russia and what is the better way of doing this than causing an armed confrontation? Also, if you remember Saakashvili's cries for help on tv he had EU flags in his room. Why would he have EU flags around him? Is it because he wants to manipulate public opinion and remind EU that they are on the same side?
And if Russia wanted to send troops in with proper Casus Belli all they had to do was to say that Georgia is harbouring or even training Chechen terrorists.
That is not only incredibly thin, but very VERY far fetched. First off, Russia has plenty reason to attack South Ossetia and Georgia - They had territorial countrol of those countries prior to the collapse of the Soviet Union - Russia has made no secret of their resentment to losing control off those breakaway former soviet states, so their motives for attacking are far greater than any supposed theory that Georgia thinks they could "get away with it".
I dont see why you're so blindly defending Russia - Fact remains there is more than one side to any story and unfortunately history is written by the winners and consequently is subject to bias. The only real way anyone can find out the truth of the matter is to look at it from all angles and then make up their own minds from the facts they have at hand.
The main point here is the alleged war crimes and atrocities that were commited by forces under russian command - One side says it happened, the other side denies it and a lot of people seem to take it as a personal attack on the integrity of Russia as a country - Russia like any country is governed by those people in power, of which there is a known history of corruption and personal agendas, and the fact remains it is feasible that russian forces did commit these crimes, as you yourself mentioned - Chechnya. I take it you dont believe any of the reported atrocities committed by russian forces in that conflict either?
Way to try and twist my arguement and avoid more "sensitive" points completely. I don't know what else I can tell you. Should I even waste my time?
shareAre you smoking crack or something? I like how you try to turn that around as if you had the logical argument. You seem to completely miss what the whole discussion is about - Alleged atrocities commited by Russia - You'll notice i used the term "alleged" more than once in my posts as I'm not trying to openly argue that these atrocities did happen, merely looking at all sides of it.
You and several others however seem to flat out refuse to even entertain the possibility that Russia did do something wrong, regardless of who started it. I suppose because America was victorious over Japan in WW2 that it means that America's forces did nothing wrong during the conflict - NO! It's a well documented fact that atrocities were committed on both sides, just like it's a well documented fact that Russia has committed atrocities against the Chechens.
I might live in the UK but i'm not naive enough to blindly defend every action the government has taken - I'm more than well aware that the UK has committed atrocities just like any other nation, I'm aware that Georgia no doubt has committed atrocities as well but as i said before, the point here is the blatant refusal by some to even consider the possibility that Russia did do something wrong.
I suppose that considering the movie is in your eyes nothing more than a propaganda piece that you belive that the testimonies of Georgian survivors at the end of the movie was all scripted *beep* designed to demonise the Russians?
You are right to think that there is a posibility for any inhumane acts by anyone involved in any war or armed conflict. But accusing someone without any proof or even more base your accusation on some fictional story/film is just wrong.
And as for those "testimonies" I can't vouch for any of them. They are included to "demonise the Russians" as you say. No doubt about that. Shame they didn't have any native ossetians to testify though. I guess they didn't want to seem too unbiased.
Good posts acid369.
The Survivor Funny 115:http://funny115.com/
Russia almost certainly violated the laws of war. Everybody does it. I imagine that there is no significant conflict where any party obeys the laws of war at all. It is how it is.
Pretty meaningless to point out that Russia does it when everybody does it. More meaningful would be if Russia did it on a vast scale unseen in history.
The reports from neutral people with no ax to grind is that the movie is very good, even if it does, indeed, side with Georgia, not Russia. Also, there's no faking of Iraqi evidence. And, since Hussein violated the other treaty, the US was perfectly justified to take him out. The question is, however, was it ultimately worth the chaos, blood and treasure? That said, the war against the Islamists and Iran will not end until they are defeated.
The film is not about Iraq but your assertion that the US was "perfectly justified to take him out" is based upon false information. It led to Colin Powell's resignation from the United Nations. The fact is Hussein did not have any weapons of mass destruction or the ingredients to make chemical weapons. The world and Congress were misled.
I could not help but see this film and how it echoed an overuse of force by the United States against a vastly inferior armed force in Iraq. The Russians committed deaths against innocent Georgian civilians as did the US in Iraq.
[deleted]
You are right about many things. BUT! Look at the size of the whole Russia and look at the size of South Osetia. Do you have any idea how small is the place? South Osetia is about the size of a small American town. And its population before war was only 6000 people. There is no oil or gas on their territory. But even if they had, what is the point for Russia to fight for it if Sounth Osetia is part of Russia???? South Osetians have Russian pasports where it says "citizen of Russia" If Russia needed anything from them, it could just get it.... Common! You don't know many things. Georgians and Osetians are historical enemies. Same like Koreans and Japanese...
shareI disagree. I am from Asia and generally not that keen on Russia. Even so, I completely support Russia and completely oppose Georgia.
International reports are clear and consistent. Georgia started the war. Simple as that.
Technically, that is not true. Russian performance was extremely weak and they only managed to defeat Georgia through sheer numbers.
International consensus is very clear. Georgia started the war and got its ass owned by Russia. But Russia was pathetic in its performance. The USSR would have wiped Georgia without a sweat.