Posted on 08/08/2008 10:43:34 AM PDT by Jeff Head
Here are numerous pictures from various online Russian and Georgian news outlest of the conflict in Georgia where Russia has now intevened on the ground and in the air and invaded Georgia over the Ossetian Seperatists.
Russian tanks and vehicles moving toward and into Georgia
Russian aircraft attackintg Georgia positions
Georgian troops movingn toward the fighting
Burniing Georgian Armor
Georgian forces engaging seperatists
We’ll pick up soon enough on Raging Debate.com - domain I own and full site ready in the next few days. The greater good now outweighs personal debate Toddster, although I do enjoy our conversations.
Good luck with that. It is one of the better excuses for running away that I’ve heard lately.
Your neighbors and community at large need your intellect Toddster and right now, not arguments they need solutions. Put your bright mind to work my brother. Talk soon.
Agreed on domestic issues. Trade deals are important, EU and Nato memberships important but you can’t implement such strategies with short term thinking and that is what I am referring to on foreign policy.
We don’t want a world war. No one in their right minds wants a world war. Any thing could set something like this off and it would put the whole world in conflict. First victim would be the internet and you know it. The next would be world trade. How many “friends” would the USA have in such a fight? Not many I fear. Want to talk about horror, just add Nuclear weapons to the mix. No, talk is cheap, but how many US cities would you give up to save Georgia? (maybe San Francisco). Here is another terrible thought—what if we lost? Remember wars have their own dynamic. Could Russia have won in Afghanistan? Yes, just as we could have won in Viet Nam. How? Nuke the whole nation and slay everyone. Then replace the population with some other race. In a world war such unthinkable ideas would be put into play. World opinion means nothing—only survival. No, its not worth it.
Yes, upon more reading, I was in error it seems.
However, for all the pontificating of America and Europe, are we prepared to defend Tbilisi and the Georgian govt from the Russian onslaught? I don’t think so.
And points out the limits of NATO expansion.
If Georgia was in NATO, we’d be compelled by treaty to defend them.
If we don’t defend them as a nonNato member, would we if they were.
And secession is a tricky issue, Georgia wanted to follow it’s own star after the demise of the USSR, and ever since then these two regions have expressed their desire to join Russia.
Just on a sauce.goose.gander basis Georgia’s territorial integrity is not written in stone, but borders imposed by Stalin.
Will we do a Berlin Airlift and more for Georgia. I doubt it.
We must forever guard against such brainwashing again.
>.Technically, we did win in Vietnam.
LOL! That’s why we got the hell outta Dodge.
Colonel Summers said that to General Giap, who responded, that may well be true, but it’s also irrelevant.
He went on to expound the Viets fought the war not only in Nam, but in the streets and kitchens of the USA.
Military victory was only one component of the war.
We can’t live without the internet!!!! OMFG!!!!!
As you say, NO ONE wants a world world, which is even more reason to get in their face, right now.
And really, don’t you think it’s about time we drop this illusion that we actually have any friends in the world? We have business partners. Period. Oil for Food wasn’t proof enough for you?
Talk is cheap, wich is the exact kind of limp-wristed thinking that is the reason we even have to deal with this BS today.
It’s ridiculous to put out of hypothetical suggesting we would lose a US city and only take Georgia back when you know damn well if we lost a city it would be the end of Russia, China and anyone else that wanted some.
The suggestion we “might lose” is equally ridiculous. Try to stay in reality. Have you looked at the military budgets? No contest. The “arms race” is long over. What is it about “only super power” you don’t understand?
This game with the Russians has gone on long enough. It’s time to call their bluff.
They work at night now and most are in Afghan. Iraq needs us less and less now. The electronic counter-measures now can blind most radar systems. New ones are being built to replace ones taken out of service. I know because of the serial numbers of the 3 ground-mapping radars I work on. Their fire control radar is maintained by some avionics squadrons.
>>perpetrators of WWI
All the Euro monarchies were to blame.
The Lions of July is a amazingly informative read based on Austrian, German and Russian archives on the utter failure of the diplomats and the rulers to extricate themselves from a morass of treaties, ententes, misunderstandings, overwork and poor translations and hidden agendas, particularly by the French, IMO.
Blaming the Kaiser is easy scapegoating.
Que Sera Sera, if the Euro monarchies hadn’t destroyed themselves in the Great War, they would have ruled the world for a millenium.
Fair enough, but at one point Germany was already at war with Russia, while the Habsburgs were not(!) and the Serbs played their own games, always with an eye on the Ottomans, though.
Anyway, a useful reminder that even when the elites could see and understand that the war would be disastrous, but trapped by their circumstances, nevertheless proceeded to annhilate themselves.
Also, the victors, the French and the British, particularly the former had huge vested interests in laying the entire blame on the Kaiser.
Plus, funny, how all the monarchies were literally related by blood, even the British, though considering French ambitions, their parliamentary systems and PM’s were hardly more enlightened than the MittelEuropa monarchs or the British Parliamentarians, particularly the Liberals of Lloyd George, who afraid to vote against a popular war, voted for one that would be “short, victorious and glorious”.
And they literally bankrupted themselves, not only financially out of their Empire.
This is the link to Georgia’s English language newspaper.....send them somme words of encouragement folks.
http://www.messenger.com.ge/
One of the problems with too many who post on forums is that they don’t know how to argue so they result in one of the many argumentative fallacies even despite having the facts on their side. Two, they allow emotion to creep in and clout their reasoning abilities. For example, my beef with you was not your understanding of WWI as you stated, not knowing all the facts as an outside observer I read and of course I can take it as is or investigate it further should time allow which is prudent so as not to get my facts wrong. You are not just making a presentation with the individual you where arguing with, but also with anyone who is going to read it. My beef with you is your argument. If you are going to use what you know then you also have to use what the other side has and turn that against them. You clearly are taking this criticism personally. That is a big mistake on your part. You obviously cannot or do not want to grasp my point about the way you are making your arguments. Your response to my criticism is a clear illustration of that. You have a higher obligation especially for someone who has spent time reading numerous books on the subject and no doubt want people to have the facts.
From the argumentative point of view with regard to the comment I sighted earlier, you can call it what you want, it’s still a straw man argument unless you can show in the authors work is equivalent to the likes of the Napoleon author as you suggested at which point you will be making real and tangible argument against the author’s position to back up your attack. To do so, you have to attach the source and his information using what you know is good as a comparison and contrast position with the author’s sources. You obviously don’t grasp this aspect to my argument. I don’t even think you know what my argument is. You offered your side along with the information you know but not in comparison with the author albeit not knowing what is in it because you haven’t read his book. Overall, you are probably right . What amazes me about your so called rebuttal to me is that it doesn’t address anything I said. You are arguing like I am the other poster you where engaged with. My argument certainly wasn’t for what the book said since I haven’t read it and I clearly stated that. I have left the possibility open only because I haven’t read it and experience has taught me that conventional wisdom is not always right so I do keep an open mind where I can. Can you grasp that? (Seriously)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.