Allegro.cc - Online Community

Allegro.cc Forums » Off-Topic Ordeals » WAR in Georgia

This thread is locked; no one can reply to it. rss feed Print
WAR in Georgia
OICW
Member #4,069
November 2003
avatar

Quote:

without warning and of course without UN backing.

I fear that orwellian nightmare came true. As far as I remember UN didn't back the Iraqi invasion. I remeber they were against it and so was the rest of the world.

Moreover Georgians attacked and killed russian soldiers.

[My website][CppReference][Pixelate][Allegators worldwide][Who's online]
"Final Fantasy XIV, I feel that anything I could say will be repeating myself, so I'm just gonna express my feelings with a strangled noise from the back of my throat. Graaarghhhh..." - Yahtzee
"Uhm... this is a.cc. Did you honestly think this thread WOULDN'T be derailed and ruined?" - BAF
"You can discuss it, you can dislike it, you can disagree with it, but that's all what you can do with it"

HardTranceFan
Member #7,317
June 2006
avatar

Russia is fighting to keep it's own state. Iraq does not belong to the USA, much as their government would like it to be.

The USA invaded Iraq on a lie - the pretense of WMDs. The leaders of some of the USA's traditional allies strongly opposed the invasion, saying that invading Iraq was not justified in the context of UNMOVIC's February 12, 2003 report. But then, it's likely that US government's english leads to a different interpretation of that report.

--
"Shame your mind don't shine like your possessions do" - Faithless (I want more part 1)

Edgar Reynaldo
Major Reynaldo
May 2007
avatar

Quote:

Russia is fighting to keep it's own state.

Russia does not own South Ossetia. They are occupying a foreign state.

As far as the US + Iraq situation goes, until the Iraqi government stabilizes and learns how to deal with the terrorism going on there, the US can't leave without Iraq plunging into a civil war.

Wikipedia already has an article on the conflict over South Ossetia :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_South_Ossetia_war

It sounds like East and West Germany all over again.

nonnus29
Member #2,606
August 2002
avatar

Quote:

I fear that orwellian nightmare came true. As far as I remember UN didn't back the Iraqi invasion. I remeber they were against it and so was the rest of the world.

Quote:

Russia is fighting to keep it's own state. Iraq does not belong to the USA, much as their government would like it to be.

he USA invaded Iraq on a lie - the pretense of WMDs.

You guys are fucking stupid. You are completely ignorant of the facts, or willfully refuse to accept there are things you don't understand. Simply reading wikipedia about any of this stuff will prove you are wrong, or only presenting a small fraction of the actual history.

I propose a test. From now on, before posting about international affairs, you must first prove you are not a fucking dumb shit moron loser.

HardTranceFan
Member #7,317
June 2006
avatar

Quote:

You guys are fucking stupid. blah blah blah fucking dumb shit moron loser.

Sorry, I got that wrong. It's more like Russia is protecting South Ossettia. Thanks for constructively pointing this out - like the mature adults we are - and correcting my post, nonnus. And if your excuse is one of frustration, the answer is grow up.

BTW, I took your advice to get the following quotes:

wikipedia:2003_invasion_of_Iraq said:

According to the President of the United States George W. Bush and Prime Minister of the United Kingdom Tony Blair, the reasons for the invasion were "to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction (WMD)..."
...
In 2005, the Central Intelligence Agency released a report saying that no weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq.
...
On March 18, 2003, the bombing of Iraq by the United States, the United Kingdom, Spain, Italy, Australia, and Denmark began, without UN support, unlike the first Gulf War or the invasion of Afghanistan.

Now, being a dumb arse, I guess I'd better just butt out of this thread from now on. Ta-ta :)

--
"Shame your mind don't shine like your possessions do" - Faithless (I want more part 1)

OICW
Member #4,069
November 2003
avatar

Quote:

You guys are fucking stupid. You are completely ignorant of the facts, or willfully refuse to accept there are things you don't understand. Simply reading wikipedia about any of this stuff will prove you are wrong, or only presenting a small fraction of the actual history.

I'm not reading wikipedia about this. I use our not-so-biased media. And I remember damn rigt that in the first days the UN was strongly against invasion to the Iraq.

What is more I'm not advocating what's happening in the South Ossetia. I'm just saying that if the USA "has" the right to invade a foreing country, they shouldn't be the ones, who throw a first stone at Russia for doing so. That is just an act of plain hypocrisy.

And last, but not least - ossetians consider themselves as russians, they have russian passports, they had russian "peace force" stationed in their region. So when georgians came killing "russian" people and soldiers, the natural reaction was to protect them. Period.

Right, it's as wrong as USA invading Iraq or Afghanistan, but then again it's not like USA can do anything in this world and others are forbidden to do the same.

[My website][CppReference][Pixelate][Allegators worldwide][Who's online]
"Final Fantasy XIV, I feel that anything I could say will be repeating myself, so I'm just gonna express my feelings with a strangled noise from the back of my throat. Graaarghhhh..." - Yahtzee
"Uhm... this is a.cc. Did you honestly think this thread WOULDN'T be derailed and ruined?" - BAF
"You can discuss it, you can dislike it, you can disagree with it, but that's all what you can do with it"

Edgar Reynaldo
Major Reynaldo
May 2007
avatar

The UN is a farce. They can't even be bothered to stop what is going on in Sudan. The Nations United for just what exactly? Do you think people like Saddam should be left in power to gas large groups of ethnic minorities? Were the Taliban stationed in Afghanistan or weren't they? So enough of this the USA are a bunch of hypocrites blah blah BS. We're the ones who save everyone else's ass. You think we like having to clean up everyone else's mess?

OICW
Member #4,069
November 2003
avatar

Well I know that anything that UN does are resolution and no actions. Sure somebody should clean a mess. But a) should have a mandate to do it, b) shouldn't say they had it if it ain't true.

On the other hand Saddam was holding situation there pretty tigth - no problems with Kurdi, no civil war. Do you even know some reasons why the first Gulf War ended shortly after freeing Kuvait?

Quote:

We're the ones who save everyone else's ass. You think we like having to clean up everyone else's mess?

Who asked you? In Afghanistan you cleared your own mess - you were the ones who gave them weapons to fight russians in the eighties.

[My website][CppReference][Pixelate][Allegators worldwide][Who's online]
"Final Fantasy XIV, I feel that anything I could say will be repeating myself, so I'm just gonna express my feelings with a strangled noise from the back of my throat. Graaarghhhh..." - Yahtzee
"Uhm... this is a.cc. Did you honestly think this thread WOULDN'T be derailed and ruined?" - BAF
"You can discuss it, you can dislike it, you can disagree with it, but that's all what you can do with it"

Vanneto
Member #8,643
May 2007

Quote:

And last, but not least - ossetians consider themselves as russians, they have russian passports, they had russian "peace force" stationed in their region. So when georgians came killing "russian" people and soldiers, the natural reaction was to protect them. Period.

Well, in Slovenia, there are Austrian, Hungarian and Italian minorities. The Hungarian minorities are concentrated in the southern part. I guess they have Hungarian passports, they also consider themselves Hungarian. Now, because they are concentrated in one region, they decided to liberate that region and make it Hungarian. Of course, Slovenia is un-dividable, and the army would have to act. Now, because of that, Hungary would attack us and start a war, protecting "their" citizens.

Now, imagine the same happening in the Czech republic. Sounds logical? If no, then stop using that argument you just used.

P.S.
I doubt this is necessary, but just in case: No, the scenario I described is not true, it never was, never will be. :P

In capitalist America bank robs you.

Thomas Harte
Member #33
April 2000
avatar

Quote:

As far as I remember UN didn't back the Iraqi invasion.

The UN decided not to pass a new resolution declaring war.

However, Resolution 1441 held that Iraq was in material breach of Resolution 687, which was the ceasefire resolution following the 1990/91 Gulf War. Resolution 678 had authorised force against Iraq upon its failure to withdraw troops from Kuwait.

The US argument was, therefore, that 678 made war with Iraq legal. 687 set the terms on which it ceased to be legal, but required the Iraqi state to act in a certain way. 1441 held that Iraq wasn't acting in that way. Therefore 687 was no longer in force. However, 678 was.

There's some debate as to what 678 (and the others close to it) actually authorise force for, but the US and UK had been interpretting them pretty widely since 1991 — it wasn't a sudden Bush (Jnr) about face.

[disclaimer: my five-year memory isn't that good, I've looked up all the resolution numbers just now, please forgive me if I got any wrong]

Edgar Reynaldo
Major Reynaldo
May 2007
avatar

Quote:

Well I know that anything that UN does are resolution and no actions.

And that's all the UN does is talk. They have the authority to send UN peacekeeping troops where they deem it necessary, but apparently Sudan's not a high enough priority to do enough to actually put an end to the violence.

Quote:

On the other hand Saddam was holding situation there pretty tigth - no problems with Kurdi, no civil war.

Well sure, you put a large enough part of the population to death and they'll stop causing problems for you out of fear.

Quote:

Do you even know some reasons why the first Gulf War ended shortly after freeing Kuvait?

Because Kuwait was liberated? I don't know what you're really asking me.

Quote:

Who asked you? In Afghanistan you cleared your own mess - you were the ones who gave them weapons to fight russians in the eighties.

The 80's? You mean the Reagan years. I don't vote for Republicans.

OICW
Member #4,069
November 2003
avatar

Oh well if 10+ year resolution can authorise a war, maybe Germany should look up if the treaty of Versailles is still valid...

Vanneto: the situation out there is more complicated and basically it's a russian own problem they have to resolve after decades of overlooking it. In the past Stalin drew the borders in a way that Ossetia was cut in the half into south and north Ossetia. It was a sovereign contry which was absorbed into Soviet Union. After it fell apart Georgia was left as sovereign country and North Ossetia as a part of Russian federation.

And if somebody would like it to legalise, and if it's possible to use a decade old resolutions to rationalize government overthrow, then we can remember and blame your president Wilson, who wrote something along the lines that every nation has a right to have it's own state.

EDIT:

Quote:

The 80's? You mean the Reagan years. I don't vote for Republicans.

I highly doubt those US soldiers that were shot down from the skies by Stinger voted them either. But it was your (american) mess.

Quote:

Because Kuwait was liberated? I don't know what you're really asking me.

The original plan was to take down Saddam after Kuwait is liberated - why on Earth would the allied units cross the Iraqi border? However shortly after the army began it's run for Baghdad and order from high places came to withdraw. Somebody up there recognised that Saddam is important to keep the region stable.

So US gov. screwed Kurdis who were helping allies by making an uprising. All that because there won't be a civil war if Saddam is w/o power and the Iran won't take the opportunity.

[My website][CppReference][Pixelate][Allegators worldwide][Who's online]
"Final Fantasy XIV, I feel that anything I could say will be repeating myself, so I'm just gonna express my feelings with a strangled noise from the back of my throat. Graaarghhhh..." - Yahtzee
"Uhm... this is a.cc. Did you honestly think this thread WOULDN'T be derailed and ruined?" - BAF
"You can discuss it, you can dislike it, you can disagree with it, but that's all what you can do with it"

Evert
Member #794
November 2000
avatar

Quote:

Iraq broke many UN mandates and sactions.
The USA ended up going into Iraq thus providing the backbone to enfore UN-rules.

Ok, so when are you invading Israel?

Quote:

Do you think people like Saddam should be left in power to gas large groups of ethnic minorities?

No, but let's be clear about one thing: you didn't invade Iraq to liberate the Iraqi people from a horrible dictator (who originally came to power with US support back when the USSR was the enemy, but let's not go there).

Quote:

Were the Taliban stationed in Afghanistan or weren't they?

Since everyone knew they took control of the country in the late 1990, that's a bit of a silly question, don't you think?

Quote:

So enough of this the USA are a bunch of hypocrites blah blah BS.

It's nothing personal and we're all friends ans allies. That does not mean that you do not criticise one another. If one of your friends does something that you think is wrong, you tell them. And the US can be pretty hypocritical in their foreign affairs.

Thomas Harte
Member #33
April 2000
avatar

Quote:

Oh well if 10+ year resolution can authorise a war, maybe Germany should look up if the treaty of Versailles is still valid...

To be fair, the US and UK had policed no-fly zones in Iraq for the decade inbetween, and the entire UN had been involved in weapons inspection, etc. So the whole saga didn't really end and then begin again.

Don't misunderstand me though: I'm just explaining why I understand the invasion to have been legal. I don't mean to make any comment on whether it was moral and/or justified and/or appropriate. But bodies like the UN are really legal bodies; nations don't sign up to them because they agree to a common morality.

OICW
Member #4,069
November 2003
avatar

Quote:

Don't misunderstand me though: I'm just explaining why I understand the invasion to have been legal. I don't mean to make any comment on whether it was moral and/or justified and/or appropriate. But bodies like the UN are really legal bodies; nations don't sign up to them because they agree to a common morality.

I understand that. I'm just being sarcastic about the fact that 10+ years old resolution can justify and legalise a war.

[My website][CppReference][Pixelate][Allegators worldwide][Who's online]
"Final Fantasy XIV, I feel that anything I could say will be repeating myself, so I'm just gonna express my feelings with a strangled noise from the back of my throat. Graaarghhhh..." - Yahtzee
"Uhm... this is a.cc. Did you honestly think this thread WOULDN'T be derailed and ruined?" - BAF
"You can discuss it, you can dislike it, you can disagree with it, but that's all what you can do with it"

bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
avatar

Honestly, a large percentage of one of Canada's provinces, Quebec, wants to separate and I think it's bullshit. I personally wouldn't want to let them. They're not really "French". No more than I'm "English"... ::) They're Canadian! The only real ties they have to France anymore is the language they speak, and as I've heard they sort of butcher it anyway. IMO, Canada should just switch to English as the "official" language nation-wide. I have no problem allowing them to learn French, which has its uses, but I think the nation would be more unified if everybody spoke the same language. As it is, you get "Quebecuers" and other Canadians or Americans in an online game on the mic and it doesn't take long for people to be telling them to STFU or speak English and making homosexual jokes. Not only can we not understand them, but their accents are SO fucking annoying. I'll take a deep deep American South accent any day over that of a Quebecuer. And some of my family is French from both sides... I don't care. It's still annoying.

I honestly don't know why they want to separate, but it sounds like they're just being stupid to me.

imaxcs
Member #4,036
November 2003

You all tell them to STFU all the time but you don't have a clue why they want to seperate?! ;)

And Frank: stop spreading liberal propaganda!!

Edgar Reynaldo
Major Reynaldo
May 2007
avatar

Evert said:

Since everyone knew they took control of the country in the late 1990, that's a bit of a silly question, don't you think?

Quote:

Quote:

Right, it's as wrong as USA invading Iraq or Afghanistan,

Were the Taliban stationed in Afghanistan or weren't they?

It was a rhetorical question in response to OICW's comment. Saying that invading Afganistan to stop the Taliban was unjustified is like saying no one has a right to kill bus bombers.

And no, I don't condone all the weapon peddling that goes on. As OICW said, it was a problem of our past government that helped bring them to power.

OICW
Member #4,069
November 2003
avatar

Quote:

Were the Taliban stationed in Afghanistan or weren't they?

Yep they were. In fact Taliban wasn't the primary target of operation Enduring Freedom, it were the terrorist camps that they were harboring. Taliban overthrow was just a cherry on top of a cake.

The main problem there was that the soviet invasion was followed by civil war. During that time Al-Qaida established their training camps there. Talian took over and let Al-Qaida in Afghanistan. After 11. 9. 2001 USA gave their government ultimatum: "give us the organisators". They didn't and so the invasion followed.

In retrospective I must agree that it was a step in the right direction, because the regime was really oppresive. However I'm not sure if Iraq was right as well.

Edited spelling.

[My website][CppReference][Pixelate][Allegators worldwide][Who's online]
"Final Fantasy XIV, I feel that anything I could say will be repeating myself, so I'm just gonna express my feelings with a strangled noise from the back of my throat. Graaarghhhh..." - Yahtzee
"Uhm... this is a.cc. Did you honestly think this thread WOULDN'T be derailed and ruined?" - BAF
"You can discuss it, you can dislike it, you can disagree with it, but that's all what you can do with it"

Jonatan Hedborg
Member #4,886
July 2004
avatar

It's "Al-Qaida". HTH, HAND... This thread has derailed from an interesting subject to a very old and pointless one (that has been done to death already). A shame :/

Evert
Member #794
November 2000
avatar

Quote:

I honestly don't know why they want to separate, but it sounds like they're just being stupid to me.

Hmm...

Quote:

I personally wouldn't want to let them.

Quote:

IMO, Canada should just switch to English as the "official" language nation-wide.

Quote:

it doesn't take long for people to be telling them to STFU or speak English

Quote:

Not only can we not understand them, but their accents are SO fucking annoying. I'll take a deep deep American South accent any day over that of a Quebecuer.

One or two reasons do spring to mind if your attitude is anything to go by...

Quote:

They're not really "French". No more than I'm "English"... ::) They're Canadian!

Maybe they feel they're Quebecian (?) first and Canadian second?

Jonatan Hedborg
Member #4,886
July 2004
avatar

The reason for this war is people like Bamccaig... Well, not really. It's about Russian penis waving... but anyway.

Edgar Reynaldo
Major Reynaldo
May 2007
avatar

I think Russia and Georgia should both abolish whatever 'claim' they feel they have over South Ossetia and let them form their own independent country/state. They'd probably all get along better that way.

Vanneto
Member #8,643
May 2007

Nah, if we let all bullshitters have their countries, soon, the world will consist entirely of a million small countries. We must destroy separatists.

In capitalist America bank robs you.

Matthew Leverton
Supreme Loser
January 1999
avatar

I saw a video of a "live" reporter get shot by a Russian sniper. Typical liberal commies ... trying to take out the free press! Ron Paul warned of Russia attacking Georgia a few years ago. If I remember correctly, it was when USA was contemplating a "preemptive" strike against Iraq.

The way I see it, let them nuke each other out. Stop trading with Russia, take away their Olympic medals, and the nation will slowly starve away.



Go to: