jujuman13
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2006
- Messages
- 4,075
- Reaction score
- 579
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
With his rusty pistol he just destroyed an exemplarily NATO army
Georgia is not a NATO member. Nor was their military exemplary.
I'll give you the rest.
Putin's looking at the strategic situation. He got away with that Georgian mess, no matter who started it, he got away with it.
He's looking at Obama and I'm SURE he's smiling in pleasure. He see's NATO as militarily weakened, and politically neutered.
Russia will do whatever the hell it wants too, and ain't NO ONE gonna do more then talk about it.
Putin is running around with a rusty pistol, trying to seem relevant.
Clearly a very anti-Russian article..
1. Russian intervention in Georgia was justified, those regions wanted independence from a suppressive and insane Georgian state. Look at the Georgian leader for some symptoms of why they wanted to break free of Georgia.
2. Clearly any view that Russia is the aggressor for responding aggressively to the US anti-missile shield in eastern Europe is anti-Russian and bias for the US and the west.
3. Not everyone understood that Russian unilateral intervention in Georgia was a warning to the west that it cannot do the same without giving Russia those rights, and referring to Iraq.
4. Not developing a closer relationship to Russia would be wrong of Europe, we should try to develop as good and as stable and influential a relationship with Russia as we can. Any statement against this is just anti-Russian and US bias.. Why in the world should we not seek good relations with Russia?
5. The US stubbornness over the missile shield even when Russia threatens with nuclear war as retaliation is clearly a bad move from the US, not Russia.
None of these things were reflected in the article, just the opposite, the usual pro western bias that every UK and American paper takes, rather than a rational approach.. Russian newspapers are the same way, but even worse, so I still prefer a basket of media from many different nations in different languages to get a proper overview of the situation in an unbiased light.
Clearly a very anti-Russian article..
None of these things were reflected in the article, just the opposite, the usual pro western bias that every UK and American paper takes, rather than a rational approach.. Russian newspapers are the same way, but even worse, so I still prefer a basket of media from many different nations in different languages to get a proper overview of the situation in an unbiased light.
Why in the world should we not seek good relations with Russia?
5. The US stubbornness over the missile shield even when Russia threatens with nuclear war as retaliation is clearly a bad move from the US, not Russia. .
Unilateral Russian intervention in an area within the internationally recognized borders of Georgia? That is a stretch. As for Georgia being insane? That is obvious bias you have against the DEMOCRATIC state of Georgia. You really like dictatorships don't you, or are you going to similarly argue that Russia is a democracy like Iran?
Hold on, Russia invaded Georgia without reasonable provocation. That seems pretty aggressive to me. All of the fighting was on GEORGIAN soil, none on Russian. Georgia never attacked Russia, yet Russia attacked Georgia. Seems pretty aggressive on Russia's part to me.
Actually, Russia was referencing Kosovo more than Iraq. As for Iraq, there were several UN Security Council resolutions regarding it and there was legal authorization from the UNSC to invade Iraq - though some dispute that fact. There is no such resolution or authorization regarding Georgia.
We should see good and constructive relations if and only if Russia shows it wants to respect international norms. Invasions of small neighbors like Georgia doesn't cut it. Threats toward Ukraine also don't cut it. Russia is beginning to behave like it did in the old days. There is no reason to develop constructive relations with The Bear until it shows it can live within the international rule of law.
Russia manufactured the missile shield issue. It was clearly targeted toward rogue regimes in the Middle East. The small number of anti-missile bateries involved wouldn't even dent the Russian arsenal and is completely misplaces vis a vis possible Russian missile attacks on the US (which would follow the Great Circle route over the pole)
I agree that I prefer a variety of sources - I read English, French, Chinese, Indonesian, and Japanese sources with varying degrees of regularity. However, the rules state OP links must be in English and I believe most users of DP are mono-lingual and ENglish is the only common language we all have, so we have to stick with that. Unless, MZ, you would like me to start making posts in Traditional Chinese?
You have to learn how to read newspapers. Russians have ability to read their papers you don't have ability to read yours. They used to read Soviet papers – and extract truth – between the lines, not in the lines. The article most likely refers not to the statements and positions of Western politicians, but rather to the positions of new members of NATO/EU = former members/satellites of the USSR. Many of them came to power on the wave of anti-Russian propaganda and they still use Russia as a escape goat for their failers as well as the leveler to extract money/help from the West.
Yeah, and that rusty pistol could destroy the US and the rest of the world, easily. Perhaps you could consider that before making ignorant comments.
Would you be alive to see that? you or any of your friends?
Long list of lies and verbal fallacies, as usual.
Whats your problem with anything else than the US and democracy? Do you think only the US and democracy is "right"? Russia went to Georgia to help the breakaway regions and avoid Georgian military suppression of those regions.
The situation with the breakaway regions in Georgia and intra Georgian conflict was getting out of hand. Russia going there without the approval of the security council was a strong signal to the US that if they have those right, Russia will also have those rights. Georgia was in military conflict with those regions, Russia stopped that, and let the people have their independence as they wanted, from the horrible regime in Tiblisi.
Your memory is clearly flawed, there was no approval in the security council for a war in Iraq. The Us effectively made the security council invalid, and thus allowing Russia the freedom to also take unilateral actions like the US did in Iraq.
Perhaps it also time then for Europe to reconsider their relations with the US, since they are also not respect international norms.
Are you sure about that? What if the US manufactured the missile shield issue? They were the ones who took the first steps and most likely to be the ones manufacturing the issue if anyone did that.. Why are you so blindly favorable for the US and to blindly against Russia? I am only trying to be rational here and say "open your eyes, Russia is not all bad, and the US is not all good".
What would the US feel if Russia placed missile shields in Cuba? Or again placed missiles there?
Lol.. I would love to learn Mandarine Chinese.. Actually I will embark on it some years from now. But having English as a main language on this forum do not mean we have to be blindly pro-US and blindly anti everything that is not like the US.
Non response signifying he has nothing to say and can't accept the facts - AS USUAL!
The status de-juro does not change de-facto even a bit.
I love democracy and the rights of the people. It doesn't have to be U.S. style democracy, though I do believe it is preferable to the Parliamentary system. I prefer systems that reflect the will of the people and grant civil and political rights to citizens and legal residents of the country. When comparing GEorgia and Russia on this score, while Georgia has a ways to go, it is clearly superior to Russia.
Those "breakaway regions" were legal parts of Georgian territory as recognized by the international community and were its borders at the time of the break-up of the Soviet Union. How would Russia like foreign troops getting involved in the multitude of areas in Russia with ethnic minorities just itching to break away from the Russian bear.
It was an INTRA-Georgian conflict. Russia went in and has now effectively taken away two parts of Georgia, including nearly one half of its coastline.
Read UNSC resolutions 678 and 1441 VERY CLOSELY! Then, come back to me.
You are being silly now. As for the missiles in Poland, those are CLEARLy aimed at a rogue regime with a very small number of missiles. Even if they were targeted at RUssia, the sheer number of Russian missiles could overwhelm such a modest system. Furthermore, the DEFENSIVE missiles would have had NO impact on missiles targeting the US as they would cross the polar Great Circle route to North America.
Is the US all good? You know better than that. I have been critical of the US when I think they are wrong. Check out the thread on the ICJ decision on the MExicans and the State of Texas. I came squarely against the US and Texas on that thread.
And if you look at my full body of posts, I am NOT always blindly pro-US. I am critical of the US and any other democracy WHEN I THINK IT IS WARRENTED. However, I am not going to blindly attack the US or any other democracy when it is NOT WARRENTED. Fair enough?
As for Chinese, it is a hard language to learn, especially the writing. But it is endlessly fascinating.