|
Escalating situation in (country of) Georgia (pg. 20)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Atmos |
Well Krypton,
I must admit you are good, and I'm not being sarcastic.
But, we all know that during times of war some rights can and many times are deprived or softened.
We all know about the Civil War and Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus, WWI and the imprisonment of many for speaking out against the government, and WW2 when thousands of Japanese-Americans were forced to relocate to concentration camps.
It's part of history, and there shouldn't be a problem if you have nothing at all to hide. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by Atmos
Well Krypton,
I must admit you are good, and I'm not being sarcastic.
But, we all know that during times of war some rights can and many times are deprived or softened.
We all know about the Civil War and Lincoln's suspension of habeas corpus, WWI and the imprisonment of many for speaking out against the government, and WW2 when thousands of Japanese-Americans were forced to relocate to concentration camps.
It's part of history, and there shouldn't be a problem if you have nothing at all to hide. |
I'm one to believe that unless the country is under a specific territorial threat, like China invading California, there is no justification to suspend any constitutional freedoms, even in a time of war. When Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus, he was fighting an enemy which was right across the Potomac River, and even was invaded in 1863. During World War II, there was a very specific threat of a Japanese invasion of the west coast.
Now we look at today. We have no specific threats. No threat to our territorial integrity. Al-Qaida will never ever be able to take away our freedoms. We do that ourselves. I see no justification for President Bush to be able to spy on me, taking my financial records, or eavesdropping on my communications. I have a right to privacy. The government should kindly off. That's my view..;) |
|
|
| aNYthing |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
I'm one to believe that unless the country is under a specific territorial threat, like China invading California, there is no justification to suspend any constitutional freedoms, even in a time of war. When Lincoln suspended Habeas Corpus, he was fighting an enemy which was right across the Potomac River, and even was invaded in 1863. During World War II, there was a very specific threat of a Japanese invasion of the west coast.
Now we look at today. We have no specific threats. No threat to our territorial integrity. Al-Qaida will never ever be able to take away our freedoms. We do that ourselves. I see no justification for President Bush to be able to spy on me, taking my financial records, or eavesdropping on my communications. I have a right to privacy. The government should kindly off. That's my view..;) |
+1. But you may not be a terrorist but your neighbor may be. When you suspect everyone, EVERYONE WINS... by not being the terrorist. C'mon, don't you trust our government? They trust you! They trust you to spread your legs, bend your knees and touch your toes, while relaxing your sphincter. OBEY! |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
| quote: | Originally posted by aNYthing
Do you have any history of the conflict for the last several years? I've been following in Russian news for quite some time now, starting with Georgia's election of Saakashvili and the "rose revolution". When Shevarnadze was ousted, Russia was not very happy. Since that time the relations with Georgia were very strained and on a fast track downward. Russia made very little secret about it's dislike that a former Soviet aparatchik was kicked out and was replaced by Harvard-educated Yankee appeaser. |
Why like a leader who makes a clear statement that Russia is his enemy, in his first week in office? Like, seriously, if you REALLY followed the situation in the region, you would have noticed by now that Russia has been retreating all these years, and Georgia growing bolder and bolder. Look - half of South Ossetia was already in Georgian hands before Georgian act of aggression few days ago. They quietly took over section by section of that region. In 2006 they invaded Kodori Gorge in Abkhazia under stupid excuses, thus breaking the cease fire, the peace treaty and whatever other documents they signed in 1990s that stated against using force in the region. What did Russia do? Did Russian tanks roll in to do the same in Georgia? Hmmmm, no.
| quote: | | Make no mistake about it, if they could poison Saakashvili like they tried to Yushenko, they would. |
Yushchenko didn't die, did he? Russians agents could have killed them both long time ago but this is not a communist/authoritarian regime back in Kremlin. Russia does kill terrorists like Basayev and Yandarbiyev, but Yushchenko is no terrorist. There's absolutely NO shread of evidence that Russian agencies poisoned him, but all signs point to Ukrainian intelligence/secret agencies, who have their own interests, you know.
| quote: |
Believe whatever you want but as I said in CORe, Ossetia was just a prop and a nice button to push to (predictably) provoke Georgia into conflict. Attacks on Georgia have been going on for quite some time now, reported in number of (independent) russian media outlets. Georgia countlessly brought misclaneous evidence proving it, only to have it dismissed or downplayed. |
LOL!!! Yeah, like when in 2006 Georgian forces took over Upper Abkhazia, without much fanfare in the media ... (aka "2006 Kodori Gorge takeover")
OR, in the South Ossetia example, when Saakashvilli sent in troops in 2004 when he came to power to take over South Ossetia, and:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/10/w...7&ex=1218686400
| quote: |
But the Georgians are intensely nationalistic, and viewed these de facto states on their border as an intolerable violation of sovereignty. Mr. Saakashvili cashed in on this deep sense of grievance, vowing to restore Georgia’s “territorial integrity.” Soon after taking office, he succeeded in regaining Georgian control over the southwestern province of Ajara. Then, in the summer of 2004, citing growing banditry and chaos, he sent Interior Ministry troops into South Ossetia. After a series of inconclusive clashes, the troops were forced to make a humiliating withdrawal.
|
OOOPS! Russian act of aggression?
| quote: |
When Ukraine followed in Georgia's footsteps and Kyrgizstan shortly thereafter, Russia got little worried. That's why similar attempts at "flower revolutions" tried to materialize in Uzbekistan and Turkmenistan, they were brutally put down with significant assistance from Russia. Uzbekistan's decision to kick US bases out of it's territory was in no small part motivated by Russia.
|
Oh, yeah, sure, when Russia supports its candidates in post-Soviet republics, its called meddling in affairs and signs of authoritarianism, but then this type of stuff is allowed, read the below article. AND THATS NOT CALLED MEDDLING???
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/21/p.../21ukraine.html
| quote: |
Dollars for Democracy?: U.S. Aid to Ukraine Challenged
Russian leaders, many Ukrainians and even some members of Congress are asking whether the $58 million the United States spent to promote democracy in Ukraine over the past two years was actually intended to oust the government there.
The Bush administration insists that its effort to influence the conduct of the Ukrainian election is nonpartisan. Government officials say the political training programs Washington has sponsored in Ukraine are no different from those in a dozen other countries in recent years.
But teaching the principles of democracy to citizens in a semi-authoritarian system may, on its face, work to empower the government's opponents.
Government officials and contractors working in Ukraine say the projects Washington subsidizes - energizing disenfranchised voters, training student activists, setting up communication networks among nongovernmental organizations - tend to educate and empower the opposition and work to the disadvantage of pro-government parties.
"It has become particularly tricky to walk a very thin line," acknowledged Leslie J. McCuaig, Ukraine project director for the Institute for Sustainable Communities, a Vermont-based organization with branches in Russia and Ukraine.
The institute has an $11 million federal contract to help bring about a "fundamental cultural shift" in Ukraine, as the organization puts it, "from a passive citizenry under an authoritarian regime to a thriving democracy with active citizen participation."
Earlier this month, Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov of Russia charged that United States government contractors were meddling in Ukraine and had been involved in "gross violations" of Ukrainian law by working for the opposition candidate, Viktor A. Yushchenko - even though Vladimir V. Putin, the Russian president, campaigned openly for the government-backed candidate, Prime Minister Viktor F. Yanukovich.
At the same time, two members of Congress, a Democrat and a Republican, are calling for a federal investigation of government spending in Ukraine, saying the money was spent for partisan purposes.
Representative Ron Paul, Republican of Texas, complained in a statement to the House International Relations Committee this month that the administration had "sent U.S. taxpayer dollars into Ukraine to influence the outcome."
"Much of that money was targeted to assist one particular candidate," Mr. Paul said, "and through a series of cutout, nongovernment organizations - both American and Ukrainian - millions of dollars ended up in support of" Mr. Yushchenko.
Mr. Paul called for an investigation, as did Rep. Edolphus Towns, Democrat of New York, who said he believed that government contractors had helped instigate the popular uprising that began on election day.
And Kent R. Hill, an assistant administrator for the United States Agency for International Development, the office that administers the political aid to Ukraine, said he believed that the emotionally charged period after the runoff election for president last month had a peculiar dynamic that made it appear that the United States had taken sides.
"Our guidelines make it perfectly clear that we are not allowed to favor particular candidates," Mr. Hill said in an interview.
"But during the election crisis our support for free and fair elections was twisted" by others, he said, who implied that "we must be partisan, for Mr. Yushchenko," because he, too, was calling for free and fair elections.
Adrian Karatnycky, a Ukranian-American program officer for Freedom House, a government contractor that has been the specific object of Russian ire, says the problem runs deeper.
He said most of the people drawn to the organization's programs in Ukraine "have liberal values, because they are fed up with corruption, fed up with intimidation and want to defeat them."
The federal government spent $97 million on aid to Ukraine in the fiscal year that ended Oct. 31, 2004 for a broad range of social and political projects. About $28 million of that was spent on what the agency calls democracy projects.
|
| quote: |
The situation with the missle defence in the Czech republic also led to assymetrical response by Russia by flying bombers to Cuba |
There are no Russian bombers in Cuba, while Russian frontiers are infested with NATO military bases (plenty of NATO bombers there).
| quote: | | impeding sanctions against Iran |
Ok, buddy, then tell me, why didnt USA or NATO or Europe criticize or try to stop Russia and Iran from starting up the whole nuclear program in Iran in 1994? Well, gee, lemme guess - back then the leader was pro American. Kinda hard to just scrap the project after initial concent after billions of dollars have already been spent and invested on it. Plus, no proof for nuclear weapons, not yet at least.
| quote: | | Like it or not, Russia will not allow long-time enemy forces within short striking distance of its borders. It's enough that former republics to the north are home to NATO bases. |
, man, USA/NATO have military bases and presence in almost every dam post-Soviet country, from Georgia to Turkmenistan to Latvia to others. Plenty of their bases in the former Soviet sphere of control. NATO is a military group and is expanding towards Russian borders, thats a fact. One can only imagine that its a "peaceful" and "harmless" military expansion.
| quote: |
How did Russia respond to Baltic republics' desire to join NATO? By breaching their air territory, shutting down planes, trade embargos, and various other nastiness. |
Get a brain - Russia did NOT cut oil or gas to Baltic countries. And Ukraine is neither a Baltic state nor a NATO country, in case you're wondering. BTW, NATO airplanes have crossed into Russian airspace, too.
| quote: | | Not to mention that Russia openly declared that it has re-targeted its nukes at those republics, as they view NATO as a threat to national security. |
Thats what happens when idiots start building missile defense shields close to Russian borders, against a non-existing threat.
| quote: |
So, please don't go on saying how Georgia is to blame for what happened to it. |
Yes, Georgian attack on South Ossetia, Russian peacekeepers and citizens there was the proper thing to do. the cease fire, peacekeepers and UN agreements to avoid military action in the region, thats not important. Its always Russia's fault.
| quote: |
Oh, and guess what - if China would decide to reclaim Taiwan or Tibet - Russia would be there to back them up and the entire world could do f*ck all. Welcome to the new (old) world order where land-grab is free for all again... as long as you got nukes, resources, and not too lazy. |
And if Serbia decided to reclaim Kosovo, only an idiot like you with your silly logic would expect NATO not to do the same. Because they would. You're a hypocrite. |
|
|
| Magnetonium |
And another point, when in Ukraine anti-Russian leaders came to power following the Orange Revolution, despite the sour relations, Russian tanks didnt roll over Ukrainian border. Hint: maybe its because Ukrainian army didnt attack and massacre ethnic Russians in its east. |
|
|
| HardTranceProd |
LOL... I actually saw the press-conference between Medvedev and Sarkozy in Russian (I'm from Russia and speak Russian so I understood everything).
I must say, even though my sympathies lie with Russia, it doesn't help when the president talks like a thug!!!
Medvedev actually used the slang word ""/"ing douchebag" ('otmorozok'/'ublyudok') to describe Saakashvili in front of the audience, with Sarkozy standing next to him! Dude, when you're standing next to a world leader, in front of the cameras and in a suit, you don't act like you're in a schoolyard fight, watch what the you're saying! Also, I thought he was an educated, distinguished lawyer? Damn, he really talks like a thug.
At least when Putin cursed, it looked OK because he had the personality to go with it. But Medvedev is a scared and inexperienced pale-looking boy whose swearing looks really out of place. If people in the West heard what was really said in Russian at that conference, I'm afraid their worst fears about Russian thuggery would be confirmed -- and I say this as a supporter of Russia. :wtf: I wonder how it got translated for Sarkozy.
For those who speak Russian:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvYVC-B9yGo |
|
|
| LatinLover |
| The US should have nuked Russia a long time ago. If we would have, none of this would be happening. |
|
|
| Krypton |
| quote: | Originally posted by LatinLover
The US should have nuked Russia a long time ago. If we would have, none of this would be happening. |
Nuke Russia, Russia nukes you back.. you are a ing idiot.. |
|
|
| hardcore trancer |
| quote: | Originally posted by LatinLover
The US should have nuked Russia a long time ago. If we would have, none of this would be happening. |
wow you really are a tard.Hiroshima wasnt enough for you? arent you the same person who is against Iran having nukes? |
|
|
| LatinLover |
| quote: | Originally posted by Krypton
Nuke Russia, Russia nukes you back.. you are a ing idiot.. |
Wow dude dont take yourself so seriously :haha:
it! Lets give nukes to a neighboring country and have them do it for us. I mean there are many countries in that region that Im sure of theyll be gladly to assist us in this humanaterian effort.
I say to Nuke Iran and Russia. And 80% of the problems of this world would be solved. |
|
|
| Xavier Moriarty |
| quote: | Originally posted by LatinLover
I say to Nuke Iran and Russia. And 80% of the problems of this world would be solved. |
nah. you'd find evidence of us Serbs building some nukes and it would start all over.
americans like you is the reason why all europeans(and pretty much rest of the world) hates you.
God help us all if everybody is like you. i really hope thats not the case |
|
|
| LatinLover |
| quote: | Originally posted by Xavier Moriarty
nah. you'd find evidence of us Serbs building some nukes and it would start all over.
americans like you is the reason why all europeans(and pretty much rest of the world) hates you.
God help us all if everybody is like you. i really hope thats not the case |
America is a country that liberates the oppressed. No offense dude, but who have started the last two world wars? What region was the one that waged a holocaust?
Our foreign policies are not meant to be popular among everyone in the world. We have the right to do what it takes to restore peace in the world, if it means we should invade Iran, we should do that. |
|
|
|
|
