Will Georgia turn into a Moscow satellite?

[Lancer]

The Ukraine, once its in NATO, would be OK though and easily covered by locally based fighters. In Georgia though I agree, the defenses could be swamped due to lack of depth.

Georgia at best would be like Berlin was. The Berlin bregade was to hold out as long as they could to be a thorn in the side of the Sovs while the heavy divisions tried to stop Sov armor from overrunning the rest of Germany.

Georgia would be somewhat cut off from aid except from Turkey. I wonder what Turkey thinks about the Russian invasion of Georgia? Remember their lack of cooperation regarding allowing the 4th inf from jumping off into Iraq. Maybe they would be more helpful vs the Russians.

[Zkribbler]

There was actually a more cynical reason for us placing U.S. troops in West Berlin and in South Korea too, for that matter.

There weren't enough U.S. troops in either place to have a prayer of slowing down a major Communist offensive. Rather the troops were there so that the Communist knew, if they attacked, they'd be killing Americans, and the U.S.A. would definitely be getting involved big time.

[Lancer]

In Europe the problem was the europeans, particularly the French and Germans. They couldn't be bothered to spend for their own defense.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Zkribbler
Until last week, I was against the missile base. I was afraid it would restart the Cold War. Well, that's kind of a moot point now, isn't it.

What reasonable person is going to be against accelerated inclusion and expantion of NATO presense in Poland and other places closer to Russia?

Hmmm, maybe there was a reason from Washington's side for what's been going on... Mr. Putin, you've just been played. /Machiavelli

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Lancer
Georgia would be somewhat cut off from aid except from Turkey. I wonder what Turkey thinks about the Russian invasion of Georgia? Remember their lack of cooperation regarding allowing the 4th inf from jumping off into Iraq. Maybe they would be more helpful vs the Russians.

The Turks might be remembering the Euro/French reaction to the possibility of them being attacked.

Turkey is an excellent example of the dangers of extending NATO membership to places where there is no general will to fight for.

Don't hold your breath for the Ukraine, unless recent Russian actions have made the French and Germans much more militant.

[Lancer]

You put your finger on it notyoueither. The Germans and the French. I have great faith in their ability to wimp out. I'm hoping the eastern euros can shame them into stepping up. If the eastern euros cozy up to the US these 'great' powers will feel their honoueoure is threated and actually do something, like let the Ukraine in and forward deploy their pathetic excuse for a military.

[onodera]

Originally posted by Lancer
Georgia would be somewhat cut off from aid except from Turkey. I wonder what Turkey thinks about the Russian invasion of Georgia? Remember their lack of cooperation regarding allowing the 4th inf from jumping off into Iraq. Maybe they would be more helpful vs the Russians.

Originally posted by Turkey
I wonder if we can grab Ajara when nobody's looking?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Lancer
You put your finger on it notyoueither. The Germans and the French. I have great faith in their ability to wimp out. I'm hoping the eastern euros can shame them into stepping up. If the eastern euros cozy up to the US these 'great' powers will feel their honoueoure is threated and actually do something, like let the Ukraine in and forward deploy their pathetic excuse for a military.

Given that the French and Germans both have had far more experience with war in the last 100 years than the US has had, calling them "wimps" is a patently moronic. The French in particular have hardly been PC in their foreign policy, specially in Africa. But given that in truth it would be them, and not the US, that would bear the brunt of fighting on the Central European Plain, I can see why both would be far less sanguine than the poor Eastern Europeans they would have to bail out, and Americans sitting 3000 miles + away from the conflict.

Good for them for having common sense.

[GePap]

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/48293.html

Did Bush speak too soon about U.S. Navy aiding Georgia?
By Jonathan S. Landay | McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON — President Bush Wednesday promised that U.S. naval forces would deliver humanitarian aid to war-torn Georgia before his administration had received approval from Turkey, which controls naval access to the Black Sea, or the Pentagon had planned a seaborne operation, U.S. officials said Thursday.

As of late Thursday, Ankara, a NATO ally, hadn't cleared any U.S. naval vessels to steam to Georgia through the Bosporus and the Dardanelles, the narrow straits that connect the Mediterranean and the Black Seas, the officials said. Under the 1936 Montreaux Convention, countries must notify Turkey before sending warships through the straits.

Pentagon officials told McClatchy that they were increasingly dubious that any U.S. Navy vessels would join the aid operation, in large part because the U.S.-based hospital ships likely to go, the USNS Comfort and the USNS Mercy, would take weeks to arrive.

"The president was writing checks to the Georgians without knowing what he had in the bank," said a senior administration official.

"The president got out in front of the planning when he talked publicly about using naval forces," said a second senior administration official. "At that point we need to look at treaty obligations, our bilateral relations with the Turks and others, waterway restrictions and what kind of ships might be appropriate and usable — something like the Comfort or something already in the Med (Mediterranean)."

The U.S. officials requested anonymity because they weren't authorized to speak publicly, because the issue is diplomatically sensitive or because the administration takes a dim view of officials who reveal its internal deliberations.

The White House and the Turkish Embassy didn't immediately return telephone calls.

Bush's pledge to send aid-carrying naval ships prompted Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili to proclaim that U.S. warships would break what he claimed — inaccurately — was a Russian naval blockade of Georgia's Black Sea coast, and that U.S. forces would take control of his country's ports.

While Saakashvili either exaggerated or misunderstood Bush's announcement, a U.S. failure to fulfill the president's pledge could prompt other former Soviet republics and Soviet bloc nations to question whether they can count on U.S. support if Russia targets them.

"We think about Turkey when we realize we need them for something," said Mark Parris of The Brookings Institution, who served as U.S. ambassador to Turkey between 1997 and 2000. "This could very well be a case of that."

Bush on Wednesday said he was launching a "vigorous and ongoing" humanitarian mission in which U.S. military aircraft and ships would bring aid to beleaguered Georgia.

The first U.S. C-17 cargo plane arrived in Tbilisi, the Georgian capital, with tents and other supplies later that day.

U.S. officials said the Turks hadn't cleared U.S. naval vessels to transit the Bosporus and the Dardanelles.

"The Turks haven't been helpful," said a State Department official. "They are being sluggish and unresponsive."

The Russian invasion of Georgia has almost certainly unnerved Turkey because it has huge energy and trade interests in adjacent Central Asia.

Turkey also may be reluctant to jeopardize the $24 billion in annual trade it does with Russia, which provides around 70 percent of its natural gas supplies. The Turkish Navy also shares the Black Sea with Russia's powerful Black Sea Fleet, which in part has prompted Ankara in recent years to restrict U.S. and NATO naval operations and exercises there.

The current situation echoes the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq, when the Bush administration tried to send thousands of U.S. troops into northern Iraq through Turkey — a Muslim nation where most people opposed the war — without first obtaining Ankara's permission.

The Turkish parliament refused to allow the United States to use its territory.

Nancy A. Youssef contributed to this article.

[notyoueither]

What was the French problem with defending Turkey from attack from Iraq? Surely they were not afraid of bearing the brunt of any fighting.

[GePap]

Originally posted by notyoueither
What was the French problem with defending Turkey from attack from Iraq? Surely they were not afraid of bearing the brunt of any fighting.

Maybe they thought the likelyhood of that was none, which was utterly correct, as there was no real Iraqi threat to Turkey.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by GePap


Maybe they thought the likelyhood of that was none, which was utterly correct, as there was no real Iraqi threat to Turkey.

What actually happened was nowhere nearly as important as the messages sent.

[Lancer]

With every passing year I become more in favor of reestablishing the Byzantine empire.

[GePap]

Originally posted by notyoueither


What actually happened was nowhere nearly as important as the messages sent.

What, that some members of the allience didn't care for the US trying to use NATO to further its chosen war against Iraq? Good for them.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by GePap


What, that some members of the allience didn't care for the US trying to use NATO to further its chosen war against Iraq? Good for them.

The Turks had realistic concerns about their security in the face of an unkown situation, but other members of NATO actively tried to block measures to ensure that security.

There is more to it than where you fall on the scale of support or opposition to Bush.