Will Georgia turn into a Moscow satellite?

[GePap]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Is it being a dick to expect people to back up wild claims of genocide or Nazi like behavior with something other than information from Kremlin controlled outfits? The burden of proof is on the people making those claims after all. I'd let it go if the claims were dropped until neutral observers are in the area but they aren't dropped and instead continued to be repeated.

Please, I already told Serb why his claims of genocide were false, and all I had to do was explain that even if we take Russian claims at face value, nothing that they described meets the definition of genocide.

So why stick to a policy of "PROVIDE ME A SOURCE I DECIDE I CAN BELIEVE!" That is not even asking for proof, because any proof he provides, you get an easy excuse to deny.

Oh, and here is todays WaPo:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/13/AR2008081300449_3.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2008081300317&s_pos=

A bit from page 3 of the article:

Despite Western governments' public statements of support for Saakashvili, some Western diplomats now privately say that the Georgian leadership or military made a serious and possibly criminal mistake last week by launching a massive barrage against the South Ossetian capital of Tskhinvali, which inevitably led to major civilian deaths and casualties.

Russian officials have said 2,000 people were killed in the Georgian offensive, a figure that has not been confirmed independently. But it is indisputable that large numbers of civilians were killed in and around Tskhinvali.

Western diplomats involved in trying to end the crisis said the Georgian assault on Tskhinvali was massively disproportionate -- as was the Russian response, which clearly involved the bombing of nonmilitary targets.

[Traianvs]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
The Russians are liars. "We're leaving now", and then don't. That's not to say ALL Russian natives are liars, but their government has lied. Either the "president" is a liar, or a puppet who got his strings yanked. You cry about Bush? At least Bush has said what he thought, regarding his "Axis of Evil" and hasn't crabbed over it.
He said we were going to Iraq. Doubtless, he hadn't a clue that Iraq would take so liong to take charge of their own interests. They're still ambiguous over a timetable.
Russia just flat out lied.

I agree that Russians are flar out liars (at least their government is of course), but come on. The Bush administration went to war in Iraq based on the claim Saddam wielded nuclear weapons, or, at least had nuclear weapons in production. Pretty much everyone in the world knew Saddam didn't have them, and Powell made a pretty poor impression with his so called evidence in the UNSC conference way back.

And even if Bush and his cronies had strong suspicion he had them, it's not a reason to go to war based on assumptions.

I think that's what Russian nationalists such as Serb and some others here mean with 'double standards', and rightly so

[Lancer]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Would you have prefered that I call him deluded?

Yes

[Ben Kenobi]

You don't get it. We don't need big ships to destroy your fleet in the Black Sea. For that we have enough anti-ship missiles and aircrafts.

You are going to sink an aircraft carrier without air supremacy? Good luck.

Besides your info about the Black Sea fleet is a bit incorrect. You forgot about submarines.

True, but if subs are the best you've got, that's not a good sign.

Anyhow, it's pretty bad place for a big naval battle for a side who has aircarriers. Your carriers can be sunk, while our carrier is unsinkable coast of the Black sea.

Again, it would be only done if the US has the support of Turkey and the Ukraine, who have more coast then you anyways. An aircraft carrier operating from the Ukrainian airspace would cause enormous problems.

[Kirnwaffen]

I think that your faith in the deterrent power of a small American force is disturbing. Sure, the Russians might back down, but it's just as likely that they won't. It's really playing 'Russian Roulette' (pardon the pun) with half the chambers loaded. The US is ill positioned for a confrontation with Russia right now, and it really isn't in anyone's best interest anyway.

[onodera]

Besides, Georgia isn't worth fighting for.

[Ben Kenobi]

Obviously worth fighting for.

The Russians are willing.

[DanS]

Originally posted by GePap

Western diplomats involved in trying to end the crisis said the Georgian assault on Tskhinvali was massively disproportionate -- as was the Russian response, which clearly involved the bombing of nonmilitary targets.

At a minimum, Georgia's actions were criminally stupid. To be honest, I don't feel too hot that Georgia put itself in such existential jeopardy knowing that the US is required to act in the worst case scenario (World War I was the most useless war ever, and now we have nukes). Georgia was woefully off-side, as best I can tell at this point.

After the dust settles, and we bail their asses out as best we can, Georgia needs a refresher course on what is acceptable and what isn't.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by GePap
Please, I already told Serb why his claims of genocide were false, and all I had to do was explain that even if we take Russian claims at face value, nothing that they described meets the definition of genocide.

And yet he has continued to make them.

So why stick to a policy of "PROVIDE ME A SOURCE I DECIDE I CAN BELIEVE!"

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm just tired of him shoveling his Kremlin talking points here and expecting the rest of us to take him at face value given the suspect source his wild claims come from.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi

True, but if subs are the best you've got, that's not a good sign.

Are you that clueless? Subs are an immense threat to any surface vessel, specially such a fat target as a Nuclear Carrier. You know, the whole stealthy sneaking up from underneath thing subs can do?

Wait, of course you are clueless about this.....silly me.

[Saras]

Originally posted by GePap


Are you that clueless? Subs are an immense threat to any surface vessel, specially such a fat target as a Nuclear Carrier. You know, the whole stealthy sneaking up from underneath thing subs can do?

Wait, of course you are clueless about this.....silly me.

Subs can be detected and sunk. That's why you have a ring of destroyer escorts, your own SSN or two and hellos dropping sonobuoys around a CV. Have you not played Harpoon?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Saras


Subs can be detected and sunk. That's why you have a ring of destroyer escorts, your own SSN or two and hellos dropping sonobuoys around a CV. Have you not played Harpoon?

Anything that can be detected can be sunk - so can a CVN? Your point?

Subs are so effective because they are the one of the hardest things in the ocean to find.

A single submarine can cause the kind of problem that few single surface warships can, and there have been plenty of reported naval excercises in which subs have been able to get through the defenses of a carrier battle group to "sink" a carrier.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by DanS


At a minimum, Georgia's actions were criminally stupid. To be honest, I don't feel too hot that Georgia put itself in such existential jeopardy knowing that the US is required to act in the worst case scenario (World War I was the most useless war ever, and now we have nukes). Georgia was woefully off-side, as best I can tell at this point.

After the dust settles, and we bail their asses out as best we can, Georgia needs a refresher course on what is acceptable and what isn't.

[Zkribbler]

Originally posted by GePap
A single submarine can cause the kind of problem that few single surface warships can, and there have been plenty of reported naval excercises in which subs have been able to get through the defenses of a carrier battle group to "sink" a carrier.

I'd far rather be on the carrier than in the sub.

[Kirnwaffen]

If any of this were to actually happen, I'd rather not be in the Black Sea, period.