A spokesman for the Russian government said the convoy was not bound for the Georgian capital but was demilitarizing the area near the South Ossetia border so that Georgia could not launch new attacks.
The troops, which had been on Georgia's main east-west highway between Gori and Tbilisi, "never had plans" to travel to the capital, the spokesman said.{...}
Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili told CNN Wednesday that Russian forces "are encroaching upon the capital" in violation of a cease-fire agreement. He said the Russians never intended to hold up their end of the truce agreed to Tuesday.
"This is the kind of cease-fire that, I don't know, they had with Afghanistan I guess in 1979," Saakashvili said. "There is no cease-fire, they [Russian forces] are moving around."
Saakashvili is also apparently disillusioned with the people he thought were his allies.
Speaking at a press conference flanked by the leaders of Lithuania, Poland, Estonia and Latvia Saakashvili said:
"The response has not been adequate. Not only those people who are committing all those atrocities are responsible, but those who don't react to that, I think they also share responsibility."
He's right on all counts. So much for President's Bush's rhetoric about promoting freedom and democracy.
UPDATE: Condi Rice is supposedly en route to Paris to talk with the French and then to the Georgian capitol of Tbilsi, if it's still in Georgia's hands by then. I'm sure Putin is quaking in his boots.
UPDATE 2: The Russians have apparently gone into the Georgian city of Gori and looted it. Our president's response was to tell them that he really, really means it this time and he's sending in American military..not to bolster our ally but - get this - to deliver humanitarian aid!
3 comments:
So much for President's Bush's rhetoric about promoting freedom and democracy.
don't you mean the current occupant of the white house?
there are things that i remember from childhood.
impressions if you will.
some change.
some do not.
my first impression of pain was when i lost my first puppy. it did not return again until i buried my mother.
it did not change.
another first impression made on me was of the palestinians. this came at the 1972 olympics. when ff speaks of arafat and abass i only see in profile that picture taken across the balcony. nothing else.
but before that, the first impression i had of commmunism was of khrushchev pounding his shoe at the UN. and while shoe pounding is not found in political science, imo, it is a characteristic of the people.
think about it.
in the aftermath of 9/11 puken went on tv as said whatever he said. i'm sort of like charlie daniels in some ways. i didn't believe/listen to him then. i won't ever. take into consideration at the time of puken's address he was constructing the iranian nuke.
this is my impression of the soviet union.
they never stopped being the soviet union.
they never have been nor will they ever be a superpower.
they are a country with nuclear weapons.
that does not a superpower make.
england has nukes.
india has nukes.
pakistan has nukes.
no difference.
in the mid-1960s the soviets could build a submarine that could dive farther and faster than anything the US could build. it's just that that washing machine was such a problem.
satellite nations not included.
in the early 1970s the populations of the US and russia were both in the neighborhood of 200 million.
present day the US is approximately 320mil and russia has about 140mil.
satellite nations not included.
the UN has estimated that by 2040 russia will have a muslim majority population.
where is this going?
the russians are nothing.
they have nothing.
spare me the rhetoric b.poster.
they are nothing.
i had a russian girl come into my store. she had married an american while he was in russia working on patching the chernobyl reactor building. she told me how much she dislikes america. here, she said, you have to work and/or produce, not so there.
all you have to do there is fund the army and kill people.
my first impressions still hold.
and are correct.
the soviets have been watching the pallys bleed the US and are now doing the same thing, except instead of currency they take real estate.
and lives.
oh, and one other thing. the soviets will never ever be our friend/ally.
the current occupant of the white house has no comprehension of this.
perhaps this could be the title for your next essay on this subject.
i bet reagan is cussing the bush family.
Louie
"Spare me rhetoric..." I simply tell it like it is. Actually we really are not that far apart. Actually I agree with most of what you wrote, however, there are a few areas where very respectfully I think you are wrong.
Yes, India, England, and Pakistan have nukes. The biggest issue is not the nukes. Factors such as numbers of nukes, yield factors,and delivery systems have to be considered. In terms of sheer numbers, the Russians probably have the most. The US comes close. Also, the Russians have upgraded their arsenal in recent years and they have trained in fighting a nuclear war. The US has not upgraded its arsenal in quite a while. The maintenace of our arsenal frankly does not inspire confidence and our armed forces do not seem to have trained for all out nuclear war at least since we thought the cold war ended.
As to Russia's population problem, this can be corrected in one of two ways. Either by immigration or more reproduction. Mr. Putin has suggested giving the equivelant of $20,000 to $25,000 per couple per child. I'm not sure how the math would work on this. This seems a bit excessive even for an oil rich country like Russia. What is clear is if we want to encourage something we subsidize it in a meaningful way. If we want to discourage something we tax it. I'm sure some type of generous tax credit has been instituted in Russia by now for couple having children. Mr. Putin wanted to do it and he is the virtual czar there now. I'm sure its happened. As such, I expect the population growth problem will correct itself in the coming years. The Russians will likely have plenty of money. Oil prices of over $100 per barrel are likely here to stay for the next hundred years at least.
Even if you and Freedom Fighter are right and Russia is dying, this makes them even more dangerous. A dying man with a gun who has no ethics and whose main goal is expanding his own power base is a most dangerous creature. He has nothing to lose. This describes the early 21st century Russian leadership to the tee. The leadership owns the Russian media and has signifcant influence within the international and American news media. Getting their subjects into a fenzy to attack anyone they want to would not be very difficult.
Should Russia become mostly Muslim especially if they should they should embrace the brand of Islam practiced by the Saudi and/or Iranian leaderhsip, I don't think I need to tell how dangerous Islamic extremists with thousands of the most advanced nuclear weapons on earth and some of hte most advanced conventional weapons on earth would be.
As to Russia being a super power, I would say they are. This is a country that is capable of fighitng and winning a war against the United States. Russia is the only country on earth that this definitely applies to. China couold probably win a conventional war against the US but I'm not sure. With their vast nuclear arsenal, huge network of proxies around the world, and their vast oil wealth they are a force to be reckoned with.
I would agree that Reagan is probably cussing the Bush family. If he can see whats going on, he is no doubt livid. When he left office the Soviet Union was defeated and in desparate need of funds. Now due to poor decison making by the last three presidents, the US position relative to Russia is worse than it was in 1980 when Reagan entered office. Russia is frighteningly close to getting its old Soviet empire back and it has gained a firm foothold in the Middle East through Iran and Syria and it has a firm foothold in Central and South America through Venezuela.
You can visit www.flynnfiles.com and look under the post "21st century Russia" for a good reason not to expand NATO and/or assist countries like Georgia, however, I disagree. I think you are right that Russia will NEVER be our friend. This only ends when either they or us are thoroughly defeated. Naturally I pray we will win. I say we make our stand now. If we do decide to engage Russia either directly or through proxies we better know this will likely be the most difficult war we have ever fought. We may have more casualties than we have had in all the wars we have ever fought. Unless we are prepared to go to the wall, we had best not undertake this endeavor.
I have read that the US is thinking about sending in humanitarian aid to Georgia. Naturally the Russians are displeased at this. Some guy with a fancy named think tank who has a fancy title says, to paraphrase, that he bets the Russian would not want to take on the Americans. Unforunately he is probably flat wrong. The Russians would love to take us on. Something like this may be just the excuse they need.
If we should be in a shooting war with Russia, we must understand this will be VERU difficult. Frankly, I'm not sure the militaries of the US or Western Europe are prepared for this challenge. I pray I'm wrong of course.
You will probably not beat the Russians by over powering them. They can be outsmarted. It has happened before. This is how Reagan and his advisors defeated them. They outsmarted them.
Putin and the Russians seems to be extremely arrogant. Arrogant people make mistakes. If we are smart and alert we can capitalize when Russia makes the inevitable mistakes. I say make our stand now but it needs to be understood how difficult an undertaking this will be. Of course virtually nothing worth doing is easy!! I would begin the stand against Russia by substantially increasing our human intellegence capabilities and increasing the size and capabilities of the military.
Post a Comment