Webdiary - Founded and Inspired by Margo Kingston

The Russians are still clinging to the hope of regime change in Georgia:

"Russian President Dmitry Medvedev no longer considers his counterpart Mikheil Saakashvili to be Georgia's leader, telling Russian television that Saakashvili is a "political corpse"."

But what the hell could this mean;

"He also said that Moscow did not fear being expelled from the Group of Eight industrialised nations over the Georgian crisis, as has been suggested by some in the West.

Medvedev said the suggestions were being made in relation to the upcoming presidential election in the United States.

"The calls that are being heard, I explain them exclusively by the American electoral technology as a way of raising popularity based on conflict," the president said in an interview broadcast on Russian television."

American electoral technology? Anyway...

Talking about " raising popularity based on conflict", that's been the main thrust of the Russian ultra-right for months now.

I knew there was a special term for this sort of thing, but it took me a while to remember it.

It's called Irredentism

"Irredentism is any position advocating annexation of territories administered by another state on the grounds of common ethnicity or prior historical possession, actual or alleged. Some of these movements are also called pan movements."

Of course, the Pan Slavic movement of the 19th century was one of the great irredentist movements in Tsarist Russia.

It's not a re-run of the Cold War. It's a re-run of the events leading up to World War One.

Sorry everyone. It just took me a while. Now, what's your excuse?

Anthony Nolan: "The Russian spooks are probably better informed than most Republicans about top end dealings:"

Well, they've been very active in Georgia, propping up pro-Russian groups.

And yet, Putin who was the head Russian spook for years reckons he didn't see it coming...

"Mr Putin used an interview with the American television network CNN to say that his defence officials had told him the war was triggered to benefit one of the US presidential candidates." (see report below).

Note, the past tense "triggered".

Or if he did see it coming, couldn't stop it.

"Putin offered scant evidence to support his assertion, and the White House called his comments absurd."

But that won't, as I predicted, stop the usual useful idiots from repeating the Moscow line. After all, they don't do evidence. They do slogans.

Next, a 'breakaway republic' in the Ukraine. Just watch. And the parrots will sing the Moscow tune.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article20630.htm

Cheney's chief of staff in Georgia just before the attack on South Ossetia? For peaceful purposes, of course.

I suggest that Medvedev's claim as to Bush's motive in provoking hostilities in order to create a military election mode for the Presidentials is probably better informed than most USA political commentators. The Russian spooks are probably better informed than most Republicans about top end dealings:

Putin accused the US of provoking the conflict to help the Republican candidate - an outspoken critic of the Kremlin in the race for the Presidency.

It works for me.  It'll probably work for McCain as well.  What better to unite the nation than the old external Cold War foe - those damn Russkies! 

Pass the shotgun Jebediah! 

Where's ma' Bible?

Y'all don' wanna trust a man of color in the White House at a time like this do ya?

Dylan Kissane: "Not once in the article you linked to did the word "trick" or "tricked" even appear."

Well, clearly, that's what has happened, judging from Putin's own frank admission of incompetence:

The Russian President, Vladimir Putin, has shocked Europe by using the giant American broadcaster, CNN, to accuse his US counterpart, George Bush, of creating the war in Georgia as a plot to install John McCain as his successor.

In the most outrageous and inflammatory claim since the crisis in South Ossetia erupted earlier this month, Putin accused the US of provoking the conflict to help the Republican candidate - an outspoken critic of the Kremlin in the race for the Presidency.

There. Putin frankly concedes he only attacked Georgia at the instigation of George W Bush in order to bolster John McCain's standing in the up-coming election.

Russia, goaded into a foolish, and essentially self-defeating geo-political move, resulting in Russia's international condemnation and marginalisation.

It will take years perhaps for Russia to dig itself out of the mess.

AS THE tiny Georgian territories of South Ossetia and Abkhazia celebrated Russia's decision to recognise their independence yesterday, the Kremlin's threat it is ready for another Cold War saw its relations with western Europe hit a new low.

Russia's signing of the decree, announced via an inflammatory address by its President, Dmitri Medvedev, has killed the peace plan and ceasefire negotiated with much fanfare by the French President, Nicolas Sarkozy.

Oh, great. A complete political and diplomatic catastrophe, and all he has to show for it is annexing South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Because of George W Bush.

Tricked. Or stupid.

Here's the latest spin:

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin has accused the United States of orchestrating the conflict in Georgia for domestic political purposes, prompting angry denials from the White House, as tensions between the former Cold War rivals escalate.

Mr Putin used an interview with the American television network CNN to say that his defence officials had told him the war was triggered to benefit one of the US presidential candidates.

If anyone asks how Putin and Medvedev allowed themselves to be "tricked" this way by the cunning Americans, just hint at the insidious Cosmopolitans working behind the scenes, I suppose.

So, now the Kremlin realise they were "tricked" into annexing Georgian territory, I suppose they'll hand it back?

Yeah, right.

I wonder who "tricked" Putin into the Chechnyan conflict? Or those Bear Bomber flights over the UK?

I suppose the only thing more alarming than the prospect of a new Cold War is the thought that the Soviet Prime Minister, a former KGB head no less, needs his defence chiefs to tell him that he's been "tricked" into invading a neighbouring country by George W Bush.

I cannot wait till the "peace" movement starts using this "analysis" around the fondue pot. How the dark, evil genius of George Dubya so got the upper hand over the Kremlin it "tricked" them into invading Georgia.

Finally, a hint as to George Dubya's place in history - the cunning engineer of international geopolitics who conned the Kremlin into what now is unfolding as the biggest blowpack in Russian history since it invaded Czechoslovakia in '68.

Funny. Well, apart for all the dead people, of course.

What next? Ronald Reagan "tricked" them into Afghanistan?

Dylan Kissane: "If you tune in to a bit of Russian state TV you will see that this is largely the Russian argument with regards to Kosovo."

Well, indeed, perhaps even the entire former Soviet bloc.

"Russia stunned the West on Tuesday by recognizing the independence claims of two Georgian breakaway regions, and U.S. warships plied the waters off of Georgia in a gambit the Kremlin saw as gunboat diplomacy."

Say, Ernest, John? What if the USA decided to recognize the independence of Chechnya or Tibet?

And perhaps sent peace keepers there to "protect" the locals. Would that be alright?

President Dmitry Medvedev says Russia would respond militarily to the deployment of US missiles close to its borders under an American missile shield plan.

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice signed an agreement in Poland last week on the deployment of 10 US interceptor rockets there.

Washington says the shield, also involving tracking systems in the Czech Republic, is intended to protect against launches by rogue states - a reference principally to Iran.

"These missiles are close to our borders and constitute a threat to us," Mr Medvedev told Al-Jazeera television.

"This will create additional tension and we will have to respond to it in some way, naturally using military means."

At the same time:

Russia stunned the West on Tuesday by recognizing the independence claims of two Georgian breakaway regions, and U.S. warships plied the waters off of Georgia in a gambit the Kremlin saw as gunboat diplomacy.

Isn't this all getting a bit out of hand? The US should take it's missiles back to the US. Democratic elections should be held in the breakaway regions to let them determine their future. A false move here by either Russia or the US could see a nuclear holocaust. Bush and Putin should take a few "calm me down" pills and focus on the real threats of climate change, population growth and world poverty.

Ernest William: "Ever since WW 2 the American interference in the affairs of world nations has been nothing short of empire building."

Perhaps they were inspired by the example of the Socialist International, the purpose of which was to spread around the world a particular conception of the ideal society, which found concrete expression in activities of Soviet Russia, Communist China, Castroist Cuba and the like? And whose interference in the affairs of world nations was nothing short of empire building?

The difference being, whereas the marxisant ideal of the Socialist International has been universally rejected by all but a handful of failed states, the liberal-pluralist model exemplified by the United States has been to some degree accepted everywhere, ironically even in Russia to a limited extent?

You never know what you might raise. (youtube) 

Eliot Ramsey: "Another area rich with potential for moral equivalence is the growing frequency in the discovery of unexploded Russian cluster bomblets around Georgia."

Moral equivalence? Wait until a certain Russian car manufacturer buys the Hummer brand. The supply of luxury cars is becoming big business in a growing economy - and a select number of individuals wish to show off that success. Not much talk of universal health-care by the "hoped" for new world leader.

Malcolm B Duncan: "Yes, Eliot Ramsay, but what will it do for GDP? Might be a market there."

Well, obviously, the destruction of vital infrastructure and the murder of Georgian workers won't do much for Georgia's GDP at all.

Also, the diversion of resources away from Russian peace-time industry and the subsequent political isolation and damage it does to Russia's relations with the EU member states, won't do much for Russia's GDP, either.

You seem to have a bit of a preoccupation with GDP, Malcolm. You should complement your strong views on it with an introductionary course in economics.

Perhaps your local community college? You won't need formal educational qualifications to get admission that way.

Tony Phillips: "While we should not think the NATO policy of expansion, or the stupid, arrogant, hypocritical and bullying tactics of the current US administration, are blameless in the current situation we absolutely should not fall into the trap of therefore thinking we should side with Russia."

Another area rich with potential for moral equivalence is the growing frequency in the discovery of unexploded Russian cluster bomblets around Georgia.

Watch this space...

Moscow moved closer Wednesday to recognising the independence of two Georgian separatist regions at the centre of Caucasus conflict -- as a diplomatic onslaught with its former Cold War rivals gathered pace.

As Russia warned that the signing of a US-Poland missile defence deal will fuel a new arms race in Europe, recognition for the two Georgian regions would present a direct challenge to Georgia's sovereignty as backed by the United States.

In Abkhazia, the separatist parliament and president issued an appeal asking Russia to recognise their independence, while the leader of South Ossetia, Eduard Kokoity, told Interfax news agency that his separatist region would do likewise.

Both regions are planning pro-independence demonstrations for Thursday.

US President George W. Bush, meanwhile, has repeated that South Ossetia and Abkhazia are "part of Georgia," adding that "the world must stand for freedom" in the ex-Soviet republic.

With two superpowers threatening each other, the people of Georgia could be the meat in the sandwich. Surely if we believe in freedom and democracy this dispute could be resolved by holding a referendum in the breakaway regions.

If the US keeps prodding the wounded bear, one day it will turn around and bite.

The United States has branded Russia an outlaw over its refusal to immediately pull its troops out of Georgia.

I guess this puts Russia into the axis of evil.

What gives the US the right to judge any nation?

Who made it the judge of the world?

May I suggest the US get its own house in order before it starts flinging allegations at others.

I heard on the ABC's AM programme this morning that Russian soldiers are posing for pictures in front of Stalin's statue in Gori, which was Stalin's birthplace, and that bread queues are forming in the centre of town

Just like the good old days.

Marilyn Shepherd : "From the Washington Post today.  Why don't western media report the brutality of Israel in all of these things?"

Rice said the alliance would punish Russia for its invasion of the Georgia and deny its ambitions by rebuilding and fully backing Georgia and other Eastern European democracies.

"We have to deny Russian strategic objectives, which are clearly to undermine Georgia's democracy, to use its military capability to damage and in some cases destroy Georgian infrastructure and to try and weaken the Georgian state," she said.

"We are determined to deny them their strategic objective," Rice told reporters aboard her plane, adding that any attempt to recreate the Cold War by drawing a "new line" through Europe and intimidating former Soviet republics and ex-satellite states into submission would fail.

"We are not going to allow Russia to draw a new line at those states that are not yet integrated into the trans-Atlantic structures," she said, referring to Georgia and Ukraine, which have not yet joined NATO or the European Union but would like to.

Rice could not say what NATO would eventually decide to do to make its position clear but said the alliance would speak with one voice "to clearly indicate that we are not accepting a new line."

At the same time, she said that by flexing its military muscle in Georgia as well as elsewhere, including the resumption of Cold War-era strategic bomber patrols off the coast of Alaska, Russia was engaged in high-stakes brinksmanship that could backfire.

I think Condi has forgotten who holds all the aces in this game of brinkmanship. How is NATO going to punish Russia? It is the US that was flexing its muscle in Europe by placing missiles on Russia's doorstep. Every day Russia is getting stronger while the US gets weaker. Threats of punishment must make the Russian generals laugh. Taking on Russia would not be as easy as Iraq and Afghanistan. The bully would have to fight someone with similar capabilities and where would it get the Army to do the fighting?

"He'll get around to the Jews eventually."

Geoff old mate; he may well do, but not as often as your dear self.

A few months ago I did a short interview (PDF) with a Portuguese journalist named Jorge Rodrigues. It was part of the wider background for a series of three pieces he would write for Expresso Economia drawing on some of the work in international political power cycles I had done. A couple of questions and my answers are below:

Jorge Rodrigues: Do you think Russia can develop an historical similar pattern with the Germany power cycle since the beginning of the XX Century? I am not meaning that Putin or his successors are an Hitler copy and Russia will change from the present "mild" authoritarian regime for a fascist and open imperialist one, but due the decline in the power cycle and the inflection with Putin emergence, can we assist in this window of 15 years to a similar strategy of power projection and risk of conflicts, for instance in the shatter belt of Russia, in Europe and Asia, or even in the Arctic?

Dylan Kissane: Of the power curves I mapped, Russia's is closest to emerging in a German-style pattern. A similar argument might be made for the United States, however the rate of rise and decline in the case of the US is less pronounced. If this is the case then a similar strategy to German expansionism of the 20th century might well emerge. Eastern Europe - particularly East Moldova/Transnistria, Georgia and perhaps East Ukraine to start with - would be obvious targets of an expansionist Russia, as would the Central Asian states. The Arctic, though, is an interesting case as not only is the expansionism under Putin already taking place today, I think there is a possibility Russia might actually succeed in having their claim recognized under international law. The question then becomes whether Russia's activities in the Arctic are really expansionist under a soft authoritarian government or just 'righting a geographical wrong' with modern sub-ocean research.

JR: So, do you think the German "model" can be cloned?

DK: Is it possible for Russia to follow a 20th century German path? Yes, I believe so. Is it likely? I think it is more likely than not. The places to watch are where any German-style expansion will take place but I think we can be more specific and point to specific Eastern European territory that would be the equivalent of the Hitler's Sudetenland in the shape of Transnistria, Georgia and East Ukraine. Also we could look to recent moves against the Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty by Russia and, perhaps, deployment of new weapons systems by Russia in Kaliningrad.

JR: Benchmarking Russia and China power cycles, it seems that the riskier situation is more in the side of Russia's counter-offensive in its decline cycle, than in the rising cycle of China. Do you agree?

DK: I do. On the long term trend, Russia is more likely to experience a critical point on its power cycle curve than China. Indeed, China's rise remains inevitable and will continue towards 2030. This makes Russia 'riskier' though probably not for Australia (the focus of my study)...

The 'cycles', 'curves' and 'critical points' we refer to relate to maps of relative power amongst the world's 'great powers', a list that (in my research, anyway) currently includes the US, the EU, Russia, China and Japan but has also included, at various times, Germany, Great Britain, France, Italy, Austria-Hungary and the USSR. 'Critical points', as the name suggests, are critical in that they are very strongly correlated with war - and Russia has recently passed through a critical period and is heading for another one.

As should be clear from the extract above, I think Georgia was always going to be one of the places that Russia might expand into; indeed, this and the questionable grand strategy of the current Georgian leadership was a big driver in denying Georgia a place in NATO. The West may not get everything right but even they could spot what a dud deal Georgia in NATO would be.

John, I think that what's important in looking at the current conflict is not to reduce it to a reaction by Russia to Polish missile bases or Czech radar stations. Rather, I think it should be seen in a much wider historical context wherein the United States has been in relative decline for half a century (and will likely continue in that direction) and where the European Union on Russia's western border is in relative decline, too.

Whatever started this conflict - and I have to say I am a little more skeptical of the official Georgian line than some others I would normally agree with on such things - the problems for the West in the east of Europe seem to me to be entirely predictable given an assessment of the wider historical context of great powers and their inevitable cycles of rise and decline.

Geoff Pahoff: "It's odd how many people are absolutely determined to go on repeating history and pin it all on the closest Jew."

It's a pretty striking illustration, isn't it, of the rhetorical and political diversonary purposes of the New Anti-Semitism?

You have an utterly indefensible foreign policy programme, like invading a tiny neighbouring country, and so how do you spin that? Easy. You are actually "protecting" it from the perfidy of the insidious global Zionist conspiracy.

You have a completely barbaric record on human rights? No worries. You take over the UN Human Rights Commission and spend every moment of the working day denouncing Israel?

"Look! Look! The Jews!"

Worked well in the case of Czechoslovakia and Poland when "peace keeping forces" rushed to the "defense" of "fellow nationals" in Sudetanland and Danzing.

Jacob A. Stam: "Eliot Ramsey, all sorts of big players are running guns all over the place. It's a huge problem, but why focus particularly on Russia and wee Venezuela?"

Before then the acutely dangerous policy of enlarging Nato had already begun, partly for the most frivolous of reasons. Bill Clinton ingratiatingly promised a Polish-American audience in Chicago that Poland would join, yet another example of the baleful influence of "hyphenated" American domestic politics on foreign policy.

And so, in this heedless way, Nato was expanded to include not only the former Warsaw Pact countries Poland, Hungary and Bulgaria, but the Baltic states that were part of the Soviet Union only 20 years ago. One didn't have to be a Russian nationalist to see this as deliberate provocation of an angry and wounded country. With all its brutality, Russia has legitimate security concerns and national interests. When Georgian membership of Nato is flaunted, one wonders what the US reaction would have been if Leonid Brezhnev had invited Mexico to join the Warsaw Pact.

"There was a lot of talk about how Georgia should join Nato and if only Georgia was a member of Nato this wouldn't have happened, and so forth. I think that is frankly totally unconvincing." The truth is surely as Sir Malcolm says: "The United States, Britain, France and Germany are not going to go to war with Russia over South Ossetia, however sympathetic to the people of Georgia we are.

"We are sympathetic to Tibet, we are sympathetic to Zimbabwe, but we don't contemplate military solutions to these problems. So Nato membership is not the answer." Is it too late for our politicians to learn again that kind of plain speaking and common sense?

Baiting the Bear may be seen as good sport in the US, but it is the people of Georgia who have had to pay the price. The sooner the US comes to grips with its loss of global power the safer the rest of the world will be.

From this morning's Australian:

The new Russia will be assertive in its foreign policy and aggressive in its neighbourhood. Moscow is no longer prepared to allow the shift in the military balance on its borders to go unchallenged.

Those theorists who have been proclaiming that future wars will not be between states over territory and will not involve conventional conflict have been proven wrong by Russia, as have those who assert that the major threats to world order no longer come from rivalry between great powers.

The implications of all this for Australia is that an authoritarian Russia, as well as an authoritarian China, is on the move.

And they both perceive America to be a weakened and distracted power. That should have important implications for our forthcoming defence white paper.

Paul Dibb is emeritus professor of strategic studies at the Australian National University. His article The Bear is Back was published in The American Interest in December 2006.

Russia and China are no longer concerned by the US. They will pursue their foreign policy aims with aggression. Australia needs to rethink its dependence on the US for defence. There is certainly no guarantee that the US will be able to come to our aid in a future conflict.

If only W. had taken the rest of his presidency as seriously as he’s taken his sports outings.

When I interviewed him at the start of his first presidential run in 1999, he took an obvious shot and told me, “I believe the big issues are going to be China and Russia.”

But after 9/11, he let Cheney, Rummy and the neocons gull him into a destructive obsession with Iraq. While America has been bogged down and bled dry, China and Russia are plumping up. China has bought so much of America that we’d be dead Peking ducks if they pulled their investments out of our market, and Russia has transformed itself from a pauper nation to a land filled with millionaires — all through our addiction to oil.

What was so galling about watching W.’s giddy sightseeing at the Olympics was that it underscored China’s rise as a superpower and, thanks to the administration’s derelict foreign and economic policies, America’s fade-out.

The so-called leader of the free world is about to leave office with the US hanging in the world's window just like a Peking duck dripping with its excess oil, and ready to be eaten.

Strange thing about Georgia.

It's odd how many people are absolutely determined to go on repeating history and pin it all on the closest Jew.

17 August 2008. The ninety-third anniversary of the lynching of  Leo Max Frank.

BTW; Russia should also consider regime change, try Saakashvili for mass murder and hang him. Just as the COW did to Saddam.

The COW precedent for doing that  justifies Russia doing same?

Eliot, and how about Georgia's intial "deployment of weapons" in Ossetia?

Seems to me committing mass murder in an ethic enclave is something worth hanging for.

Eliot Ramsey, all sorts of big players are running guns all over the place. It's a huge problem, but why focus particularly on Russia and wee Venezuela?

Geoff Pahoff, perhaps you could go over to the other thread and put your historical facts up for scrutiny.

And nor did the Poms while the Stern and Irgun terrorist gangs set about destroying over 550 villages, 13 urban centres and forcing out over 750,000 Palestinians so they could have their state.

The world has moved on since the Israeli archives proved years ago that Israel was the aggressor and that the Mufti had stuff all to do with anything much at all.

The US has responded to the South Ossetian crisis with renewed determination to hem Russia in. Its method is to press ahead with plans to include Georgia and Ukraine in Nato and to deploy anti-ballistic-missile defence systems in Poland and the Czech Republic. When, in the past, Russia has complained about the 'son of Star Wars' system, the US has insisted it is meant to deter Iran. It now looks transparently like old-fashioned Cold War escalation.

One crucial difference between the current East-West confrontation and the Cold War is that, this time, the economic ties binding the two sides are stronger. Russia needs access to Western markets; the West - and Europe in particular - needs Russian oil and gas. That creates an opportunity for the European Union, the world's largest single market, to play a moderating role, steering the conversation away from military grandstanding and towards economic negotiation.

Let's hope that the EU can play a moderating role in the arm wrestling match between the US and Russia. The US lacks the diplomatic skills and an understanding of European history. These are European problems and will only be solved by Europeans. Again the US needs to get back into its box and accept its place as a minor player on the European stage.

Now I suppose Russia has every right to occupy Georgia for the next how many years.

After all did not Saakashvili, like Saddam, commit crimes against humanity? Did we not invade Iraq to protect those human beings (after all the other bullshit reasons)? 

Would it not be best if Russia pre-empted any further atrocities by George W Bush's terrorist client and stayed in Georgia for however long they feel like it?

After all, Russia has every right to fight terrorism and from all reports there were many innocent human beings slaughtered, terrorised and displaced just because some fucks thought it would be a good idea.

The stupidity, recklessness, callousness and hypocrisy of Georgia and its US puppet master is beyond belief.

Russia should not leave Georgia until the COW leave Iraq and Afghanistan.

Nothing about Jews in this from Pepe Escobar; but with a name like that he must be a bit of a pinko, hey Eliot?

Jacob A. Stam: "Eliot Ramsey, it's a bit of a stretch to equate a "strategic alliance" between Venezuela and Russia with the actual physical deployment of weapons."

The Russian supply of weapons to Venezuela was part of the deal. And how about Russia's "deployment of weapons" in Georgia?

Eliot Ramsey, it's a bit of a stretch to equate a "strategic alliance" between Venezuela and Russia with the actual physical deployment of weapons. Within a country which is party to a strategic alliance originating in the Cold War against the former USSR, now Russia.

But I know you're up for it. Keep it up.

It's interesting also to see you do actually read comments by Geoff Pahoff. I guess you must have missed his error in relation to "strategic support" for the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem by the British authorities in Palestine, otherwise you'd have corrected him, yes?

It's okay though, I took care of it for you; however, you may wish to examine some of his other claims there about British treachery, such as the one about "unilateral attacks [by the British] on Jewish self defence militia". And in British Mandated Palestine, no less.

And here it is! The Israeli connection...

"Under his rule, Georgia has become a close ally of the West, with the US and Israel providing arms and military advisors."

- Green Left Weekly, 16 August 2008

Some other hilarious Cold War era "moral equivalence" stuff from Green Left Weekly to cue the usual suspects on how to "analyse" the Soviet liberation of George, er I mean Russian invasion of Georgia....

"The hypocrisy of Western leaders and media in condemning Russia’s actions is striking. It is justified largely by claims that Georgia is a “new democracy” — a code word for “pro-West”. The brutality of the US-led occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan leaves the US and other Western powers with no moral high ground from which to deliver lectures to Russia."

Oh, okay. We shouldn't criticise Russia's actions then. Okay lads, carry on then!

This must really take the crusties at the Democratic Socialist Party back to the good old days, mustn't it?

"Western sponsors of a UN Security Council resolution to formalise the ceasefire agreement pushed for a vote by week's end. However the text is being held up by Moscow's balking at inserting any reference to Georgia's territorial integrity."

Selfish of Georgia to insist on that.

"The US has told Russia that the Russian attacks on Georgia will damage US-Russian relations for many years. What does the US think the placing of missiles in Poland was going to do for that relationship?"

I know. It would be as if Russia was putting weapons in Venezuela. Oh, wait:

Venezuelan President Hugo Chávez met on July 22 in Moscow with his Russian counterparts President Dimitri Medvédev and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin. They seemed to enjoy every moment of the occasion, even though it was rather short when it came to hard developments. The encounter was arranged to formalize a military and defense alliance between the two countries, dubbed the “Alianza Estratégica.

Why shouldn't Georgia have a democratic, independent existence? Why should the Russians be allowed any more to bully their way around Georgia, which they occupied for three centuries?

What next? They should re-occupy Poland and Hungary?

John Pratt: "It is time the UN was restructured to give a voice to all not just the bullies."

I agree:

The UN Human Rights Council has now passed 60 per cent of its resolutions on Israel alone and nothing on China and Zimbabwe and Saudi Arabia.

... get rid of the bullies.

John Pratt: "Why does the US feel it has to go around the world punishing other nations?"

Why does Russia?

Geoff Pahoff: "I haven't had a chance to read this thread so could somebody tell me whether they are blaming Israel yet?"

They're still trying to find Israel's link with the Tibet uprising.

Not only was Israel up to her eyeballs in arming and training Georgia but they were gloating about it in the Israeli papers in the first few days.

Read part of the interview with Eric Margolis.

I haven't had a chance to read this thread  so could somebody tell me whether they are blaming Israel yet?

THE outcome of six grim days of bloodshed in the Caucasus has triggered an outpouring of the most nauseating hypocrisy from Western politicians and their captive media. As talking heads thundered against Russian imperialism and brutal disproportionality, United States Vice-President Dick Cheney, faithfully echoed by Britain's Gordon Brown, declared that "Russian aggression must not go unanswered". George Bush denounced Russia for having "invaded a sovereign neighbouring state" and threatening "a democratic government". Such an action, he insisted, "is unacceptable in the 21st century".

Could these by any chance be the leaders of the same governments that in 2003 invaded and occupied — along with Georgia, as luck would have it — the sovereign state of Iraq on a false pretext at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives? Or even the two governments that blocked a ceasefire in the summer of 2006 as Israel pulverised Lebanon's infrastructure and killed more than a thousand civilians in retaliation for the capture or killing of five soldiers?

It is time the world stood up to the bully nations and refused to trade with any nation that thinks it can win its way by the use of force. The UN and the Security Council are hamstrung because both Russia and the US hold the power of veto. It is time the UN was restructured to give a voice to all, not just the bullies.