Friday Night Musings on Georgia

By BJ

The post-mortems of the conflict are beginning to fly fast and furious. For me right now, just a few random musings.

First, I can't believe that I find myself in basic agreement with Peter Worthington. Given just how closely aligned the man is to the Bush-neocon cabal, his column is a remarkably straight forward and clear-eyed view of the conflict, plus he adds the US invasions of Grenada and Panama to the list of conflicts the Russian assault can be compared to.

By an amazing coincidence, Poland and the US ink a missile defence deal the day after hostilities in Georgia end. Anyone who still doesn't believe that said shield is aimed at the Russians has the intelligence of a cabbage roll. The Poles certainly know what they're doing:

"Above all, it seems that the Americans changed their opinion as a result of the situation in the Caucasus," Bogdan Klich told the Polish newspaper, Dziennik.

"In Washington's eyes, this conflict proved that Russia was not a stable partner for the States."

How long do you think before we hear of Iran buying fancy new anti-aircraft missiles?

Speaking of, John McCain is wrong that this counts as the first serious international crisis, but I would never underestimate the ability of his ideological soulmates in the Bush administration to manage to turn it into one.

And while we're with the Bush administration, Cernig already noted the semi-humourous "flubbing" regarding Bush's promise of naval ships delivering aid. The line that jumped out at me was this:

"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."

Because nothing says just how much you value your allies than admitting you basically only think about them when you realize you need them for something. Basically, the Bush crew has been running US foreign policy like that annoying relative who only calls when he needs money, complete with the hissy fits if they get turned down.

And speaking of hissy fits, Saakashvili had another one today:

"Who invited the trouble here?" he said, flanked by several large Georgian and U.S. flags. "Not only those people who perpetrated this, but those who failed to stop it."

The guy reminds me of those mouthy little pricks in high school who'd keep mouthing off at some big jock, who could and usually would beat the crap out of him, and then go crying to the teachers for help and punishment against the big bully while still mouthing off every chance he can get.

Not that it seems to matter, as this story from the BBC points out.

The Bush administration appears to be trying to turn a failed military operation by Georgia into a successful diplomatic operation against Russia.

It is doing so by presenting the Russian actions as aggression and playing down the Georgian attack into South Ossetia on 7 August, which triggered the Russian operation.

Yet the evidence from South Ossetia about that attack indicates that it was extensive and damaging.

The rest is worth the read. In any case, it explains why the US is bashing the Russians for not doing enough to control Ossetian and other irregular forces in and around the conflict zones while also demanding that they have to pull all of their forces out immediately.

Finally, How many “Georgia on my Mind” posts are there out there? Honestly folks, I know post titles can be a bit of a bother at times, but is it too much to ask for some creativity? Not to dispute the greatness of Ray Charles or anything, but while the first couple of posts with that title seemed kind of clever, by about the fortieth or so, they started to grate. Besides, given the general tone of the coverage noted above, I’m rather surprised more folks didn’t get into the whole, “The Devil Went Down to Georgia” theme.

Comments

[Bill H.]

See my post at On My Mind."

[Fred Beloit]

BJ, here is another view of what happened in Georgia that seems to differ with the "true" account:

"Let’s be clear: What happened in Georgia is that Russia gave diplomatic recognition and support to a breakaway region of another country without international agreement, massed troops on the border, repeatedly violated Georgian airspace, shot down a Georgian aircraft, fired missiles into Georgian territory, and attempted to assassinate a major Georgian official in the region. Then it goaded the region into launching an attack on Georgian forces, and when Georgia finally responded with a limited strike against the region, after more than a year of provocation during which Georgia responded only with diplomatic protests, Russian invaded and seized the region, including the use of strategic bombers that destroyed civilian apartment blocks. Now, the breakaway region is engaged in massive attacks on Georgian civilians, in the manner of a pogrom."
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-pathetic-defenders-of-russia/2/

[BJ Bjornson]

Fred, as amusing as it is to read the spin of the Russia-haters trying to absolve Saakashvili of his responsibility, you still haven’t been able to find me anything that disputes the timeline. (And I do have to admit, watching the rubes on the right swallow the propaganda from Saakashvili whole is quite amusing.)

I mean sure, you can ignore all of Georgia’s drone overflights and rhetoric aimed at the pro-Russian enclaves, the previous Georgian military attacks on Abhkazia, the threats of force used to intimidate the third enclave back into Tbilisi’s fold, and characterize as a “limited strike” what independent agencies are now confirming as massive indiscriminate use of Georgian artillery to flatten a town of 40,000, but that still leaves Saakashvili as a gullible idiot who was tricked into doing something incredibly stupid to give the Russians an excuse to bash some heads.

Defend and support his idiocy if you wish, but for all of America’s tough talk, Bush has shown once again just how much of a “crisis” he thinks this is by going on vacation. Georgia started it, they lost, learn to deal.

[Fred Beloit]

Thank you for the lengthy reply, BJ. I recommend you broaden your knowledge by reading this post that points to a claimed "impartial" expert. This person says Russia began planning the attack in April. One piece of evidence is the Russians repaired a key railroad to make it easier to put tanks and other heavy vehicles quickly near or onto the battlefield.

http://www.thenational.ae/article/20080816/FOREIGN/689163001/-1/ART

[BJ Bjornson]

Fred, if you'd bothered to read my previous entry, you'd note that I've already said that the only way the Russians could have responded as fast as they did with as much force as they did was if they were ready and waiting for Georgia's assault. Of course, the same logistical constraints apply to Georgia's attempted blitzkrieg of South Ossetia. The fact that the Russians were prepared doesn't absolve Saakashvili of his responsibility for starting things.

[Fred Beloit]

Thank you, BJ. The Georgians "blitzkrieg" while the Russians go to the UN to complain about the Georgians' many transgressions. I don't quite remember that, but anyway, the Russians decide to "defend" the Ossetians. This is the way it was? Perhaps you will put some credence in the Wapo as to who is at fault. Up to now it seems the only story you will believe is that of the Russians, a nation not prone to public truth telling:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/15/AR2008081503319.html

[BJ Bjornson]

Ah Fred, the problem you have with me isn't that I believe the Russians, since any reading of my posts would make it clear that I don't. No, your problem is that I also don't believe the Georgians and those apologists who are trying to cover up for the criminal stupidity of its leadership. After all, the Russians are Evil and the Georgians are therefore Good. Good only speaks Truth, and any who do not treat the Word of Saakashvili as Gospel must be on the Russians' side.

Back in the real world, they're both a bunch of liars and propagandists, and when the WaPo's editorial writer refuses to put their name to their writing, it's usually a good indication that they're doing the same.

[Fred Beloit]

Thanks for the response, BJ. I fear I am beginning to detect a little petulance in your responses. I understand that. But so far in our little discussion you have condemned governments, and specifically Georgia and Russia and the Western governments, of being liars and the Wapo editorial Board of publishing opinions they are ashamed of. Yet you somehow have managed to find the truth from somewhere.
Where are your sources of truth and wisdom, and how do they manage to find comfy digs in the great and universal edifice of lies? If one cannot believe anyone at all, how can one have any opinions without personally having been there, on the scene?

Sincere best wishes, Fred.

[BJ Bjornson]

Ah Fred, you still find a way to amuse. Claim that I'm being mean to the WaPo editorial board after starting this thread by linking to the PJM crowd hammering a different article from that very paper. I believe they call that projection.

And I don't determine truth, I discern facts. Its a subtle distinction, and I'm not surprised you are unable to understand it, but as you've shown, truth, at least the way you describe it, is a very subjective thing. Facts are objective. As to how I do it, I would explain it to you if I thought it would do any good. Joshua Foust did a pretty good job of explaining some of the basics if you're interested.

Of course, to figure it all out requires the ability to see past propaganda, have an open mind, not have pre-determined answers to you questions, and be capable of logical thought processes, all of which it has become apparent you are lacking. It is not petulance you are detecting, but pity. I initially thought you capable of the cognitive processes listed above, but it has become clear that you are instead little better than a parrot who can only imitate that which others have taught him to say. It makes me sad to contemplate such an existence, and I can only hope that you can serve as an example and warning to others of the dangers of letting others do your thinking for you until you are no longer capable of doing your own.

[nait deth]

>Finally, How many “Georgia on my Mind” posts are there out there? Honestly folks, I know post titles can be a bit of a bother at times, but is it too much to ask for some creativity?

you took the words right out of my mouth (head?).. and i've read some good 'georgia on my mind' posts and wanted to show them to someone else... but couldn't remember which particular one it was..

glad to see i'm not the only one

nait

[Fred Beloit]

Ah, I'm so ashamed. Thank you for setting me straight. As only a man, may I send my regards from all of the less intelligent and enlightened to you, peerless truth and fact detector of seemingly supernatural sources.