What Part of "Nyet" Did You People Not Understand?

We're spread out too thin as is, with our military being in Iraq and Afghanistan. It's too risky. I think that Germany learned its lesson trying to invade or attack Russia. Napoleon tried the same thing and failed.

I know nothing about this subject.

Don't forget Charles XII of Sweden as well in the Great Northern War. The only nations successful were Germany in WWI--because of the revolution, largely and then they tried to dismantle the Ukraine from Russia, which in the end didn't work out so well and then there were the Mongols. Fights with Russian usually don't end well for those fighting against Russia, as the Russians are willing to pay an absolutely staggering cost to win. Do we have the stomach for that kind of war? Just for Georgia? Or the Ukraine? Is it really worth it?

Martha: I'd suggest you learn some about it. It's going to be in the news for a while.

I don't really know a whole lot about the subject, but I guess it's just a matter of wait and see. Thanks for sharing and peace.

Although Angela Merkel's quoted words may seem to indicate she doesn't get it, she is perhaps the only Western leader who seems to understand Putin and the Russians, how they find it unacceptable for Georgia and Ukraine to join NATO - their joining the EU would not be be a threat - and more importantly the need of Putin and Russia to feel powerful (not comprehensibe to most Westerners because of their political history and institutions). Since Bush promised Gorbachev that if Germany was re-united and joined NATO there would be no further push of NATO eastward, we have broken many broken promises , including the Arms Treaty, which was important to Russia. We acted as if Russia was powerless.

I tell ya Sean, it don't "smell" right . . . this is a distraction of some kind, not a serious bid to muscle Russia. They're turnin' up the heat, I think they plan on doin' some cookin' real soon . . .

If we raise children that do not study history more than just enough to pass the test, then what can we expect? They do not see how the events of our lives could relate to the past or to human behavior. People do change, and I assume so do countries. I think it is still important to know our roots or our history in order to know how and why things happened in the past, so we can make judgements on possible actions in the future. Studying the past does not force us to make the same mistakes but allows us to learn from those mistakes and move forward towards a brighter future.

Thank you for using Gather Broadcast, where there is an open line of communication for all and you’re more than a connection.

Gather Broadcasting: Have it your way


This takes you in the back door. If you’ve already been, don’t click again.

Nyet, Kyet, Schvyet, this is a bad scenario for the next few decades and an ominous sign worldwide. Ruskies will do as Ruskies want.

Your article is Featured in the Triple Name Club.

I don't know that NATO membership in itself is as critical as full and complete engagement with Russia. NATO only comes into play if there is aggression, and even then for situations like South Ossetia NATO would be unlikely to send military forces to fight Russia, unless as a last resort (which Russia would likely not press - Putin is not a stupid man). Mostly Russia wants respect and it wants to protect it's own national security (real or perceived). That's why we talk to each other and that's why we have diplomatic ties with other countries. We seem only to be looking at this from the point of view of two bullies trying to stare each other down. It would seem by now we would have realized that approach leads only to one action (or inaction) and is completely self-fulfilling. [Not to mention stupid]

If we won't come to their aid, does NATO really mean anything?

If they are a formal part of NATO and we do not come to their aid, then yes, NATO means nothing and the alliance has been shredded.

S-P,

Do you think we would have come to their aid if Georgia had been a formal member? (Would Russia still have gone in?)

Those are big "ifs" Sandi. But no, actually, I don't. How could we? All our manpower is tied up in Iraq and Afghanistan--which is part of the reason the Russians did what they did: they knew the could get away with it. Of course, we have airpower to spare, but had we used it, what then could we threaten the Iranians with? You see what kind of 'real' strategic bind we are faced with after 8 years of failed neo-con George W. Bush policies? (I'm a realist-pragmatist in the Machiavelli vein, myself and certainly no liberal ideologue.)

And had Georgia been a full NATO member and we had not come to their aid then NATO would cease to exist, our credibility with our Western European allies would have been shot (although I seriously doubt they would want to fight a major European war over little old Georgia either) and the world would begin to realize that American power is just that: power. We would lose all our moral high ground, etc. . .

This is part of the reason why I think Georgia and the Ukraine should not be invited to become NATO members. First, strategically, they are indefensible. Second, they are in the sphere of Russian VITAL interests. And nations will go to war to protect those. We cannot protect the whole world, we cannot save the whole world. We do not have the power, or the capabilities nor do we have the will. Something are just better left alone. Do I dislike it? Of course I do. But it comes down to weighing two bad decisions: a shitty lot for the Georgians or a massive land war in Europe? Which would you choose?

Simply more empirical evidence that "feel-good" Alliances are useless...

And, by the bye, Sean-Paul...haven't you made claim that America HAS no "moral high ground?"

America will continue to do what she does...GOOD in the World.

No, I have never made the claim that American has "NO" moral high ground. I have made the claim that 8 years of Bush-neo-con-Cheney policies have diminished our 'moral authority." There is a subtle difference, perhaps lost on you, but that is, as you say, by the bye.

As for 'feel good alliances' do you really think American power alone can replace NATO, because if you do, I have some really great real estate I want to sell you!

Another assfaced answer, as I had expected. Have you ever considered being decent for a change?

Our Moral Authority hasn't been diminished in the World; our Moral Authority has been diminished with the Leftist of the World. For me, that is quite reassuring.

Oh, and Kelley...try to smile every now and again.

Thanks, Sean-Paul, you make a very good point. As for the question, war in Georgia or war in Europe... it is insane we still fight like this to solve our differences. I just can't bring myself to answer the question. A few lives lost or many lives lost, it's loss either way.

Right on Mark-John! Has anyone considered that if Georgia was a member of NATO Russia wouldn't have attacked in the first place? The very last thing Russia wants is a war with the west. If we truly stand for democracy, we will accept Georgia has a NATO member. If Russia wants to be isolated and see their people suffer, you know like in the good old days of long lines for toilet paper, they may try something miliatarily.

But consider this: Other than Vodka, Russia exports nothing of value. The oil they export is becoming more difficult and expensive to extract. They need western technology to assist them. They need us and Europe needs them for oil. Mutual interests will prevent Russia from doing something totally insane, unless Putin has lost it completely.

And Sean, I put you on the list to look-up the term "neocon" only if you wish to appear intelligent when using this term. Oh heck, let me help you. The term "neocon" is short for "new conservative." Without getting too far into history, if you were always a conservative, you cannot be a "new conservative" since neocons are considered to be converted liberals. No need to thank me for the lesson.

Kay, sometimes this gets sooo exhausting...!

Sheryl-

Good points.

I am no fan of Putin or the Russian government particularly as he/they had no backbone when it came to standing up to the illegal invasion of Iraq but perhaps now some semblance of a balance in the world has been restored to global politics.

Typically, once again, Western "democracies" have helped in the development of their deadliest adversaries. Just as they created the monsters of the Taleban and the demonic followers of Bin Laden so too did they help in the development of the monster which is Putin and his government, having enthusiastically backed the clown Yeltsin, the figurehead of Russian "democracy" who in turn hand-picked the dictator Putin.

Much of what Putin does smacks of the old style Soviet Union; a strong leader standing up proudly to defend his motherland. Much however smacks of capitalism, his policies having driven millions of Russians into poverty, (following the lead of Yeltsin), while the few make billions from the sale of Russia's wealth.

The West loved Putin and his predecessor Yeltsin for developing a Capitalist economy in Russia, (no not because they embraced democracy). Now however they are faced with a resurgent Russian bear which is waking from it's slumber and once again expects to be taken seriously and the invasion of Georgia marks the bear's first steps outside of it's cave.

When the Soviet Union existed the West knew who it's enemy was and in Afghanistan it counteracted that enemy with it's proxies, the embryonic Taleban and a man named Bin Laden. Now those Cold War polices of yesteryear have come back to haunt the West and it is faced with 2 enemies for the price of one. Both of these enemies are much deadlier than the cuddly old Soviet Union simply because there so many variables.

The West is walking a tight-rope of it's own making, on several fronts, and all we can do is watch and wait.

Oh Mark-John, yes it does.

Brian, the entire fortune of Russia rests on oil. They have nothing else. Their move into Georgia is to control the oil pipeline into Europe. This problem will be easily solved once Europe grows a backbone and stands with Georgia and Ukraine. Russia will back down, they have no choice.

Kay Russia's fortune does not lie with oil alone, they have vast natural resources including natural gas which is pumped into Europe. It is why it was once a superpower and easily has the potential to reclaim it's former glory.

Ladies and Gentleman,

Allow me to give you some facts that will open your mind further.

US of America owes Russia about US$ 300 Billion. and recently Bush asked Russia to invest in USA more.

Russian oil companies were bought by American Giant oil companies using dirty tactics including clowns like Kodorkovsky of the late Yukos.

Today US and Europe is trying very hard to build channels to take oil from regions of Former Soviet Union. They already have pipelines in Georgia. They have already started their "democratization" of these regions and have financed the installation of puppets who will listen and assist the Western Oil Giants including Total, Eni, Exxon and BP.

What Russia is doing is to ensure the Western grand plan does not succeed and thus maintain the value of their own large oil deposits.

So it seems all is about Oil and money. US is now in Iraq for the same region. Killing millions in Iraq or a few thousands in Georgia is all to maintain that profit.

Russia learned all this from US by the way when Soviet Union collapsed. Before that Russians under Soviet Union were talking about ideology. Today please visit Moscow to see the total corruption of Russians for western materialism. All the big Western brands are there and they sell normally 3 times the price in Europe.

I think similar to Americans this Russians are not going to allow anything to stand in their way of Capitalism and its benefits.

Georgia has the right to join NATO if it wants to, whether Russia is bullying them or not.

Putin is in the same position as Kennedy was with Cuba.
Merkel gets this as the other Western leaders seem not to. Chancellor Merkel has not changed her position on Georgia since the last NATO summit in Bucharest. At the time, Merkel and Sarkozy prevented NATO from starting the accession process with Georgia through the Membership Action Plan -- instead saying Tbilisi could become a member at an unspecified point in the future.
At a press conference held with Saakashvili on Sunday, Merkel said that as a free and independent country, Georgia can decide "with NATO, when and how it will be integrated into NATO and in December we will make a first assessment of the situation." She added, however, that "we are on a clear path to NATO membership." This is nuance.

On Monday, her spokesman Steg said ' Berlin feels that Georgia needs more reforms and modernization before it can become a NATO member. At the same time, it is clear that Georgia needs international help and aid. The first step would be international observers and later, possibly peacekeeping troops. '

I hsve Russian friends who say it is Putin's power play - that Medevev is weak and that Putin wants his power back and that Putin doesn't want political power going to Ivanov, either.

"We'd go to war if Russia invited Panama into the Warsaw Pact, this is the same in reverse."

I don't think there is a Warsaw Pact group anymore. I think that is one thing the Russians are mad about. I'm sure someone will let me know if I am wrong. Don't think I am.

Also, the more I look into this, the more complex I see it is. Don't think any sound bite answers will explain or solve it.

Brian, my point is that they must have customers for their oil and natural gas. Will they cut off Europe to spite themselves? I don't think so. The last situation they want is what is occurring in Iran; all that oil and no way of refining it. Russia does not want to be isolated-----again.

I agree with two of the above. I think this is, indeed, tied up in the global conflicts involving oil and that Putin is approaching a power play that will make our collective heads spin.

If we consider world powers motives in terms of things like "oil," we don't understand their behavior and history. It is true that Germany lost two wars , WWI and II, because they were cut off from sources of oil to fight them. When Hitler was cut off from Caspian and Middle East supply in 1942, he had lost the war (and he may have known it).

Let me try this one again.

"I don't think there is a Warsaw Pact group anymore. I think that is one thing the Russians are mad about. I'm sure someone will let me know if I am wrong. Don't think I am."

Of course there is no more Warsaw Pact. So why is there a NATO? If NATO was an anti-Soviet alliance, designed to keep the Germans down, the Russians out and the Americans in, why is there a NATO? Western Europe is safe from the Russians so what's the point of adding Georgia? Or the Ukraine? It makes no STRATEGIC SENSE. I don't care about the moral, or the hyberbolistic reasons. I care about realistic strategic considerations.

One would like to think there were higher intelligences in higher offices and Byzantine motives for power and conquest lurk behind lofty statements of "freedom and Democracy." One would like to think that the slide into catastrophic war would be a purposeful seizing of political/economic power for national ends and a game of brinksmenship, a chess match of manuver and double talk would be the prefered solution. But it does not work out that way. Individual temperment and weakness of the ruling elite tip the scales into war. It took an anarchist's bullet to a mid level Archduke to ignite WW1 fueled by alliances between some of the same players as today.

Those who underestimate the Russian capacity for suffering, cruelty and willingness to fight for power are fools. George Bush is a fool. He thinks he can rob and contain Russia and if necessary blackmail them militarily. War is always the same, even if the weapons are different. Russia is a vast place with vast resources and a very large population. War costs money, creates privation and is always unpredictable. Victory will not consist of a cake walk across desert Iraq against unmotivated troops. If NATO decides to militarily confront the Russians over Georgia the Russians may retreat but will strike elsewhere. The end of this issue will be a recognition of Russias national interest and position upon the world stage as a real player. The neo-con oil imperialist jackasses need to be locked up. The satellite nations surrounding Russia need to get real and pay attention to history or suffer the damn bloody consequences. The American foreign policy makers need to be purged and ADULTS put in their stead.

I am afraid we Americans are not so good at foreign policy. How many folks did we have who could speak the language when we set out for Iraq? Don't think we have the folks Sam is looking for.

Times change, don't they? Wasn't long ago that Russia was failing in Afghanistan and broke. Now they are awash in the big bucks from oil and natural gas and our credit is maxed out all over the world.

We have no clue about the Russia - Ga thing, and could not do anything about it if we did. Without us, I'm pretty sure NATO won't do anything.

My questions is what's wrong with Georgia becoming part of NATO? It will give us a foot hold in a strategically important area. If you look at the map of the world, Georgia is geographically very close to two other trouble makers, Iran and Syria. So, a strong Western presence there actually might be beneficial in a left handed way by curbing the evil powers of Iran and Syria and not to mention keep Russia on the defensive.

The answer to your question is self-evident: the Russians won't allow it. It's in their sphere of influence and they have already proven they are willing to use violence to defend that sphere of influence.

My question to you, Yum Chum, is do you want to die for, or have your children die for Georgia? Because that's what NATO is about: it is a military alliance.

thanks for sharing

We should just sign an agreement with Hitler, that way he will play nice with his neighbors.

This kind of bury your head thinking got millions of people killed in the 40's. Not just Jews ether Sean Paul, Russians, Europeans, Americans.

Oh well, at least history NEVER repeats itself. Hehehe.

Don't forget the argument that if Georgia where in NATO, Russia would have thought twice before murdering Georgian citizens and getting back into the Empire business.