digg

Join DiggAbout

Call for questions
Submit and vote up questions you'd like to see answered by Kevin & Jay at the next Digg Townhall on 11/18.

NATO's Hour

online.wsj.com — Russia's invasion of Georgia is a game changer. This war is part of a Russian strategy of roll-back and regime change on its borders. The more evidence that comes in, the clearer it is becoming that this is a conflict Moscow planned, prepared for and provoked -- a trap Tbilisi unfortunately walked into.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • MidwestDigg, on 08/18/2008, -3/+39Whatever NATO decides to do tomorrow could have significant blow-back from the Russians, and could quite possibly escalate these tensions to a completely new level.
    • WrldWr3, on 08/19/2008, -14/+2Come on NATO!!! Less talk more action, lets see you dismantle the Russian Dictatorship and Dispose of their Nukes, then on to China to fix our economies! WW3 2008
    • damack, on 08/19/2008, -1/+13They won't take any action in reality I live in Europe myself and all our big economies are in trouble, one of our smaller banks collapsed highlighting the recession in the coming months. There's a question over how well the European economies will fair and how long before they collapse the last thing we're going to do is piss off the people who provide us with oil and gas. Think of it in terms of the USA and China, China practically own the US treasury they literally have the power of practically destroying the US economy over night.

      China and Russia are two nations in the current world where so much of the western world relies on them taking any action that hurts their interests means we're going to get screwed even worse in return. Fact of the matter is these countries are rising in power while our nations are falling in power so we're running out of steam while their gathering steam and they just see that and are taking advantage of it. It's going to be a few harsh words some actions Russia couldn't care less about and hoping that Russia doesn't get pissed off and take some real action that makes the recession in the EU even worse.
      • jsavage58, on 08/19/2008, -5/+2"Think of it in terms of the USA and China, China practically own the US treasury they literally have the power of practically destroying the US economy over night."

        China can not destroy anything overnight. They would in turn destroy themselves..


        "Russia couldn't care less about and hoping that Russia doesn't get pissed off"
        So,, you are in essence saying you are already beaten? Your gov't will now just have to sit and cower and hope not to make Russia upset?



      • Frosty122, on 08/19/2008, -2/+4But it's funny, the US also controls the Chinese economy. Want proof? When sales of Chinese made toys, dropped after lead was found in many of them, whole villages and towns shutdown because factories had to close (temporarily), due to the drop in sales.
      • KnightWhoSaysNi, on 08/19/2008, -1/+3China depends on the US as much as we depend on them. If China tries to bring down the US economy, they destroy theirs in the process. It's the economic equivalent of Mutual Assured Destruction.
    • WrldWr3, on 08/19/2008, -9/+0People have always made drastic decisions during difficult times throughout history, I just hope someone does something soon, does Russia and China deserve their new found wealth? Have they contributed ANYTHING to us in the way of science, technology, space exploration, medicine etc? The collapse of the west in my opininion should not be tolerated, we can't just sit by and watch it fall apart, we owe this to our grandfathers and our grandchildren!
    • sanman, on 08/19/2008, -6/+7What a pile of paranoid Cold War crap this article is. They're making a ridiculous claim that Russia wanted thousands of its own citizens to be massacred by Saak-o-swill. What a pile of *****. Here's a way better article:

      http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/8/18/2337/96853 ...
      • mbraynard, on 08/19/2008, -3/+5First, those aren't Russian citizens per se: Russia has just been very aggressive about having their embassy issue those with Russian ethnic heritage citizenship (how do you think they got Russian citizenship not having been born in Russia?) as a means to foment separatism.

        Second, given that the Russian government has massacred more of it's own citizens than any other nation on the history of the planet, particularly recently in the Chechnya region (and how many ethnic Russians have they killed in their current campaign in Georgia), is this really surprising?

        Third, referencing DialyKos does not end an argument any more than referencing a book by John Kenneth Galbriath or Nome Chompsky. Lesson effing learned?
    • AndreiOttawa, on 08/19/2008, -3/+10This article is full of crap. Christian-conservative nonsense. What else can be expected from Wall Street Journal.
  • tkeeley, on 08/18/2008, -4/+22From the article, this appears to be the most significant part, IMHO:

    "NATO also needs to reassure those partners likely to be the next targets of Russian pressure and possible aggression, first and foremost Ukraine. This means rethinking NATO's enlargement strategy. In the mid-1990s, NATO adopted an enlargement strategy based on integration and not as a strategic response to Russia. We consciously raised the bar and requirements for new members. Our focus was less on protection than on democratic reforms to help anchor these countries to the West. But we also consciously left ourselves the option of lowering the bar in the future if the security environment took a turn for the worse. It now has done just that, and we need to shift our criteria again."

    Are they going to re-consider their enlargement strategy? Do they lower the bar and let more countries in?

    The troubling part to me is the timing, as there is a tendency to act quick in times of chaos, without completely thinking through the repercussions. While I think this meeting is extremely important, I just hope all options are considered before any dramatic shift in NATO admission policies are considered.
  • beerock, on 08/18/2008, -3/+31This sucks, NATO's got its head way too far up its ass to produce a rational response to this.
    Should be an exciting Autumn.
    • dcshiderly, on 08/19/2008, -1/+9Exciting. Yes. I'm excited, in exactly the same way monkeys get excited when you hit them with a shock stick.
    • stranglethorne, on 08/19/2008, -1/+5and Nuclear Winter

      *evil laugh*
    • mbraynard, on 08/19/2008, -2/+1So what is a rational response to an authoritarian Government invading a democracy and an ally on your border?
      • buckrogers1965, on 08/19/2008, -0/+1Don't be so hard on the Georgians.
      • beerock, on 08/20/2008, -0/+2What? Is there a proctologist searching for your head also?
        Georgian's opened up a slaughterhouse in South Ossetia, you've got to lay off the FOX/CNN feed.
  • Patrikc325, on 08/18/2008, -11/+30All the Russians have to do is turn off the gas and Europe will wimper off!!
    • fandyboy, on 08/19/2008, -7/+9they wouldn't dare, the Ruskies need our cash.
      • xander, on 08/19/2008, -0/+5China always needs more gas.
      • BESTenemy, on 08/19/2008, -0/+4What is cash? A unit of exchange - nothing more. Cash is not a commodity and it is only valuable through its ability to be exchanged for things of value. Europe, just like the US is consuming more than it is producing, so with every passing day it offers less value for its "buck". Russia produces more than it consumes. It sets the rules. An economic isolation for Russia would set it on a path to self-sustainability. Europe that does not produce enough energy for operating its economy doesn't have the luxury of choosing such path. It relies on trade to get essentials. Russia conducts trade to buy luxuries, while producing all the essentials within its own borders.
    • jellygraph, on 08/19/2008, -6/+10right... you go ahead and believe that
    • LukasSmith, on 08/19/2008, -1/+18Ruskies know how to starve rather then surrender. They have been doing it for thousands of years.
  • TYRONEBR549, on 08/18/2008, -22/+8Perhaps Russia learned nothing from Afganastan. Maybe they need a reminder. Anti-tank mines; shoulder fired missles; Nothing brings the troops home faster than a bunch of body bags. Too bad we aren't out of Iraq or we could help. Then again I think that is how Russia sees it too.
    • HollowMarkeD, on 08/19/2008, -4/+16Its America's invasion of another country to pre empt possible terrorists that provided the exact mandate for Russia to do the same when Georgia started ethinic cleansing. This is the consequence of America changing the rules of international politics - can't have your cake and eat it.
      • TYRONEBR549, on 08/19/2008, -6/+2Please spare me. They have been invading countries for hundreds of years. Read a book will ya'.
    • WrldWr3, on 08/19/2008, -8/+1Traitor.
    • stranglethorne, on 08/19/2008, -3/+8"Nothing brings the troops home faster than a bunch of body bags."

      3000+ dead?

      Yes, in a perfect democracy in which the president listened to and adhered the calls of the people
      • fandyboy, on 08/19/2008, -6/+5You do realise the majority of people in America supported the Iraq war right? So going by your logic, the perfect democracy worked.
      • Waiting2awake, on 08/19/2008, -2/+5fandyboy - You do realize that most Americans have been lied too for the last 7 years. You do realize that it is now known, and demonstrable that your government lied to you to support the war...

        Remember how 50% of Americans thought Saddam was responsible for 911? Propaganda FTW!
  • BabyWookie, on 08/18/2008, -18/+47Bleh... Another incredibly one-sided opinion piece by a known neocon hawk.
    • methylamine, on 08/19/2008, -1/+6Yeah, and he's a CFR "Senior Fellow" since 2000...plenty of time for the NWO brainwashing to take effect.
  • BabyWookie, on 08/18/2008, -9/+78Why the ***** is that, after 17 years following the collapse of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact, NATO, an organization which was created specifically to counter the Soviet threat, still exists and keeps expanding? Did NATO not make a promise to Gorbachev that this alliance is not going to expand eastward past Germany? Russia is being isolated and surrounded by NATO. How are the supposed to feel about it? Quoting Patrick Buchanan:

    "How would we have reacted if Moscow had brought Western Europe into the Warsaw Pact, established bases in Mexico and Panama, put missile defense radars and rockets in Cuba, and joined with China to build pipelines to transfer Mexican and Venezuelan oil to Pacific ports for shipment to Asia? And cut us out? If there were Russian and Chinese advisers training Latin American armies, the way we are in the former Soviet republics, how would we react? Would we look with bemusement on such Russian behavior?"
    • atdigg, on 08/19/2008, -14/+9NATO exist exactly because of situations like this one.
      • Waiting2awake, on 08/19/2008, -1/+9 Agreed - but threats like this were done a long time ago. If we, the west, kept our eyes on our politicians so that they weren't arming and helping a nation start ***** with another nation - then Russia would still be at rest. But nope, Bush the guy that has run from every conflict that he has ever encountered, is more than willing to have others die for his ego.

        Sadly once he waved the flag, 300 million just stopped using common sense and followed this guy like lemmings.
    • WrldWr3, on 08/19/2008, -18/+0Traitor.
    • BioTeq, on 08/19/2008, -17/+7If they had any brains left in those KGB brains they would have joined... and believe you me, NATO would have opened up for a democratic, strong, safe and secure Russia.
      But of course, Putin would rather have his good ol' empire back, rather than join the enemy against which he's been fighting his entire life.

      Of course, have no doubt, Georgias move was as stupid as they get, but this doesn't change anything on the fact that Putin was preparing for this for a very long time. Handing russian passports to south ossetians made it possible... they were defending russian citizens... right ?...
    • znicket, on 08/19/2008, -11/+4The way I see it, Russia has only itself to blame. There is a reason why these former Soviet states are steadfastly refusing to consider cordial relations with Russia. They think that their independence is best served by being in NATO, based on former experience. Russians have not been approaching them either with honey and diplomacy.

      Soviet Russia ruled with an iron fist and steel boots - and are now reaping distrust in spades.
    • pilgrim3970, on 08/19/2008, -5/+5I read that article - very well written and it made some good points.
    • mbraynard, on 08/19/2008, -11/+4NATO still exists because Russia is still a threat. As recently demonstrated.

      NATO is morphing now into a league of Free Nations - something the UN is not.
    • draculthemad, on 08/19/2008, -6/+6I am really starting to wonder if there is a Russian Government presence on Digg lately.

      "Why is NATO still in existance?"

      What kind of question is that?
      It is a treaty organization founded to secure the military strength and sovereignty of its members.
      So what if their most obvious opponent imploded? The fact that NATO's members werent the ones imploding just means it WORKED.

      The need for it doesnt go away, not unless humanity unamously wakes up with flower garlands in their hair one day and says "lets give peace a chance".
      • novenator, on 08/19/2008, -2/+4NATO was designed specifically to counter the expansionistic communist doctrine in Europe. With communism gone, its time for Europe to come together and disband Nato. The EU needs its own military to protect itself today.
    • Tenbatsu404, on 08/19/2008, -0/+4Well said, BabyWookie.
    • Naieve, on 08/19/2008, -4/+1"Bleh... Another incredibly one-sided opinion piece by a known" liberal "hawk."

      Way to move to the middle and take the situation objectively.

      Yeah, sure.
    • enzomedici, on 08/19/2008, -2/+5
      Buchanan is dead on. We wouldn't tolerate Russia doing what we are doing. The US is expanding Nato, putting bases in Georgia and other republics bordering Russia, has troops in Iraq & Afghanistan and is talking about bombing Iran. All of this is happening on Russia's door step. This is a very dangerous situation and if Russia were doing this to the US, we would be freakin' out.
  • Fangsinmybeard, on 08/18/2008, -19/+15THe Shrub regime planned on this day for six years. They have been preparing Georgia ever since Checznia went rogue, which displaced several hundred thousand Russian settlers. This was an orchestrated move to push oil prices higher.
  • kavutu, on 08/18/2008, -19/+5You can't trust those Russkies and PUKIN!!
    • stranglethorne, on 08/19/2008, -1/+10But you can trust Bush?

      The one politician who I'd trust with my life (seriously) is Ron Paul.

      The man is gold.
  • richmomz, on 08/19/2008, -16/+71Tblisi was tricked? No, I think it was Russia that was baited into this. Remember that Georgia started this war when they blasted the hell out of Tskinvalli on Olympic opening night, killing Russian peacekeepers that were legally present under a 1992 peace treaty from the previous conflict along with 2,000 innocent people. Here's a video of their opening salvo against S. Ossetia (starting @0:45): http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maaabZvpPSM

    Russia was forced to react, not only to protect its people and stop its violent neighbor but send a clear message to western interests that it will not tolerate militant expansionism within its sphere of influence. Contrary to western assertions of "Russian regime change" Russia has not moved to overthrow Saakashvili and has adhered to the peace agreement with Georgia. Unfortunately the neocons have used this incident to revive the spectre of our old Cold War enemy and scare the public into compliance with their militant expansionist doctrine to counter waning public support for the occupation of Iraq.
    • atdigg, on 08/19/2008, -18/+11"Russia was forced to react" -- what a load of *****, how come tanks rolled out so quickly how come navy arrived so fast at Georgian shore? You are so naive to think that you can move armies so fast without a clear drawn plan?
      • funklor, on 08/19/2008, -5/+9The same applies to Georgia and how quickly they rolled into South Ossetia. Both sides planned for this, and both are to blame.
      • WrldWr3, on 08/19/2008, -11/+2Truth be told, we will never know the true story behind it all, all we see is this bizarre behaviour on both sides, what goes on behind closed doors better be diplomatic too, last thing we want is China and Russia jumping into bed with each other quite similiar to the Nazi Japan alliance in ww2, cept it will be a quick Nuclear War, pre emptive action now NATO! Support the war against these axis forces!
      • Waiting2awake, on 08/19/2008, -2/+9What does that have to do with anything atdigg? Regardless if Russian troops were ready or not, who hit who? Georgia hit Russian territory. That is it, full stop.

        If I sucker shot you, and you happen to have friends around to help you... does it make any sense for me to blame you? Yet here you are doing exactly that.

        Now I think Russia went a little hot and heavy, but if you are going to send a message(Remember how gung ho sending a message was when it was US missles going through windows in GW1? - so lets not be hypocritical here) that is what you have to do.

        In the end, as the saying goes "If you don't want none, don't start none!", Sadly the US seems to be starting ***** all over, while their leader has refused at every opportunity to show his bravery... but that doesn't stop him from sending your children to die for his cowardice..
      • WrldWr3, on 08/19/2008, -6/+1I just thank god that people like you don't run countries. Do you think I like speaking my mind and getting dugg down? Someone has to do it, otherwise you can kiss goodbye to the lovely lifestyle and democracy you take for granted daily, forever regret letting the emerging superpowers get where they are, Russia and China are going to set us back atleast 100 years if allowed to dominate look at the political culture of both countries... DICTATORSHIPS and CORRUPTION. Sadly a 20 ton bomb is the only solution to this problem at the moment. Try getting the big picture before you put someone down you bigoted traitor.
      • crazy0, on 08/19/2008, -1/+3hey guy stfu, you stupid lil chicken hawk
      • richmomz, on 08/19/2008, -0/+3The Russians have had a strong military presence in the southern Caucasus region for years. Take a look at a map of the area in question - the whole region is a powderkeg. Chechnya is right next door, and Russia already had a military presence both on the border and in S. Ossetia pursuant to the 1992 peace treaty between the 'separatists' and Georgia (that's right, this isn't the first time this crap has happened).
    • bishop, on 08/19/2008, -14/+6The youtube video you link to is from Russian TV.

      Forgive me but I don't really think it's the most impartial press that exists. I would take whatever they say with a grain of salt.

      What do you mean by militant expansionism?
      South Osssetia belongs to Georgia. It would be like the US sending the army to responds to separatists Canadian in New York and Canada sending its army.
      • richmomz, on 08/19/2008, -0/+2The same clip has been shown on CNN and BBC - the one I linked happened to be the first one I found.
    • roodammy44, on 08/19/2008, -12/+6You're talking crap.
      Georgia has been fighting with south ossetia since 1990.
      It's no coincidence that 150 tanks and a large army came into the region from russia on olympic opening day.
      Russia bombed civilian towns, as well as military bases (we've all seen the pictures of it on tv)
      Russia is also quite clearly a bigger power. The Georgians wouldn't have any chance in a battle, and they knew it.

      This entire thing was a display of russian power to the countries near it and an attempt to impose their will on them. What other use would it have? You think they care about a few thousand people in some breakaway province? They probably killed more civilians than that bombing Georgian towns.
    • BohicaTwentyTwo, on 08/19/2008, -3/+4Human Rights Watch (no friends of the US), stated that the hospital in Tskinvalli has seen only 400 patients and had 40 bodies after the first week of fighting. There weren't thousands of civilians killed as the Russian media claimed.

      Sadly we will probably never know really how bad it was because the Russians leveled whatever was left of Tskinvalli in their counter attack, that included tactical ballistic missiles (scuds).
      • richmomz, on 08/19/2008, -0/+5Human Rights Watch is funded by George Soros, the same guy that funded the 'Rose Revolution' and put Saakashvilli into power. Not to say that Russian sources are any more reliable but I would take their figures with a grain of salt. Don't take my word for it though, Google it and do some research on your own.
      • feeldarhythme, on 08/22/2008, -0/+1Did FOX News tell it to you?

        Hospital in Tskinvali was ruined by Georgian artillery and tanks just like the rest of the city.

        Didn't you think that there is no use of taking injuried and dead people to hospital when city is under CONSTANT HEAVY BOMBING?

    • mbraynard, on 08/19/2008, -2/+2Even assuming you are correct (hardly, given Russia's state run media is your SOURCE), don't you think Russia has now over-reacted?
      • richmomz, on 08/19/2008, -0/+4The media clip I linked has also been shown on CNN and BBC - the Russian media version happened to be the first one I found.

        How have they overreacted? They took the Georgian army to the woodshed, stopped the violence in the 'separatist' regions and halted their advance. They didn't move on the capital or attempt to overthrow Saakashvilli. They've only been there for a week, and are already withdrawing their troops (compare with Iraq where we've been there for 5 YEARS with no withdraw in sight). So I have to say that their response was quite reasonable.
    • Naieve, on 08/19/2008, -1/+1You mean to help protect "its people" who they gave citizenship papers to despite them living in another country?

      You mean to help protect the people whom they were arming as part of a concerted long standing effort to annex the two provinces in question?

      Notice how Russia and the Separatists seemed to agree on everything?

      Why did the cyber attack on Georgia begin in July?

      I agree Russia had some concerns, but make no mistake, it takes two to tango.

      Both sides deserve blame.
  • JagPop, on 08/19/2008, -6/+37Disturbing. Americans are subjected to lies from nearly all directions. Imagine if the INTERNET didn't exist, we might be Sieg-Heil'ing along with the masses that fill their heads from headlines.

    On the INTERNET we can read this:

    http://digg.com/political_opinion/The_real_meaning ...
  • bishop, on 08/19/2008, -15/+7Russia gets most of its money from oil.
    It's now the no. 2 exporter after Saudi Arabia.

    One way for the US to answer would be to start exploring offshore and ANWAR for oil.
    This would send the price of oil down, lower the economic strength of Russia.

    Less money would lessen the ability of Russia to destroy more democracy.
    • mearom, on 08/19/2008, -2/+8I agree with your general notion of energy depedance, but I think that the USA's actions around the world have made the world a tougher place for democracy to call homemore than Russia wants to destroy democracy by a far shot.

      Take this Georgian conflict, if the US didnt gve them military aid so they would feel confident enough to "poke the bear", hopeful of actual US mlitary involvement, they probably wouldnt have been invaded by Russia just because they wouldnt have a good enough reason. Not saying we couldnt give them economic help by way of generous loans, though.

      MY argument is on much more solid ground, I think, with Israel. All the arab nations see the West -democracy- as a negative and apparently cling to their religion more when they see the Isrealis destroy their infrastructure (see Lebanon) with American made military equipment. Not to mention we very much so prop up Saudi Arabia, the people hate the regime. Perhaps democracy would take root if we difuse emotions and the call of radical mullahs with more bead than bombs? Iran is already a mostly industriallzed nation and man of the people, especially young people, hold pretty western values. If we tkae off the sanctions and again diffuse emotion by lowering the percived threat of the Usa marching into terhan, a lot of the radical elements would be diffused. Do we have them here, in America? Yes. Do we listen to them. Not to much. Because people dont feel scared enough to give up rights. that was the MOST horrible thing about 9/11, people were ok with laws like the patriot act. As to the sanctions and economics. People really are like sheep if they are fed and entertained and arent hot today (the publics misconceptions about global warming), they dont care.

      And what about China, our Most Favored Trading Partner.
    • jellygraph, on 08/19/2008, -0/+8The US gets most of its oil from Canada (1,883 thousand barrels a day in July '08). Next is Saudi Arabia at 1,479. Russia is number 10 on the list with 228. So, Russia is not one of its biggest exporters and any possible impact of drilling in Anwar (which is very very small http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arctic_Refuge_drillin ... ), would not affect Russia in the slightest.

      ( The list is: Canada, Saudi Arabia, Mexico, Venezuela, Nigeria, Iraq, Angola, Brazil, Algeria, Russia, Kuwait, Ecuador, Colombia, Chad, Libya )

      http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_ ...

      Nice try tho, but please go back and re-examine what you said and use logic and intelligence, rather than bleating a party line (unless you happen to be part of a political group posting this covertly on Digg... in which case, f*ck you. You are everything to do with whats wrong with this world and I hope you change your ways, for the betterment of mankind, or go to hell if you don't).
      • bishop, on 08/19/2008, -0/+1You forget that oil is sold on the world's market. It doesn't really matter who we buy from. If we reduce our import of oil EVERY oil exporter is affected.

        The figures you report are for exporter to the US and not overall exporter.

        Russia is the No. 2 overall exporter
      • jellygraph, on 08/19/2008, -0/+1still doesn't matter. the amount that you will eventually benefit a decade or two from now is still going to be small potatoes. This of it this way, 20 years is like 5 more disastrous Bush terms of presidency. Now, imagine how much has changed since 2000. Will Anwar make the slightest difference? And will it be soon enough? Or would it be wiser and money better spent investing in new technologies to get off oil, which is the core problem to begin with? It's only extending the inevitable, but just making it more painful.
      • bishop, on 08/19/2008, -0/+1"you will eventually benefit a decade or two"
        There's a wide range as to exactly when we would start benefiting.
        10 years towards the end of the range. Some people say it might take as little as 2-3 years to start getting oil. We would also see immediate benefits in terms of price.

        Also right now it is a fact that we need oil. Why let countries with poor technologies drill the oil and ruin the environment when we could do it here with better technologies?

        How can you use the argument that drilling for oil will take too much time while the technologies you're promoting would even take more time?
    • Ortheos, on 08/19/2008, -2/+4Russia gets less than 8% of it's GDP from the resource sector. That is oil/gas/others. That will shrink below 5% by 2010.

      Russia consumes 50x more of everything than it sells. Don't cling to your wishful thinking without doing some research.
    • MadamRobot, on 08/19/2008, -0/+3Question - how much does the McCain campaign pay people to parrot their talking points on message boards, and are they hiring?
      • bishop, on 08/19/2008, -0/+1I am trying to present ideas I believe in.
        If you don't agree with them; give me some counter-arguments.

        Cheap shots and personal attacks don't do much in advancing the discussion.
    • unfairunbalance, on 08/19/2008, -0/+0 We have plenty of oil in Alaska. some say more than Saudi Arabia. This not so much as who has oil but who controls oil and production in the world. The IMF does not like Russia to be self efficient and have it's own oil supply. This is NWO against Russia. USA is a tool for the NWO
      to push it's agenda and at the same time destroy our reputation.
  • Kahootz, on 08/19/2008, -16/+48Georgia started this war!
  • Ferre1, on 08/19/2008, -12/+49WOW! hat article reads like he war propaganda that it is. Burried for the load of mis-information, deceit and ***** it contains.

    Americans, PLEASE learn some different languages to be able to read REAL NEWS and REAL FACTS because your press is not giving you facts, it's feeding you war propaganda.
    • LouBrown, on 08/19/2008, -2/+4Although I agree with you that this particular article is mostly propaganda, it was clearly marked as an opinion article. Hopefully people reading it will take it lightly.
      This is clearly not a journalistic piece.
      • Waiting2awake, on 08/19/2008, -1/+5you mean the same people that, as of a few years ago still thought Saddam was responsible for 911?(Thanks media!). Something tells me they might miss that small point.
    • Bulbospongiosus, on 08/19/2008, -7/+2Waste my time learning another language? No thanks. Google does a good enough job translating Pravda to demonstrate it's 10 times more full of ***** than WSJ.
  • WrldWr3, on 08/19/2008, -17/+1Someone strong has to do something fast, the end of the American economy spells doom for the rest of your flesh and blood spread out throughout the worlds' continents, can you imagine the likes of China or the Muslims having an upperhand over us? Do you feel safe is this was the status quo? Pre emtpive war now to solve these problems. America has contributed as a whole far more to our lives this last century then any of the afforementioned have ever. They are cruel and will show no mercy if allowed to dominate us miliatarily and economically, spread the good word people, before we find ourselves labouring in rice fields by a power who got there based on undemocratic values, and human rights violations. This is a sad truth unless someone stands up and takes action now before it's too late, we owe it too our forefathers and future generations. There is hope in knowing that the people in charge now behind the scenes are doing something, it starts with the Russians and ends in China, this is the only way we're ever going to recuperate our loses, if the rules of the game can still be changed while we have the power to do so then the massive trade deficits and loans can be wiped free a horrible thing too say I know, but they will do worse to us unless we all come to the consensus that this is the right thing to do.
  • 1ncu3us, on 08/19/2008, -3/+40NATO should be shrinking, not expanding .. ***** centralization of power across the board
  • stranglethorne, on 08/19/2008, -3/+7Immediate Post WW2 Map:
    -Look at all the lands controlled by the Russians
    http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/maps/1900s/1942wor ...

    Present Day Europe with NATO
    -Look at all the land Russia has lost control and influence in
    http://www.ukraine-observer.com/image_add/Image/Na ...

    • Jelly292, on 08/19/2008, -2/+2What does this piece of fiction: http://history.sandiego.edu/gen/maps/1900s/1942wor ... have to do with anything?
    • mbraynard, on 08/19/2008, -1/+1Er. That first map looks pretty fictional. Like some kind of alt-fiction.
    • novenator, on 08/19/2008, -1/+2The point is, you corner a bear, and it will attack. When the Cold War ended, BOTH sides were supposed to disarm and stop hostilities. The conservatives in the US and UK treated Gorbachev's attempt at peace as a sign of weakness, and they took full advantage. The breakup of the former USSR was severe, but Nato expansion is simply insulting. Further, how would the US feel if Russia tried to put interceptor missiles in Canada to protect itself from 'Rogue states' like the US is doing in Poland?
  • Blashy, on 08/19/2008, -8/+32What a ONE sided piece of crap that was too read.

    NATO IS the problem, it was supposed to be dissolved after the end of USSR.
  • RedAmerican, on 08/19/2008, -9/+31Georgia sneak attacked Russia first... get your info right :)

    http://www.infowars.com/?p=4004&cp=1
    • BohicaTwentyTwo, on 08/19/2008, -5/+3Georgia attacked Russia? Get a map.
      • ciaran036, on 08/19/2008, -0/+4Although South Ossetia is technically in Georgia, we have no right to say otherwise when the people of that region overwhelmingly decided to declare independence from Georgia. The majority of the people of South Ossetia are Russian. We have no right not to disagree with their democratic decision.
      • BohicaTwentyTwo, on 08/19/2008, -1/+2Non sequitur. South Ossetia is not part of Russia.
      • novenator, on 08/19/2008, -0/+11 word: Kosovo
    • cdzrom, on 08/19/2008, -4/+1the sad day has come when people consider you can get "real info" from the cesspool that is www.infowars.com


      you were kidding right?
  • DesertDude, on 08/19/2008, -16/+11NATO is VERY angry that Russia did that. The peace-loving NATO countries believe that only the US wars and invasions are legitimate, and therefore it helped the US in the criminal Afghanistan occupation.

    NATO does not like competition. NATO loves peace. Russia moves fleets. Now you make NATO mad. Bad Russia bad.
  • n8f8, on 08/19/2008, -13/+7NATO is a mutual protection pact, retards.
  • BioTeq, on 08/19/2008, -8/+14Doesn't make any sense to compare Russia to any other country today, there are no analogies to base those comparisons on, there is only the history which we can review, and the current political decisions that are made. Have no doubt, Putin is in power, Putin is an ex KGB, who was stationed in East Germany for many years, those were not friendly people, those were people who had the power and the will to do whatever it took to achieve the goals of the USSR, and those goals were simple, complete domination over the eastern block. Now we're in the 21st century, and this very man is the leader of one of the most powerful nations in the world, sure, weakened by the crisis in the 90s, but on its way back to rebuild the economy, and establish a position of power.
    There is too much background to cover in a simple comment, but its important to remember that the Georgian conflict was in fact a civil war, Russia stepped in because it had to protect its own interests, clear and simple, protection of Russian citizens was just a pretext, we've seen it before, and I'm fairly certain we'll see it happen again. Russia is not interested in its citizens, to the contrary of what they say, its the power it wants to yield that is being protected here. There is no greater power right now, than the power of economical blackmail.

    Caucasus is an area of valuable resources shared by many states, almost the entire region is influenced or controlled by Russia. If this continues Russia will indeed have a complete control and complete monopoly in the worst moment possible, as we begin our transition away from fossil fuels, we will need them more than ever to ensure continuous development.

    Russia knows that for the next 50 years it will be one of the greatest economic powers in the region, because of its resources, and it has already given us a taste of that power, when they've decided to close the flow of oil to Ukraine a few years ago, orange revolution spinned Ukraine out of Russias control, and that was not an easy pill to swallow for Putin. There are other examples, the construction of the Baltic oil pipe, which goes around all the central and east european countries directly into germany, that is avoiding what the russia calls the rogue countries (the strongest critics and opposition in europe comes from those countries, because of what they've been exposed to in the post-WW2 reality), a tragedy was avoided here as the EU has decided to include a few important points in its policy, one of which is the energy security.

    Its a shame that Russia has chosen a path of force instead of partnership, the rest of the world however will not follow, that's something that Putin has missed in all his years in office, USSR is however more than just a faint memory, its a constant reminder of what we can never allow to happen again. I wish they had learned something from Afghanistan and Chechnya, thank god Georgia took a step back.
    • novenator, on 08/19/2008, -0/+3well written response. I disagree with your conclusion, but I won't digg you down
    • x060t, on 08/20/2008, -0/+2Digg up for a motivated point of view, i agree with it partially.
      As for Ukraine, you can consider the fact that it was importing our gas at prices, substantially lower than international prices. You can say we were sponsoring their economics. As they turned to the west - what's the point of keeping doing so? We'll have them paying full price and at the same time gain some money for transit. It's not that we're enemies. It's more like giving them a choice - are you going east or west? you can't go both ways at the same time. Economics aside, we support them in many cases, take an exemple their recent flood, when we've sent a considerable aid.
      As for partnership - you can have it when both sides are willing. When one side has US-sponsored economics, US-guided president, is raising $5b army for US money, igniting frozen conflicts inside its territoryand is no doubt going to have US military bases right beneath our borders - what partnership are we talking about? Imagine we've raised a huge army in Serbia and went clearing Kosovo out completely, to the clean ground. Imagine China attacks Taiwan. In case of Serbia - US/EU'd wipe it out instantly and Russian press would claim it to be their aggression against the sovereign state, same as US/EU press is doing now against us. In case of China - it would lead to serious political conflict, if not WWIII. So here Russia is acting more like US now - use diplomacy when possible, use power when not (see also supporting Saddam when he was loyal and invading when he started to object).
      It's not even Russia tries to expand its influence, but more like trying to keep current status-quo.
  • punkcat, on 08/19/2008, -1/+11yesterday it was a georgia trap russia walked into....
    • BESTenemy, on 08/19/2008, -1/+1 No matter what Russia does it will never be praised by those that envy its territory an natural resources. There is absolutely no scenario under which those that hate Russia would give it deserved credit.

      Well, if it's going to be portrayed as a monster for playing nice, maybe it shouldn't play nice next time. Maybe it should take over the aggressor completely if it gets attacked. The newspapers are going to be running the very same story anyway.
  • malice8691, on 08/19/2008, -3/+11the article says its FROM TODAY'S WALL STREET JOURNAL EUROPE. So who's propaganda is it? American or European?
    • ciaran036, on 08/19/2008, -1/+4Both. The anti-Russian propaganda is being spread across both Europe and America. It's the same lies and distortions in all news agencies, broadcasters and publishers across the continents. No mainstream media source have yet to tell the real truth about what is happening.
  • fandyboy, on 08/19/2008, -8/+3They do, Russia has a poor economy, oil and gas revenues are vital.

    Russia is just Saudia Arabia with trees.
    • fandyboy, on 08/19/2008, -1/+1Sorry about this appearing as a main comment, blame the stupid Digg comment system where "reply to this thread" means "Create new thread".
    • pahasnag, on 08/20/2008, -0/+1Besides trees, they also have a capacity to wipe out US. Well, and also the most successful and reliable space program, educated population, first rate culture and it is 11th largest economy of the world, rapidly growing. Doesn't sound like a banana republic to me.
      • fandyboy, on 08/20/2008, -0/+1"most successful and reliable space program".

        NO.

        Have they landed men on the moon?
        Do they have a space telescope?
        Have they been to Mars?
  • rsHoratio, on 08/19/2008, -8/+4Finally we (USA) can have a real power struggle like back in the cold war days.
  • BotchaMcCoola, on 08/19/2008, -3/+2Maybe Russia can get us free from the Iraq and Afghanistan mistakes? You can't always tell who is an enemy or a friend.
  • fandyboy, on 08/19/2008, -1/+1Yes I know about propeganda, I was just pointing out the fact the the poster above was wrong when he said that Bush went against the will of the majority of the people.
  • trosnyak, on 08/19/2008, -3/+3Just wanted to say that humankind lives off the competition. Thats what makes us evolve and I can say that historically (and russia exists for over 1000 years) Russia (Kievskaia-Rus) was always considered a threat to most of the neighbouring countries, for natural reasons. Russia had its up´s and down´s (all in life is cyclical), but we always managed to come back. Even though in the last 20 years Russia was in a state of crisis, it will come back (it is already recovering) and believe me it will have a good memory of what has happened to it and who were the main protagonisits of our situation. At that stage the rules of competition will kick off........
  • vermax, on 08/19/2008, -0/+12starts off with a big assertion it never proves: "The more evidence that comes in, the clearer it is becoming that this is a conflict Moscow planned, prepared for and provoked -- a trap Tbilisi unfortunately walked into." If this is the premise of all the chest-thumping that follows, then either show your work or STFU. Who are these insane people who crave lies that will make war with Russia a possibility? What next, punch China in the face and say Taiwan did it? Then say China started it? ohhhh I jusy had a creepy feeling when I wrote that...somewhere some skeezy wannabe is prepping a report on that for the Team Bu**sh**..
  • identifiedlogo, on 08/19/2008, -4/+16F*** U Wall street journal....and incredibly poor article too. You blood sucking liars!!!!!!!!!!!
  • Socolco, on 08/19/2008, -2/+19Buried for being ***** propaganda.
  • nastronomical, on 08/19/2008, -10/+2LIBERAL COWARDS ARE IN FULL EFFECT TODAY!!
    • DamienKarras, on 08/19/2008, -0/+5And the neoconservative cowards just arrived it seems.
  • hesonacorner, on 08/19/2008, -0/+7This says it all.

    http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_be9EPlH_ckc/SJ_Js9NcQiI/ ...
  • TTURabble, on 08/19/2008, -2/+5WSJ lost all credibility when Rupert took over. By the way, what the hell does this have to do with wall street?
    • ciaran036, on 08/19/2008, -1/+1Did he? Got any links to news articles about that?
    • cdzrom, on 08/19/2008, -1/+1"By the way, what the hell does this have to do with wall street?"

      Did you really just say that? You obviously have no clue whatsoever what the WSJ is, so reserve your narrow-minded ignorance for people who are stupid enough to believe it.

      man some people are dumb here.
  • kernel16, on 08/19/2008, -0/+4HAHA, who's going to pay for all these military infrastructures? How about just not forging alliances with retards who are going to give Russia the perfect excuse to invade their ass, way better than fake WMD. After your citizens get killed, to not retaliate in full force just sounds like a failure of the core purpose of a military, whether the Russians masterminded this or not, the retard still fell for it.
    • Naieve, on 08/19/2008, -2/+1You mean the Georgians Russia gave citizenship to, then fomented a rebellion with?

      Those Russian Citizens?
  • yellowcakewalk, on 08/19/2008, -1/+9For those interested in the facts and context surrounding this conflict, here's one of the better backgrounders. Yes, it's from the right-wing Washington Post, but occasionally they will get something right.
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ...

    MISFIRE
    'We Are All Georgians'? Not So Fast.
    Unlike most of the armchair generals now posing as experts on the Caucasus, I have actually visited Tskhinvali, a sleepy provincial town in the shadow of the mountains that rise along Russia's southern border. I was there in March 1991, shortly after the city was occupied by Georgian militia units loyal to Zviad Gamsakhurdia, the first freely elected leader of Georgia in seven decades. One of Gamsakhurdia's first acts as Georgian president was to cancel the political autonomy that the Stalinist constitution had granted the republic's 90,000-strong Ossetian minority.
    • stormkrow, on 08/19/2008, -0/+3It's all about OIL my friends. Every conflict that has been or will be engaged in will revolve around fossil fuels and control over them. Whether it's Iraq, Iran, Georgia, Afghanistan, Sudan.
      The Caspian Oil Story in full; draw your own conclusions in their current context.
      http://www.wsws.org/articles/2002/aug2002/casp-a30 ...
      We, all of us, live and die to further the cause of Big Oil and Military mega-corporations empirical mission of greed. This is just how the neo-cons have wanted it. I'm actually impressed Putin stood up and gave a big "Fu*k You!!" to the White House and Israel. Facts are sticky things and as the facts emerge it is more and more obvious Georgia, with the help of friends, was the aggressor and may in fact have committed war crimes. I think if NATO does anything it will be a harsh rebuke of Georgia, which will lower their chances of ever becoming a NATO member.

      The truth shall set you free:
      "Georgian tanks and infantry, aided by Israeli military advisers, captured the capital of breakaway South Ossetia, Tskhinvali, early Friday, Aug. 8, bringing the Georgian-Russian conflict over the province to a military climax."
      "The Russians may just bear with the pro-US Georgian president Mikhail Saakashvili’s ambition to bring his country into NATO. But they draw a heavy line against his plans and those of Western oil companies, including Israeli firms, to route the oil routes from Azerbaijan and the gas lines from Turkmenistan, which transit Georgia, through Turkey instead of hooking them up to Russian pipelines."
      FULL STORY HERE:
      http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1358
  • RAGEdemon, on 08/19/2008, -1/+17Holy *****. I can't believe some of the comments I'm reading. This is EXACTLY the kind of paranoid delusional idiocy that led us to two wars and 600,000 civilians killed, our economies in tatters and every Muslim county on earth spitting as they say our names.

    And now you turn on the Russians.

    You want to invade Russia now?

    I am quite flabbergasted by the stupidity. Perhaps if people still have not learned their lesson they they deserve to have their liberties stripped away.
    • Naieve, on 08/19/2008, -1/+2600,000 dead?

      Got a source that isn't a Lancet style sample poll?

      Cause I know taking a few numbers and multiplying is easy, but that doesn't mean its right.
    • JohnGalt750, on 08/19/2008, -2/+0People that don't agree with you deserve no liberty? Does it have to go there? What happened to respecting alternative viewpoints?
  • CHANNELOCK, on 08/19/2008, -1/+5Americans are losing interest and are apathetic to the Orwellian Islamo-fascist threat.
    Time to change the threat.
    Expect less Armored Humvees and more main Battle tanks to be built.
    The Russo-Fascist enemy must be contained and then defeated.

    • ciaran036, on 08/19/2008, -2/+1You've been watching too many war movies, by the sound of it.
    • novenator, on 08/19/2008, -0/+2I think he's merely pointing out what the neocons are trying to spoon feed the media to keep the american public afraid
    • CHANNELOCK, on 08/20/2008, -0/+1Correct
      kinda strange that Russia is the new-now fashionable enemy.
      Maybe primitively armed faceless Arabs aren't the rallying cry that America needs as things look bleak on the home-front economically and politically.

  • saturnx8, on 08/19/2008, -4/+2do ya think!? gee i wonder how long till russia decides to step in to Poland?
  • caferrell, on 08/19/2008, -0/+11How can the WSJ talk about this war being part of Russia's strategy when the war was planned by Georgia together with the USA. The troops were trained by Israeli and American advisers and the the war was initiated by Georgia with a midnight rocket barrage on South Osettia's largest city.

    This is all spin and neocon lies. Do not believe anything that comes out of Rupert Murdoch's propaganda machine!
    • ciaran036, on 08/19/2008, -0/+4Although Rupert's publishers and broadcasters do form a huge percentage of the lies being forced upon us, there are many other throughout the establishments deliberately distorting facts and lying for their own anti-Russian agenda. That's the BBC and CNN included.
    • Naieve, on 08/19/2008, -1/+1Don't forget the German and French advisors.

      Also don't forget the rebellion in a Georgian province supplied by Russia and given citizenship by Russia.

      You know they call that an act of war everywhere else in the world.
  • insomniac8400, on 08/19/2008, -1/+4Why do they continue to ignore the fact that Georgia invaded South Ossetia and the Russian's stopped the slaughter? It's scary how all logic leaves the room once oil is involved.
  • BohicaTwentyTwo, on 08/19/2008, -8/+4Russia has proven why NATO is still relevant.
  • ejpusa, on 08/19/2008, -2/+2Boys being boys. Sorry, I am having MUCH more fun hanging out with the gals. SUCKERS! :-)

  • roycommi, on 08/19/2008, -5/+0It is absolutely stunning to me as a liberal to see how pervasive the "blame America" attitude is on this subject. Trying to cast Russia in a good light for this affair is just absurd in the extreme. Russia is totalitarian regime and has fomented rebellion in these two break away provinces for a decade or more. You poor deluded souls who think all the worlds problems start at home really need to pull your heads out of the sand and come to grips with reality.
    • kemp34, on 08/19/2008, -0/+6Are you joking? You realize South Ossetia voted in the high 90% range for independence, right? Do you support them being ruled over against their will? Would you be against democracy in this case?
    • yellowcakewalk, on 08/19/2008, -1/+5@roycommi: a polite suggestion to you to read up on the history and context of this conflict

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic ...

      Unlike most of the armchair generals now posing as experts on the Caucasus, I have actually visited Tskhinvali, a sleepy provincial town in the shadow of the mountains that rise along Russia's southern border. I was there in March 1991, shortly after the city was occupied by Georgian militia units loyal to Zviad Gamsakhurdia, the first freely elected leader of Georgia in seven decades. One of Gamsakhurdia's first acts as Georgian president was to cancel the political autonomy that the Stalinist constitution had granted the republic's 90,000-strong Ossetian minority.
  • ciaran036, on 08/19/2008, -2/+9This article is lies and distortion. This is a strategy of global hegemony, with power currently concentrated in the United States of America - with their biggest allies in the plan being Britain and Israel.

    Israel and America trained and funded the Georgian military and took part in military exercises just several months ago.
    Georgia is not a real democracy - political dissenters were beaten up by police and American provided sophisticated crowd control techniques were used to send dissenters home last year.

    It was Georgia who attacked first, killing more than 1,500 innocent people before the Russians intervened to protect their people. Some of the Russian bombings we have seen in Gori are the result of bombs missing a military base. The real carnage and genocide is taking place in South Ossetia - which declared itself independent from Georgia in 1992. Georgia has no moral right to invade and attack innocent South Ossetians. Russia had every moral right to defend the people of South Ossetia. Whilst Russia's response was not perfect - they also went on the offensive with the aim of wiping out the Georgian military. Whilst I can't agree with this response, it is laughable that Western media and Western politicians have criticised their actions considering the American and European participation in the war on terror, as a response to 9/11 (which the reality of that event is contested), which has so far left hundreds of thousands of innocent people dead as well as provided massive profits for US politicians and those with stakes or jobs in the military industrial complex - companies like Blackwater, Raytheon, EDB making enormous profits in recent years.

    Ignore this article and Digg it down it is nothing but anti-Russian propaganda - we are being told lies to heighten tensions between these nations which could very easily spark a Third World War. Many people are convinced that is part of their plan.

    They are lying about Russia and they are lying about Iran. We know that Russia only invaded Georgia as a response to the US/Israeli/Georgian orchestrated genocide in South Ossetia. We know Iran have no nuclear weapons and no intention of attacking any countries outside its borders.

    The mainstream media continue to carry these blatant lies and distortions. That's the BBC, Sky News, Fox News, CNN and every single newspaper in the West reporting the same heavily biased lies.
    • BigMacMcChicken, on 08/19/2008, -1/+0So Russia is just allowed to invade other countries whenever they feel like it? OHHHH....they declared independence, so obviously the Georgians have no right to be there and thus, Russia intervened to protect THEIR people. Oh man, you are a giant tool dude. And you throw in some Jew-baiting for the hell of it. Damn what a *****. I can't tell if you're a fellow traveler or useful idiot. Talking about "moral rights," a word you apparently just made up. Wow. You hate america so much that you are willing to ignore the sovereignty of its allies. I got a "moral right" to call you a sicko.
      • ciaran036, on 08/19/2008, -0/+1They did not invade Georgia out of the blue. They invaded Georgia after the Georgians carried out a genocidal attack on South Ossetia. It was a typical response.
        And yes you are absolutely right South Ossetia declared independence from Georgia therefore it shouldn't be the business of either Georgia or Russia. They declared independence, they didn't formally pledge allegiance to Moscow - it leant that way though because the majority of South Ossetians are Russian.
        And no I did not mention Jews. Israel has many people that are not Jews, in case you didn't realise that. And I don't see why you focus on Jews, couldn't you also then have criticised my 'British-baiting' or 'American-baiting'? I wasn't criticising the individuals of that country I was pointing out the wrongdoings of the corrupt governments in Britain, America and Israel. I only have a problem with those individuals who are knowingly complicit or participate in wrongdoing.
        ***** and tool I am not. I didn't use childish name-calling on you so I don't see why you should. It doesn't help prove anything.
        Also, "moral rights" is two words, not one, and they are both in hte English dictionary, so no it's not made-up. No I don't hate America you are seriously mistaken if you think that. I don't care about American's allies. I have not and will not pledge allegiance to ANY individual country or set of countries or regions. I am me and I am free I will not be ruled by the policies these regions and countries set.
        I am as much a friend of America as I am Russia, if that's you mean. I don't hold prejudices against entire populations of people I know little about. Neither should you, if you want to be free, that is.
  • record200, on 08/19/2008, -2/+2Russian-Georgian relationships are not NATO's business.
    I don't think that insane Saakashvili should expect support from European countries. He's just tried to start WW3 involving us all in the dispute over his "democracy" with the jailed opposition to him. He should be hanged for all that.
  • nathanww, on 08/19/2008, -2/+3Yes, by all means we need another Cold War.

    Never mind that NATO had in significant part in creating tension between Russia nad Georgia, as well as Poland.
  • ohplease, on 08/19/2008, -3/+4

    The problem is that anything NATO declares about Russian aggression sounds pretty empty because of the Iraq war.

  • Gioware, on 08/19/2008, -4/+1http://digg.com/politics/Russians_have_stolen_US_h ...
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 64 of 64 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.