Discover the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.
Russia 'shot down Georgia drone'
news.bbc.co.uk — A Russian fighter jet has shot down an unmanned reconnaissance aircraft over Georgia, Georgian authorities say. Georgia's defence ministry told the BBC it had video footage showing a Russian MiG-29 aircraft shooting down the unarmed Georgian drone on Sunday.
SirPopper- 36 diggs
- digg it
- sensor, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1This is extremely disturbing... I'm getting really pissed off at Russia... if this turns to another Chechnya and the world does nothing. We are all *****.
- BabyWookie, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1LOL. WTF are you talking about? The only way that this can turn into "another Chechnya" is if Georgia decides to take it back by force and make it their own "Chechnya".
Chechnya = Russia's [former] break-away region.
Abkhazia = One of Georgia's break-away regions.
BTW, the notorious Chechen warlord/terrorist Shamil Basayev had fought in Abkhazia, against Georgia in 1991.
- BabyWookie, on 04/21/2008, -0/+1LOL. WTF are you talking about? The only way that this can turn into "another Chechnya" is if Georgia decides to take it back by force and make it their own "Chechnya".
- NaCl, on 04/21/2008, -0/+2That is what they say where their aircraft was. Georgia is just pissed that Russians support independence for those two regions, and I don't see how it's different from what U.S. did over Kosovo, or Serbia for that matter.
- sensor, on 04/21/2008, -1/+1Totally different. The aircraft took off from GEORGIAN SOIL and landed in Russia. United States did not do anything like that in Kosovo.
- Beveridge89, on 04/21/2008, -1/+2Well for one thing Russia doesn't support the independence movements, it supports unification of those two region into Russia. And the intentions are entirely different: Kosovo granted a people the right to self determination, albeit one that will ultimately lead to more violence and be a pain in the ass for NATO; Putin is doing this for the same reason he's trying to turn Chechnya into a giant crater- the perception of protecting the Russian people boosts his popularity and allows him to keep on destroying democracy.
- BabyWookie, on 04/21/2008, -2/+2Oh, STFU. No one is trying to runt Chechnya into a "giant crater". If any thing, the region is being re-built rather nicely. Here are the pics to prove it --> http://englishrussia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=700
If the majority of people residing in South Ossetia and Obkhazia want to live in Russia and not Georgia, that's their business.- Beveridge89, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2The key word there is 're-built'. From a giant crater. Created by the Russians. Here are the pics to prove it: http://www.time.com/time/daily/special/photo/grozn ...
And i wasn't questioning whether South Ossetia and Obkhazia have a right to be part of Russia. In fact i fully support their right to, just like the Chechens had a right to be seperate from Russia. - BabyWookie, on 04/22/2008, -0/+2@Beveridge89:
I thought that the First Chechen War was clearly terrible, wrong and I supported their right to Independence. Then, the Russians left, the Chechens won and got their Independence.
In a couple of years, they managed to turn their country into a haven for radical extremists, drug and arms smugglers and for-profit kidnappers. I saw the videos of mass executions at public stadiums, women being beaten for not following the Sharia Law, Russian and Western kidnapping victims getting their fingers chopped off, read about the seven British telecom workers who were beheaded, local Russian girls sold into sex slavery and other terrible things. The kidnapping incursions into the neighboring Russian regions never stopped and then, the Chechens really went over the top, by conducting a massive armed invasion of Dagestan, trying to create some kind of a North Caucasian Islamic State.
They had their chance for independence and they ***** it up, badly. That is why, I fully supported the Russians moving in and restoring some semblance of order in the Second Chechen War. That madness just couldn't have gone on any longer.
As far as I know, Georgia is not having similar issues in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. - Beveridge89, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1Yeah fair enough, i don't think anyone would argue that Chechnya was in any way working as a state. That said, a lot of those problems can be traced back to the severe destruction in the first war. Russia, while at fault for the initial situation, did try to fix this through aid, that was then divied up by corrupt officials and given to various warlords, so doesn't bare full responsibilty for the situation. But it should be noted that President Maskhadov did his utmost to curb the Warlords who were kidnapping, drug trafficking and murdering, to curb extremist Islam and condemned the attempt to invade Dagestan. He couldn't do this effectively though, because of the laxk of infrastructure and corruption. When Russia invaded, he offered a plan to work with the Russians to deal with all this. This, to me, seems like the ideal solution, but Putin had gained popularity, and largely been propelled to the presidency, on the basis of dealing with the Chechens once and for all, while this solution would likely have taken time and not have calmed down quickly, leading to unpopularity for Putin.
I think we can agree that some sort of intervention by Russia in Chechnya was necessary. But to me a war that wiped out between 5 and 10% of the population is entirely the wrong solution.- BabyWookie, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2It seemed like Mashkhadov was only about as relevant as the Queen is in modern UK. Under him, the Chechen presidency was largely a symbolic post. In reality, he wielded very little actual power and control over his people, which had seemingly degenerated into a medieval, clan-based society, ruled by various warlords, who often brutally fought with each other. On numerous occasions, he proved that he could not guarantee the safety foreign aid and contract workers or journalists. Eventually, no one would risk coming to Chechnya any more. Mashkhadov became very good at issuing condemnations and that’s about it.
At the same time, the people who were really in power, such as Shamil Basayev couldn’t be negotiated with for different reasons. Primarily, they controlled only their own “clans” and their actions had proved that they were terrorists. Most governments wouldn’t negotiate with people who lead raids on hospitals and use pregnant women as human shields or film themselves chopping heads.
- BabyWookie, on 04/23/2008, -0/+2It seemed like Mashkhadov was only about as relevant as the Queen is in modern UK. Under him, the Chechen presidency was largely a symbolic post. In reality, he wielded very little actual power and control over his people, which had seemingly degenerated into a medieval, clan-based society, ruled by various warlords, who often brutally fought with each other. On numerous occasions, he proved that he could not guarantee the safety foreign aid and contract workers or journalists. Eventually, no one would risk coming to Chechnya any more. Mashkhadov became very good at issuing condemnations and that’s about it.
- Beveridge89, on 04/22/2008, -1/+2The key word there is 're-built'. From a giant crater. Created by the Russians. Here are the pics to prove it: http://www.time.com/time/daily/special/photo/grozn ...
- BabyWookie, on 04/21/2008, -2/+2Oh, STFU. No one is trying to runt Chechnya into a "giant crater". If any thing, the region is being re-built rather nicely. Here are the pics to prove it --> http://englishrussia.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=700
- cybrspin, on 04/22/2008, -0/+1hmm seems i posted one of this after, it didn't show up when i checked durign submission process, sorry
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by