View Full Version : Are we on the brink of WW3?
The US is sending troops to Georgia for humanitarian aid. East v West again. We already have Christian v Islam. Pakistan v India. China is on the up and causing the global thirst for fuel. Russia is playing fuel politics with Europe. All have a whiff of old capitalism against old communism.
Is it time for the UK to rearm and defend itself? Is it gonna kick off bigstyle?:confused
To be perfectly honest I'm more concerned about what to have for dinner tomorrow night. In other words, I'm not worried 'cos nothing will kick off.
Bad Manners
13-Aug-08, 22:31
there will never be world peace it is just impossable to obtain.
human nature means someone will always want something they cant have and it will always end in dispute.
there has always been a war in some part of the world and depending on politics or money depends how many country and people will be involved.
I would say religion but behind the religous statements it is always politics or money.
I have served my time in hm forces and went to war twice and although bot those conflicks have been resolved more appear. TB and WB just wanted to play power politics and off we go again. one battle ends another begins. but in the end the greatest battle is life it's self.
Whitewater
13-Aug-08, 22:33
I have always thought that Bush was crazy, he has now removed any doubt. It must be the oil and gas reserves. Neither he nor any other of the our western leaders displayed any interest in providing humanitarian aid for the people Zimbabwe. No oil I guess.
It could now, as you say 'kick off bigstyle', he is playing a very dangerous game and I don't think he has brain enough to contemplate the consequences. The only connection America has with Georgia is a state of the same name, perhaps that is where he thinks the Russians are. It wouldn't surprise me.
Bad Manners
13-Aug-08, 22:35
All you need to be a political leader is the ability to be a puppet with invisable strings
Are we on the brink of WW3?
Yes, always, I'd say. Sometimes it just gets postponed - Cuban missile crisis, 9/11, etc etc.
Bush only has 2 or 3 months left, halleluja. Let's hope he can't be bothered with anything too taxing at this late stage. He's a danger to himself and everyone else on the planet.
The US is sending troops to Georgia for humanitarian aid. East v West again. We already have Christian v Islam. Pakistan v India. China is on the up and causing the global thirst for fuel. Russia is playing fuel politics with Europe. All have a whiff of old capitalism against old communism.
Is it time for the UK to rearm and defend itself? Is it gonna kick off bigstyle?:confused
Answer to your question is NO
teenybash
13-Aug-08, 23:47
I think WW3 has been ongoing for sometime now...................America interfering with Russia is a big mistake as Putin won't take kindly to Bush and his thirst for oil. I think at the moment it is saber rattling and hopefully won't lead to what we all fear.....it's time Bush was put in a pickling jar along with his already pickled brain......he is one very dangerous and man.
porshiepoo
14-Aug-08, 00:19
I've always said, Let mothers rule the world and we'll be as close to peace as we'll ever get.
I've always said, Let mothers rule the world and we'll be as close to peace as we'll ever get.Not very close then?
I've always said, Let mothers rule the world and we'll be as close to peace as we'll ever get.
When I was growing up the number of times I heard mothers saying "You'll get a piece of my mind"! On that basis I don't think we should bother.:roll:
The Pepsi Challenge
14-Aug-08, 01:10
Of course there won't be WW3, it doesn't make good business sense. I mean, think of the Real Estate issues. The estate agents won't let it happen.
Metalattakk
14-Aug-08, 03:42
I've always said, Let mothers rule the world and we'll be as close to peace as we'll ever get.
There already is a right bunch of mothers ruling the world, and they're making a bit of a hips of it in my humble opinion.
i am a bit freaked aboot a world war - armageddon a wise friend told me :eek:
brokencross
14-Aug-08, 08:51
I don't think WW3 is going to start because of the ongoing overstretched commitments of Iraq and Afghanistan.
It is a very good question though and I do think the UK should have sufficient deterrent to defend itself, but we do not have anywhere near the capability to be defending all and sundry around the world.
So no WW3; however there will probably be lots of sabre rattling and verbal missles flying back and forth with veiled threats of this and that, and dummies being spat out of political prams or even handbags at 3 paces.
If the Russians carry on being an aggressor in Georgia using the "ceasefire" to continue to strenghten their position I think CW2 may start, Cold War 2.
One big mother of a stand off will prevail. (these mothers are getting everywhere)
With Iran being an alleged nuclear threat and the US needing Russia's support on the UN Security Council to progress resolutions, it all makes for an interesting and worrying world situation.
If WW3 did start, you could probably go to bed at night and by the morning half the world will be obliterated without enemy soldiers being face to face. Buttons are dangerous things, especially when they are in the charge of twitchy fingers.
With that cheerful note I shall shut up and go and listen to the latest updates.
Lolabelle
14-Aug-08, 08:55
If we are to have an armageddon, then I guess we will have to have a WW of some kind. If Biblical Prophecy is to be believed, and I do believe it, there will be some kind of final conflict. And Russia will be the instigator, if my take on the scriptures is right (that may be questionable lol).
Something about the "BEAR" (Russia) going down, and also about going up, with an evil thought. I gather going up would be north and over to USA???? I must find the proper scriptual reference. I'll be back later.
If we are to have an armageddon, then I guess we will have to have a WW of some kind. If Biblical Prophecy is to be believed, and I do believe it, there will be some kind of final conflict. And Russia will be the instigator, if my take on the scriptures is right (that may be questionable lol).
ats what ma 'man o' 'e world' friend says lola...
Lolabelle
14-Aug-08, 09:40
ats what ma 'man o' 'e world' friend says lola...
There's gonna be something Trix, there's just too many things that have already come to pass. It's kind of exciting to have this kind of thing confirm the Bible Prophecies, but very scary at the same time. It would be nice to think there could be world peace, but I doubt it. :(
Of course there won't be WW3, it doesn't make good business sense. I mean, think of the Real Estate issues. The estate agents won't let it happen.
Are wars not meant to be good for the economy?
Satcomguy333
14-Aug-08, 11:39
There's gonna be something Trix, there's just too many things that have already come to pass. It's kind of exciting to have this kind of thing confirm the Bible Prophecies, but very scary at the same time. It would be nice to think there could be world peace, but I doubt it. :(
What things have already come to pass, Lolabelle?
I think it could go really nasty.
As for all the George W Bush bashing, America's ideological enemies will only hate us even more for our decadence for distancing ourselves from his policies.
Reading this thread reminds me of the great philosopher Cpl Fraser from Dads Army~"Wur doomed laddie, wur doomed".[lol]
It's kind of exciting to have this kind of thing confirm the Bible Prophecies
Woo hoo, the Bible WAS right!! In your face non-believers.
Oh, the world's over. Ah well, never mind, Am'ageddon Outta Here.
I was speaking to a friend in Turkey who says basically they cant win cos if America gets involved, they have to allow them to use airspace etc and that annoys Russia so they are gonna get dragged in either way.
northener
14-Aug-08, 16:25
Georgia is pro-West, EU and NATO, obviously this irritates the Russians who feel they are being squeezed a bit too much politically and strategically.
A lot of people in the disputed region are, apparently, Russian passport holders and pro-Russian - so Russia feels it is within it's rights to enter what it sees as a region that is allegedly pro-Russian and anti-Georgian to protect it's own interests.
Nothing really different to what the West does, or anyone else for that matter.
Will it get out of hand? I doubt it, for all the sabre rattling going on, Putin knows that the USA will want to avoid direct confrontation as much as he does. For all the spouting off and speculation we are seeing on the box - there'll be a lot more communication going on behind the scene.
The 'slow' withdrawal is Russia saying that it is in control in that region and can act as it pleases.
And let's face it, this is about Russia making a very clear statement to it's immediate neighbours that they will not tolerate any monkey business, that they have the military strength to deal with trouble and most importantly, they are not frightened to use it.
The world is still a dangerous place, maybe more so since the alleged end of the Cold War - but I don't think this will be Armageddon.
But i've taken the washing in - just in case.......:eek:
A lot of people in the disputed region are, apparently, Russian passport holders and pro-Russian - so Russia feels it is within it's rights to enter what it sees as a region that is allegedly pro-Russian and anti-Georgian to protect it's own interests.
Probably, and it sounds a bit like Germany's excuse for the invasion of the Sudetenland.
It's all connected to the Olympic Games.
Consider some of the disasters coaused by the Olympics.
TUrkey and Greece went to war in the aftermath of the first of the revived Olympics. Greece got in a terrific lather of patriotism after a Greek shepherd won the Marathon. This led directly to a crushinig military defeat by the Turks (Turkey had not been part of the games but their national sport was warfare.)
Then there was the famous games awarded to the Third Reich in the hope it would have calmed down Mr. Hitler. Instead it got the Nazis even more excited....
As for the Mexican games we still dont have an accurate accounting of the numbers of students massacred by the Mexican police and army.
Shall we linger over the slaughter of the Israeli athletes at the games held in - was it Munich? No let us instead look at the original Olympics. If you lost an event you were likely as not to be executed. The athletes were all professionals which makes a mockery - if one was needed - of our 20th century code of conduct for athletes.
The ancient games were suspended after the Emperor Nero announced he, personally, had won all of the events.
Let's scrap the Olymics altogether; it's a bloated, hypocritical behemoth and a danger to the peace of the world.
northener
14-Aug-08, 16:38
Probably, and it sounds a bit like Germany's excuse for the invasion of the Sudetenland.
It certainly does, but my own (ill-informed) opinion is that the Russians will seek to neutralise any military capacity that Georgia has in the disputed region and then sit on the Russian border (armed to the teeth) staring at Georgia to prevent them from stopping pro-Russian autonomy for the disputed region.
So a bit different to 'Lebensraum', as I believe Russia has no interest in sitting inside the disputed territory.
They just sit back, stir up the region, let Georgia struggle to control the region without provoking the Russians military anger and eventually it will all come tumbling down around Georgia's ears and the breakaway region will become a pro-Russian protectorate.
Job done.
Welcomefamily
14-Aug-08, 16:44
I think it could go really nasty.
As for all the George W Bush bashing, America's ideological enemies will only hate us even more for our decadence for distancing ourselves from his policies.
I think I am going to have to agree, you can tell oil involved. That often the problem when surpress states become liberated you then realise how much internal conflict is being hidden by surpression. Its like opening a can of worms.
Bring back National Service before its too late.
I hope you guys are right about the end being nigh.....I've just ordered a Lamborghini which I intend to drive to Scotland in 3 1/2 hours, and maxxed some credit cards. Roll on Armageddon.
Or maybe we should send in the vested hero, Bruce Willis, to sort it out.
Since the break up of the USSR and the end of the cold war, the Russians were believed to be a reduced force due to lack of finances. I recall being told that the Ruskie was no longer a threat, they couldn't even afford fuel for their tanks. Options for change saw a lot of us leave the forces, and seek a better life elsewhere.
Current foreign (American) policy has seen our resources commited to Iraq and Afghanistan, to the extent that our forces are drastically over stretched. Troops are not getting sufficient down time between operational deployments.
Meanwhile, with all attention being on the middle east, the Argentinian Government are making noises about the Falkland Islands. Can we fight, let alone win another Falklands conflict?
Russia has been going through a period of nationalistic fervour, bombers have been probing our airspace, requiring the RAF scrambling to intercept and escort them back out again. Late 80's, I was guarding the Q sheds and was surprised just how often our planes flew fully bombed up in response to these incursions.
I would like to think that we are further away from WW3 than those days, if we arent, we sure arent in the same position to fight it as we were toward the end of the cold war.
Couldn't we invite Russia to join NATO then that reduces the chance of war? Or am I being stupid....again?
Welcomefamily
14-Aug-08, 17:46
Its a good excuse to get out of the middle east without too much egg on our faces, the Russian threat.
In the 60s I used to be terrified of the guys with sandwich boards roaring on Town street corners "" The End Is Nigh"" the world will end on whenever
As a complete country bumpkin I believed it and was truly scared I remember my parents asking me what was wrong and my grandad saying Nutters the lot of them
hopefully this is true today Like Northerner Ive taken in the washing and closed up BBQ after a glorious day [lol]
Since the break up of the USSR and the end of the cold war, the Russians were believed to be a reduced force due to lack of finances. I recall being told that the Ruskie was no longer a threat, they couldn't even afford fuel for their tanks. Options for change saw a lot of us leave the forces, and seek a better life elsewhere.
Current foreign (American) policy has seen our resources commited to Iraq and Afghanistan, to the extent that our forces are drastically over stretched. Troops are not getting sufficient down time between operational deployments.
Meanwhile, with all attention being on the middle east, the Argentinian Government are making noises about the Falkland Islands. Can we fight, let alone win another Falklands conflict?
Russia has been going through a period of nationalistic fervour, bombers have been probing our airspace, requiring the RAF scrambling to intercept and escort them back out again. Late 80's, I was guarding the Q sheds and was surprised just how often our planes flew fully bombed up in response to these incursions.
I would like to think that we are further away from WW3 than those days, if we arent, we sure arent in the same position to fight it as we were toward the end of the cold war.
This happens more than you like to believe at the moment!!!!
Poland has just agreed to be covered by US missile strategic cover, scary
northener
15-Aug-08, 08:10
Poland has just agreed to be covered by US missile strategic cover, scary
And that's one of the reasons Russia is so pee'd off with the West, it would be interesting to see what the West would say if Russia placed missiles in a borderline area...how about Cuba?
porshiepoo
15-Aug-08, 11:31
The fact of the matter is that men play war games as a power struggle.
It's almost like they're all 10 year olds again, positioning their plastic soldiers and tanks to wipe out the next guy. Peace doesn't come into it, total annihilation is the aim of the game, and unfortunately IMO, that doesn't change when they rule a country, it's the reason they rule a country.
The sole aim is to be the most powerful person they can be.
The fact of the matter is that men play war games as a power struggle.
It's almost like they're all 10 year olds again, positioning their plastic soldiers and tanks to wipe out the next guy. Peace doesn't come into it, total annihilation is the aim of the game, and unfortunately IMO, that doesn't change when they rule a country, it's the reason they rule a country.
The sole aim is to be the most powerful person they can be.You mean Bush and Putin are playing a game of stratego with the world as their board?:eek:....:eek:
Metalattakk
15-Aug-08, 14:29
The fact of the matter is that men play war games as a power struggle.
It's almost like they're all 10 year olds again, positioning their plastic soldiers and tanks to wipe out the next guy. Peace doesn't come into it, total annihilation is the aim of the game, and unfortunately IMO, that doesn't change when they rule a country, it's the reason they rule a country.
The sole aim is to be the most powerful person they can be.
Hey, don't make this out to be solely a 'male' thing. I'm sure those poor sods on the Belgrano would agree.
rob murray
15-Aug-08, 14:36
Financially, the west is on its knee's with the worst yet to come..wars costs...can we afford to ?? .In the early 90's the USSR was on its knee's and kicked heaviliy when down by western government financiars....Who is now an oil / energy rich country, running a state capitalism system, and rich enough to have real clout...Russia...Maybe this is payback time. The interest in Georgia is based around securing oil / gas under Russian control. A couple of years ago Russia cut the tap for oil / gas on the Ukraine...where does the georgian oil / gas pipeline go.....the west. Control Georgia = control energy = massive control leverage on the West. The US is screwed and washed up....meet the new boss...same as the old boss !!!
pesonally i would tell the states to bog off and mind their own.
why should the russians pull out of Ossetia
70% of Ossetians hold russian citizenship they get financial aid from russia they even get their electricity from russia since the georgians pull the plug on them after their last war with them.
the ossetians want independance they are a different ethnic group from georgia but the georgians and the world community won't recognise it.
maybe the georgians should pull out of ossetia and stop with the massacre of innocent ossetian people who want nothing to do with them.
if the americans are so hellbent in interfering they and nato should be on the backs of china for the abuse of their own people and the amount of crap their country spits into the atmosphere.
but they are classed as a developing country so get a way with it even though they signed the masstricht agreement
It's not likely that we will have world war 3.
That's in nobody's interest.
But we are in for some mega-posturing.
What the current crisis shows is the moral bankrupcy of US foreign policy.
George W Bush has his nickers in a twist because Russia is indulging in a spot of regime change. This is pretty rich when you consider US policy in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran!
Fortunately for us all, the USA does not have the military resources to get involved in any more far-away wars.
But what we are going to hear is a lot of twaddle from the neo-cons in the US. And a lot of twaddle from Russia.
But I must say Russia has every reason to be alarmed by the West. NATO has no business expanding into Ukraine. NATO is a military alliance that was directed againstthe Soviet Union. The Soviet Union is gone and the nation state Russia has re-emerged.
So why dont we disband NATO?
That's the question that is emerging from behind the current propoganda fog.
I wonder if Poland has exposed itself to possible military strikes by Russia through signing an agreement with the U.S to allow Interceptor missile bases to be installed there?
Green_not_greed
15-Aug-08, 19:18
The US is sending troops to Georgia for humanitarian aid. East v West again. We already have Christian v Islam. Pakistan v India. China is on the up and causing the global thirst for fuel. Russia is playing fuel politics with Europe. All have a whiff of old capitalism against old communism.
Is it time for the UK to rearm and defend itself? Is it gonna kick off bigstyle?:confused
From the title I thought it was just you and ywindy taking things up again......
In answer to your question, there will always be conflicts. Managing their limitations seems better these days, tho' with Bush gone I think things will be far better.
Melancholy Man
15-Aug-08, 20:57
Has anyone mentioned Stalin's birthplace yet? Can that person forfeit the argument?
Weather Report for the Caucuses... showers of s everywhere.
I have always thought that Bush was crazy, he has now removed any doubt.Alarmingly, I have found little overly objectionable about Bush's remarks this week. And Dick Cheney.
Shoot me now.
It must be the oil and gas reserves.And Russia's motives are prisine. This is the same Russia which, in the shelling of Grozny alone, likely killed more civilians than the Coalition forces have in Iraq.
Of course there won't be WW3, it doesn't make good business sense. I mean, think of the Real Estate issues. The estate agents won't let it happen.
Someone who understands capitalism! I love you!
George W Bush has his nickers in a twist because Russia is indulging in a spot of regime change. This is pretty rich when you consider US policy in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Iran!
Only until you weigh up those regiemes against Saakashvili, unpleasant thought he is. Hmmm...
<thinks>
No double-standards there.
Bad Manners
15-Aug-08, 23:03
WW3 if it happens will not be started by polititions or any one country it will be started by a lunatic fringe terrorists, they will light the blue touch paper and allthe rest will fight to protect their own ideas.
China will no be far off thinking it could take on the rest of the world either.
WW3 if it happens will not be started by polititions or any one country it will be started by a lunatic fringe terrorists, they will light the blue touch paper and allthe rest will fight to protect their own ideas.
China will no be far off thinking it could take on the rest of the world either.Not a hope, terrorists could never start ww3, only people like Bush and Medvedev. China are the new 'reds under the bed'.
If memory serves me correctly I read a book once about Nostradamus in which he predicted the Chinese to be the ones to watch out for.
PS Whether he meant the end of the world or their cooking I'm not sure. [lol]
If memory serves me correctly I read a book once about Nostradamus in which he predicted the Chinese to be the ones to watch out for.
PS Whether he meant the end of the world or their cooking I'm not sure. [lol]I think he was meaning the proliferation of Chinese restaurants and takeaways rather than anything else
Well if Russia bomb Poland, then we'll probs rush to their rescue like WWII, then halfway through the War, America will join in and when we win claim it was all their doing. :D
Does it matter if they bomb Poland? As far as we're led to believe by the media all the Poles are over here.
Melancholy Man
16-Aug-08, 22:07
Well if Russia bomb Poland, then we'll probs rush to their rescue like WWII, then halfway through the War, America will join in and when we win claim it was all their doing. :D
Citing Russia's treatment of Poland during WWII is a fabulously bad way of suggesting we'd come to their aid!
Its a typical show of muscle from Russia. They have lain dormant for some time now and it looks like the "sleeping giant" has risen again.
It seems that nearly all of the region are trying to claim independence or arguing over who "is the boss", countries seem to split from Russia then split within themselves.
Bush has a point as Russia has much more muscle than Georgia ever will have,but we cant afford to get involved in another conflict so hopefully Russia will get bored and leave it all alone.
On a brighter note if they keep on fighting Scotland may get the next football euro championships after all, as the media have stated that Scotland is on Standby! :)
sprint95m
17-Aug-08, 11:58
I am surprised that nobody has mentioned the American owned pipeline that transports oil obtained from under the Caspian Sea all the way from Azerbaijan to a Mediterranean port in Turkey, passing through Georgia. I believe the oil is then transported by sea to the USA.
Georgia had National Parks renowned for being unspoilt and its government refused permission for the pipe to cross these. However "influence" was brought to bear on the Georgians and said pipe now takes the route chosen by the U.S..
Isn't there a large US military presence in Georgia?
Welcomefamily
17-Aug-08, 12:44
Its the only reason the Americans are jumping up and down, oil, they have plenty of opportunities to show humanitarity aid else where.
Its the only reason the Americans are jumping up and down, oil, they have plenty of opportunities to show humanitarity aid else where.
Like New Orleans for Instance?
JamesMcVean
17-Aug-08, 17:29
I read somewhere that the Mayan's of South America predicted the end of the world to be in 2013 march, i think LOL
The situation in the world is going to develop as food and water shortages cause riots world wide...war for water??
Melancholy Man
17-Aug-08, 18:18
One of these day, the it-was-all-about-oil crowd are going to be right. But only in the sense that the End is Nigh bloke was when the Vogons destroyed the Earth, i.e. pure coincidence.
I've always meant to ask, how do they heat their homes and fund a consumerist-style Western lifestyle at the same time? It ain't all down to North Sea oil.
I am surprised that nobody has mentioned the American owned pipeline that transports oil obtained from under the Caspian Sea all the way from Azerbaijan to a Mediterranean port in Turkey, passing through Georgia.The reason being is that the Caspian resources are overwhelmingly gas, and that far, far, far more oil passes through the Russian pipelines. Someone should tell the Georgians and Azeribijanis that they're selling passage of their countries' own oil to the wrong people.
Russia is the last player which should be taking the moral highground on anything, as well as hosting the Baku-Novorossiysk pipeline which also receives oil from the Azeri-Chirag-Guneshli oilfield. The USA first "sacrificed her international credibility" at the Spanish-American War, but, let's face it, it ain't Russia millions of people from just about every society have flocked ro. This is the same Russia which has threatened, at the last count, five different countries with drastic reduction of oil and gas (and launched cyber attacks on one of them). The same Russia whose hired goons harass British ambassadors and oil executives, whilst the kleptocrats in the Kremlin and their siloviki mates preform their own resource grabs. The same Russia which has almost certainly preformed nuclear terrorism on the streets of London and, I can just about believe, really did murder her own citizens in false-flag bombings.
But, it's only the 'West' which wants easy access to oil.
I believe the oil is then transported by sea to the USA.
You believe wrongly. It is transported to whomever wishes to purchase it. The US - currently at least - has more than enough domestic supplies, and from the likes of Mexico or Canada.
Georgia had National Parks renowned for being unspoilt and its government refused permission for the pipe to cross these. However "influence" was brought to bear on the Georgians and said pipe now takes the route chosen by the U.S..
China, to name just one country, is more than able to pillage her own territory and that of Sudan in the pursuit of natural resources and economic gain, but a vague reference "influence" and no further explanation (e.g. what damage, if any, was done to the parks) is all that's needed to make a case. Then there's the fabulous confusion which, at one point is implying that Mikheil Saakashvili is a willing client of the US, then infers that even he is powerless against shadowy forces.
If they were in control, you'd think they'd be able to manage a reconquest of South Ossetia with a bit more elan. I'd oust Saakashvili, he ain't fit for purpose.
Truly conspiracy therorist are the new animists; internalizing random events and seeing patterns in mutally contradictory beliefs.
Isn't there a large US military presence in Georgia?
One, two hundred personel at most. So, no.
(Before anyone starts accusing me of supporting ethnic cleansing of Ossetians or being an apologist for that ghastly lout in Tblisi, I refer them back to my reading of the weather report for the Caucasus.)
sprint95m
17-Aug-08, 23:33
China, to name just one country, is more than able to pillage her own territory and that of Sudan in the pursuit of natural resources and economic gain, but a vague reference "influence" and no further explanation (e.g. what damage, if any, was done to the parks) is all that's needed to make a case. Then there's the fabulous confusion which, at one point is implying that Mikheil Saakashvili is a willing client of the US, then infers that even he is powerless against shadowy forces.
Thank you Melancholy Man for answering (and expanding on) my post.
I don't think it is possible to tell what the longterm effect on the National Parks has been, because too short a time has passed since the work took place.
With any government's decision making process, isn't it always possible for us to question why they chose what they chose, especially when they reverse or change a previous decision? Then the question of corruption can easily arise?
Going a bit off topic, were the Georgian National Parks first established during the time of Stalin?
On a brighter note if they keep on fighting Scotland may get the next football euro championships after all, as the media have stated that Scotland is on Standby! :)
It wouldn't work out Hotrod, there is some sort of hoodoo that forbids decent fitba happening in Scotland ever since that legendary European Cup Final many years ago ;)
Margaret M.
18-Aug-08, 00:06
I think all the Russians wanted to do was to take out the main road to the Tbilisi airport -- George W. Bush Street and the billboard with his face on it. Who can blame them for that?
Melancholy Man
19-Aug-08, 10:14
Personally, I would have first ordered the destruction of Stalin's statue in Gori, before taking a detour to Minsk and pulling-down that of that notorious thug, Dzerzhinsk, and onto Moscow to feed the body of another notorious thug, Lenin, to the dogs: just as he did to Fanya Kaplan. That said, at least Lenin didn't wet his pants when personally killing another man, as Dzerzhinsky did. Then, maybe, pulled-down the posters of Dubya.
Don't get me wrong, I think the main difference between Saakashvili and Putin is sphere of influence. The current conflict should be a gift to the mob who, say, acted as faciliators, appeasers or outright supporters of the national socialists and war-lords of Belgrade and Banja Luka last decade. Both sides are as a ghastly as each other.
Instead we see Georgia being portrayed as a stooge, and Russia as a supporter of genuine Caucasian self-determination movements (except when they're Chechen), and not an imperialist power.
Going a bit off topic, were the Georgian National Parks first established during the time of Stalin?
I honestly don't know much about the national parks movement in 1930s Soviet Union {1}, but it's reasonable to assume that Stalin would have been involved and that it was accompanied by mass explusion of peasants without the practical advantage of working, as with the Highland Clearances (oh, the complaints are going to start!).
However, because polemics against Georgian policy inevitably boils down to "guess where Stalin was born", I'll say that human catastrophes occurred across the Soviet Union and Georgians were, by no stretch of the imagination, immune.
{1} This ain't sarcastic. It would be an interesting avenue to follow. How many, for instance, sense a link between the modern Green movement, and it's genesis in the 1920s as a desire to preserve German forests for the Volk?
Condoleeza Rice said "A number of Steppes will be taken in support of Georgia".[para]
And Russia's president says he is not afraid of a new cold war.
Bring it on, jobs at UK's naval establishments were safer back when the last one was in full swing.
northener
26-Aug-08, 23:24
And Russia's president says he is not afraid of a new cold war.
Bring it on, jobs at UK's naval establishments were safer back when the last one was in full swing.
Yup, plenty of work for the shipyards and I'm now too old to patrol off the Kola Inlet and Murmansk...thank Christ.
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.