Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

The hunt is On.
Sponsored by
Can you track down Scotland's wildest beastie?
 
 
Wednesday, 3rd December 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Russian warning on Nato warships



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 29 August 2008
RUSSIA has issued a stark warning over what it says is a build-up of Nato ships in the Black Sea, as tensions rise to their highest level since the outbreak of hostilities in Georgia.
The missile destroyer USS McFaul is already off the coast, with the US Coastguard ship Dallas docked in Georgia's port of Batumi, both to show support for the Caucasus nation. Washington has now ordered the flagship of its 6th Fleet, the sophistic
ated command ship Mount Whitney, into the area, saying it will deliver humanitarian supplies. But the flotilla has angered the Kremlin.

Dmitry Rogozin, the Russian ambassador to Nato, warned against western interference in Georgia's two breakaway regions, saying: "If Nato takes military actions against Abkhazia and South Ossetia, acting solely in support of Tbilisi, this will mean a declaration of war on Russia."

Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin, the Russian prime minister, dragged the United States presidential candidates into the row. He suggested Georgia might have been pushed by someone in the US into using force to protect the two separatist states, saying the anti-Moscow rhetoric would help give a competitive advantage to one of the candidates.

Colonel-General Anatoly Nogovitsyn, Russia's deputy chief of the general staff, claimed up to 18 Nato vessels were in, or expected to be in, the Black Sea, and he attacked the use of warships to deliver aid to Georgia as "devilish".

Three frigates – from Spain, Germany and Poland – sailed into the Black Sea eight days ago. They were joined later by a US frigate, the Taylor, for port visits and exercises off the coasts of Romania and Bulgaria. Four warships of Nato member Turkey are also in the Black Sea.

Mr Putin's spokesman said: "The appearance of Nato battleships here in the Black Sea basin … and the decision to deliver humanitarian aid (to Georgia] using Nato battleships is something that can hardly be explained.

"Let us hope that we do not see any direct confrontation."

Russia claims the build-up is contrary to the 1936 Montreux Convention, which regulates the passage of warships there. But that charge has been denied by Carmen Romero, a Nato spokeswoman, who said the alliance had applied for transit into the Black Sea in June and stressed that the vessels would stay less than 21 days, as required by the convention.

"There is no Nato naval build-up in the Black Sea," she said. "Nato is conducting a routine and long planned exercise limited to the western part of the Black Sea. The exercise is not related to the crisis in Georgia."

Meanwhile, in an interview with CNN, Mr Putin, the former president, suggested the conflict was orchestrated to give one side in the battle for the White House an advantage. Although he did not single out John McCain, the Republican candidate has been more strident in his criticism of Russia than his Democratic rival, Barack Obama.

Mr McCain has said that Nato's failure to sign up Georgia into the military alliance had left the country vulnerable. And while Mr Obama has called for restraint on both sides, he has condemned Russian aggression.

Mr Putin said he suspected someone in the US had provoked the Georgia conflict to make the situation more tense and create "a competitive advantage for one of the candidates fighting for the post of US president".

He went on: "The fact is that US citizens were, indeed, in the area in conflict during the hostilities. It should be admitted they would do so only following direct orders from their leaders."

Mr Putin added that the US had armed and trained Georgia.

But a White House spokeswoman, Dana Perino, said: "To suggest that the United States orchestrated this on behalf of a political candidate – it sounds not rational."

Pressure on Russia will mount on Monday at an emergency summit of European Union leaders, to be attended by Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister.

Bernard Kouchner, the French foreign minister, suggested the EU would consider sanctions against Russia.

As current president of the EU, France said it would aim to get consensus among all 27 countries of the bloc if sanctions were envisaged.

While the EU is not contemplating the most stringent of sanctions, such as the travel bans and arms embargoes imposed on Iran, it could postpone talks on a new partnership and co-operation agreement with Russia scheduled for September. The EU could also scrutinise the activities of the Russian energy giant Gazprom, which obtains 70 per cent of its profits from sales to Europe.

Washington said it was considering scrapping a US-Russia civilian nuclear co-operation pact in response to the conflict.

In a related development, Moscow, which has been incensed by the proposed US anti-ballistic missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic, announced it had successfully tested a long-range Topol-M intercontinental ballistic missile.

According to the Russians, the missile has been modified to avoid detection by the anti-missile defence systems.

Meanwhile, after previous tough criticism of Russia, David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, yesterday said "there is no question of launching an all-out war with Russia".

He said: "No-one ever doubted that a Russian army of up to 800,000 people was going to defeat a Georgian army of up to 18,000 people. Indeed, that has happened over the last two weeks. The question, though, for Russia is whether it wants to suffer the isolation, the loss of respect and the loss of trust that comes from that."

A statement signed by Mr Miliband, along with the foreign ministers of the US, Canada, France, Germany, Italy and Japan, said they "deplored" Moscow's "excessive use of military force" in Georgia.

Moscow was offered one supportive comment, however. Alexander Lukashenko, the president of Belarus, Russia's closest ex-Soviet ally, said the Kremlin "had no other moral choice" but to recognise the Georgian regions.

The crisis flared early this month when Georgian forces tried to retake South Ossetia and Russia launched an overwhelming counter-attack.

Russian forces swept the Georgian army out of the rebel region and are still occupying some areas of Georgia proper.

PROFILE

THE USS Mount Whitney, a Blue Ridge class command ship, is the flagship of the United States navy's 6th Fleet.

It is also the command and control ship for Nato's southern European strike force.

It is currently based out of Gaeta, Italy.

Considered by some to be the most sophisticated command, control, communications, computer and intelligence (C4I) ship ever commissioned, Mount Whitney incorporates various elements of the most advanced C4I electronic equipment and gives the embarked joint task-force commander the capability to control all other US naval sea units.

Mount Whitney can receive and transmit large amounts of secure data from anywhere through HF, UHF, VHF, SHF and EHF communications paths.

The vessel carries little in the way of armaments, other than guns for close-range defence.

Mount Whitney typically carries enough food to feed the crew of over 300 for 90 days and can transport supplies to support an emergency evacuation of 3,000 people.

Its distilling units make over 100,000 gallons of fresh water a day.

Traditional allies of Moscow denounce force

CHINA and several central Asian nations rebuffed Russia's hopes of international support for its actions in Georgia, issuing a statement yesterday denouncing the use of force and calling for respect for every country's territorial integrity.

A joint declaration from the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation, or SCO, also offered some support for Russia's "active role in promoting peace" following a ceasefire, but overall it appeared to increase Moscow's international isolation.

The Russian president, Dmitry Medvedev, had appealed to the SCO alliance – whose members include Russia, China and four central Asian countries of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan – for unanimous support of Moscow's response to Georgia's "aggression".

But none of the other alliance members joined Russia in recognising the independence claims of Georgia's separatist regions, Abkhazia and South Ossetia.

Mr Medvedev's search for support in Asia had raised fears that the alliance would turn the furore over Georgia into a broader confrontation between East and West, pitting the United States and Europe against their two main Cold War foes. But China has traditionally been wary of endorsing separatists abroad, mindful of its own problems with Tibet and Muslims in the western territory of Xinjiang.

The joint statement, which was unanimously endorsed, made a point of stressing the sanctity of borders – two days after Russia sought to redraw Georgia's territory.

"The participants… underscore the need for respect of the historical and cultural traditions of each country and each people, and for efforts aimed at preserving the unity of the state and its territorial integrity," the declaration said.

Internet maps 'are wiping out' British landmarks

THE internet is wiping thousands of British landmarks off the map, a leading geographical society warned yesterday.

Churches, ancient woodlands and stately homes are in danger of being forgotten as internet maps fail to include the traditional landmarks, said Mary Spence, the president of the British Cartographic Society.

In recent years, web applications such as Google Earth have become a popular way for people to search for maps and satellite images.

Speaking yesterday at a Royal Geographic Society conference, Ms Spence said: "Corporate cartographers are demolishing thousands of years of history – not to mention Britain's remarkable geography – at a stroke by not including them on maps which millions of us now use every day.

"We're in real danger of losing what makes maps so unique; giving us a feel for a place even if we've never been there."

But Ed Parsons, the geospatial technologist at Google, said the way in which people used maps was changing. He said: "Internet maps can now be personalised, allowing people to include landmarks and information that are of interest to them.

"Anyone can create their own maps, or use experiences to collaborate with others in charting their local knowledge.

"These traditional landmarks are still on the map, but people need to search for them," Mr Parsons said.

"Interactive maps will display precisely the information people want, when they want it.

"You couldn't possibly have everything already pinpointed."

1936 treaty comes under the spotlight

THE Montreux Convention cited by Nato with regard to Black Sea access may be regarded by some as an obscure treaty, but amid the current high level of tension in international politics with Russia, its terms are coming under close scrutiny.

The agreement, signed on 20 July, 1936, gives Turkey full control over the Bosphorus Straits and the Dardanelles and regulates military activity in the region.

It permits Turkey to remilitarise the straits and imposes new restrictions on the passage of combatant vessels.

The treaty also guarantees the free passage of civilian vessels in peacetime.

It severely restricts the passage of non-Turkish military vessels and prohibits some types of warships, such as aircraft carriers, from passing through the straits.

The terms of the convention have been a source of controversy over the years, most notably concerning Russia's military access to the Mediterranean.

Under the agreement, Turkey must be notified 15 days before military ships sail into the Black Sea, and warships cannot remain longer than 21 days. The convention applies limits on individual and aggregate tonnage and numbers.

These limitations effectively preclude the transit of major "capital" warships and submarines of non-Black Sea powers through the straits, unless exempted under Article 17.

That clause permits a naval force of any tonnage or composition to pay a courtesy visit of limited duration to a port in the straits, at the invitation of the Turkish government.









The full article contains 1940 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 29 August 2008 8:17 AM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Russia , Georgia
 
1

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 29/08/2008 00:24:14

'HOY' YOU! @#1, you being funny,?

Whats with the Name,?
2

Statsman,

Edinburgh 29/08/2008 00:45:22
The Americans seem to be winding the Russians up.

There is another territory that may suddenly appear important:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/country_profiles/3641826.stm
3

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 29/08/2008 01:06:58


"Greenslade" no-doubt! but why clone the name, even if one has spelling error,?
4

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 29/08/2008 01:08:14

BTW, your 'Gap' is pants!
5

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 29/08/2008 01:32:09

Awe thanks, #9 bring them on, that's nice of you, I often read you posts, so don't think that I don't appreciate what you say, just because I don't make comment to you, because I do.
6

Charles Linskaill,

Edinburgh 29/08/2008 01:34:32

BTW! I dont know what this guys game is about, trying to clone me, Karl Linksaill, spelt wrong.
7

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 29/08/2008 07:13:53
Roulette, or chess? Russians play both.
8

scottish person,

paisley 29/08/2008 08:11:46
The Americans are wrong as usual. They want to put weapon detection equipment in Poland (neighbours of Russia) but got very upset when Russia wanted to do the same in Cuba in the early sixties. Yes football is much more interesting.
9

Boy Wonder,

29/08/2008 08:24:11
#12. And they both cheat at it too!

#9 and #10/#11 are both the same person. 94 year old Chuckles Linskaill. He's getting worse!
10

fons et origo,

29/08/2008 08:25:44
The Russians have been pushing the West about under Putin for too long,this culminated with the Russians nuking central London with the Litvinenko affair.

Nato needs to stop their creeping power base,funded on nothing more than that they happen to live on a sea of gas and oil.

Nato must take the Russians on,militarily if necessary, as power and strength is all Putin seems willing to recognise.

Then punish them further by isolating them for 20 years or more.

Were that to happen the Russians under Putin could blame no one but himself.
11

fons et origo,

29/08/2008 08:28:38
#13 The Russians were wishing to deploy offensive weapons on Cuba.

Poland will only have defensive systems.

Big difference.
Isn`t it.
12

fons et origo,

29/08/2008 08:38:11
That the Chinese have condemned Putins hostilities is a major blow to the Kremlin.
A blow that cannot be underestimated.

Putin fears the Chinese far, far more than they have ever feared the West,simply because of their unpredictability.
Now that the Chinese have condemned Putin we will probably see Putin looking for a way out,of backing down without losing face.
Putin should not be allowed to do that.

When Putins punishment is decided on by the West and China,all peoples outside and inside Russia must be aware what that punishment consists of.
No saving face deals behind closed doors must be permitted.

Putin must be publically held to account and punished.
13

Griffe,

29/08/2008 08:56:07
Russia get out of Georgia! US fleet leaves. End of problem.
14

Bigwull,

edinburgh 29/08/2008 09:06:40
be afraid, uncle George has his twitchy finger on the button, and not long left on his presidency.
15

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

29/08/2008 09:06:49
Some our media have displayed their usual anti-American tendencies - just listened irately to the Today programme where they all but blamed Georgia for instigating this.

The villians are not the Georgians but the Russians, who have actively encouraged a long-term ethnic cleansing of South Osettia and Abkhazia, purely to satisfy their own imperialist expansionist goals.
16

UrbanFox,

29/08/2008 09:08:49
There is no doubt that Saakashvili was an idiot to send his troops into SO although I suspect he was provoked by the Russian ethnic residents. However since then Russia has acted like an uncivilised violent caveman. Does Russia really want to be part of the world community? Or do they want to isolate themselves through their bullying aggressive attitude. Even China looks like a civilised world partner compared to the sulking Russians. They say they are protecting ethnic Russian residents of OS, what about the Georgian residents that are being cleansed from the enclave? The problem for Russia is that freedom and democracy are built into the human spirit and there is nothing they can do about it.
17

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 09:15:55
#18 Griffe,
Sorry Griffe, not that simple. They're there for the long haul now, until they've finished what they are there for, and that's to secure the oil supply by trying to control the tap.
Russia's recognition of two independent states was a nice excuse to get in there, kind of like the 18 warships now present to deliver 'aid'.
Whether or not Russia is right, the US is definitely wrong, it's nowhere near their neighbourhood, they just jumped on the opportunity.
18

The Federalist (the poster formerly know as NAUON),

29/08/2008 09:31:33
"Whether or not Russia is right, the US is definitely wrong, it's nowhere near their neighbourhood, they just jumped on the opportunity."

You obviously have a short memory when it comes to history.

Putin's actions are no different from the expansionist policies of Hitler in Nazi Germany or Stalin in the old Soviet Union.

Russia is taking wee bites out of its neighbour. Who will be next? Belarus? Ukraine? The Baltic republics?

If history tells us anything it is that a bully won't be stopped by appeasing him - NATO are right to act now to stop the Russian bully.
19

YHOTA,

Newbridge 29/08/2008 09:37:18
I guess you guys who make these knee-jerk anti-Amercian comments are either to young or too ignorant of history to realise that throughout my lifetime (born 1940) we have all survived by working together against people who would do us harm. Pay a visit to Bastogne if you need some evidence. Where is Bastogne? Google it chump!
20

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 09:37:31
#23,
Russia maybe taking nibbles out of its neighbours, but the US is taking huge bites out of the Middle East, and what excuse do they have for being there?
Where ever there's oil to be found, you'll find the US lurking nearby, and if there's no oil, well, just take one look at Zimbabwe.
21

,

29/08/2008 09:41:20
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
22

sonofhamish,

edinburgh 29/08/2008 09:42:36
Looks like two articles in one here, is no-one at the Scotsman proofreading these days?

Apart from anything the bully here is more the U.S. than Russia and its unfortunate that our own govt has thrown their hat in with the U.S. but not surprising.

The Georgians decided they could go into these regions and ethnically cleanse Russians was ALWAYS going to be a provactive move that the Russians would respond to. I smell the hand of the neocons and specifically Cheney behind this little prank...
23

Silence of the Yams,

29/08/2008 09:47:49
#25. Maybe you should ask the Iraqi govt? Chumps like you forget that the US are there by the invitation of a democratic govt. Maybe you should ask why the Chinese are in Tibet? Because they are NOT wanted there, pal!
24

Alan B,

29/08/2008 09:49:11
#scottish person

"They want to put weapon detection equipment in Poland (neighbours of Russia)"

So by logical implication Poland should not be allowed membership of NATO. And be kicked out of the EU.

Remember Poland was the victim of Russian oppression for 40yrs, under the soviet union. And now you want to punish the victim in case we upset the country that conducted the crimes.

NATO is the promise by a group of countries to protect each other in the event of war. A promise to safeguard their sovereignty. If Georgia was a member of NATO we would have not other option but to go to war to protect it. (unless you thing it is ok to promise mutual help for each other and then do nothing in the event of anything happening). NATO cannot simply choose to protect some of its members and not others. If any country is invaded and NATO does not react then NATO is finished.

The best way to protect a NATO member is not to leave it undefended and then have to go to war to try to free it with all the civilian casulties that will happen. If a country is allowed to join NATO it has to be strongly defended from the outset. ie you prevent invasion and you ensure no-one is stupid enough to try. As such you need missile systems in Poland and other countries at the outer border. Remember by asking to join Poland is asking for help to defend itself. Poland is asking that the 40yrs yrs of totalitarian rule from Russia is not allowed to return.

Can you credible have a EU member that is barred from NATO membership. The EU would be ineffect saying if you are invaded we will not lift a finger. You are a second class member of the EU. The EU is refusing to protect its own borders.

It is interesting that you like punishing the victim of 40yrs of Soviet oppression.



25

Alan B,

29/08/2008 09:52:04
#Postmark-55

A comparison with Zimbabwe is completely illogical. The only country that was interested in internal Zimbabwian issues were the British because it is an ex colony. There are worse in Africa and the rest of the world than them.
26

Tweedmouth,

Coldstream 29/08/2008 09:53:12
Is anybody else worried that we have a walking foetus called Miliband as Foreign Secretary - a guy who looks like a 16 year old school prefect and who has never had ANY real job in the real world??? This guy has never run a corner shop - and he is out there saying " we don't want an all out war with Russia"!!!!

This is a very dangerous situation and the poverty of talent and experience in the Nulab party is cruelly exposed by this moron. Brown is even worse.
27

yockel,

29/08/2008 09:53:38
Where are the isolationists when we need them?
28

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 09:55:22
#28 Silence of the Yams,
Please save your China comments for a China article, this is about the US, NATO and Russia.
29

Alan B,

29/08/2008 09:55:48
#Tweedmouth

Many of the British foreign secretaries have been poor. While i think labour generally have a poverty of talent in their ministerial ranks, look at many of the poor excuses we had under the tory decades (howe, hurd, major etc).
30

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 09:59:34
#30 Alan B,
Hey Alan, how's it going?
My point is that there's no oil in Zimbabwe, thus no US military lurking nearby.
31

Silence of the Yams,

29/08/2008 10:05:53
33. The thread is about Georgia you clown, not the Middle Wast.
32

Alan B,

29/08/2008 10:07:57
#Postmark-55

I know but I see no parallel with Zimbabwe. Why would anyone go in militarily to Zimbabwe. You would have to invade many, many more countries first, as they are far worse. France has even invited their leadership to certain African meetings so they have not even been properly isolated. South Africa has no real problem with it.

There are serious problems with the middle east. Whether it is wars, global terrorism, mass internal problems (Sadam using chemical weapons), the rest of the world giving tin pot dictators tonnes of money for their oil, which they then can use to buy weapons and have nuclear ambitions. There is also the problem of Israel. If the US (which i think is totally wrong about israel) was purely motivated by oil why does it support Israel so much, an enemy of the oil producing countries. There is also alot of history in the middle east becase of france and britain carving up the old turkish empire after ww1. And also the cold war and the strategic nature of the place. As such it was a pawn in the game to defeat the soviet regime.



33

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 10:10:50
#36 Silence of the Yams,
Yes ,but I'm drawing comparisons as to what the US is up to, and how they get involved when there's oil at stake, but stay away when there's no oil. You see, I'm still talking about US involvement, and that's relative to this article.
34

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 10:18:16
#37 Alan B,
Well Alan, Zimbabwe is just one blatant example that came to mind, thus the comparison of oil vs no oil.
As far as Israel is concerned, the Americans are no dummies, and know how the rest of the Arab world perceives Israel, so they put their money into a country who can keep an eye on their neighbours, most of who are sitting on a lot of oil, oil that the Americans want and need.
The US is strategically based all over the world, and it's not for friendly reasons, just for reasons that they hope can and will benefit them.
35

K McDonald,

Glasgow 29/08/2008 10:18:26
35 Postmark-55,China, 29/08/2008 09:59:34
My point is that there's no oil in Zimbabwe, thus no US military lurking nearby.>>>

And there is oil in Sudan and no US military lurking nearby.....the only foreign lurkers are Chinese oilmen, weapons salesmen and military advisors.

Amazing that the US is the only country singled out for criticism for providing military advice to their friends. There were Russian's helping to shoot down stealth fighters during the Kosova war, Brits in West Africa helping to defeat the West Side boys, Chinese in North Korea, North Koreans in Syria and on and on and on.....

Putin is a gangster trying to recapture his old turf. Simple as that.





36

Alan B,

29/08/2008 10:26:53
#Postmark-55

I still cannot see how Zimbabwe is a blatant example. it is a threat to no-one and has caused not wars and does not involve itself in international issues or disputes and has no terrorist activities.
37

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 10:28:05
#40 K McDonald,
Ah, but you don't see China involved here do you? Well at least not for the present time anyways.
The US on the other hand is heavily involved, and oil is the reason, bottom line.
38

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 10:33:19
#41 Alan B,
Alan we all know that Zimbabwe isn't involved in this dilemna.
I just brought Zimbabwe into the picture, making a point that if there's oil involved, you'll find the US in the neighbourhood, but if oil isn't on the menu, the US won't be dining there.
Zimbabwe has had terrible atrocities commited against its citizens, but because there's no oil, you won't find the US there.
39

Alan B,

29/08/2008 10:37:47
#Postmark-55

I think you really do not understand how the US has got to where it has.

Much of the big problems in the world were caused by the colonial empires particularly from Europe. Take many of the world problem areas and they were british colonies, afganistan, iraq and palestine (although the middle east was previously dominated by the turkish empire), india/packistan. You can even look back at the disputes between china and japan.

WW1 was a colonial war, fought over and between european countries and their empires.

The US was dragged into this war, before which its policy was one is isolationism.

Again the US was dragged into anothe european inspired world war with ww2. Where again it had previously resumed its isolationist stance.

Most of the problems in the second hald of that century have been underpinned by the soviet regime and trying to stop the evils of stalin. This was made worse as some countries lined themselves up with the oppressive totalatarian communist regimes eg china.

As such much of the issues were trying to safeguard the democractic world from communist dictotorships.

The cold war meant getting involved in a dirty way to win that war but avoid military conflict. Much of the world is still damaged from being pawns in that dispute.

If you look at it seriously the US has been a victim of european colonialim (alhtough it was created by this way itself) and the evil spread of communist dictorarships.
40

Alan B,

29/08/2008 10:45:05
#43 Postmark-55

Why would the US get involved in Zimbabwe.

The US gets involved in areas that are strategic, aligning up against what it sees as it main enemies.

There is no oil in europe so why does the US have so many bases here. No oil in eastern europe so why there.

Is there oil of china for export? Doubt it. But that is to try to safeguard these disputed areas from Chinese aggression. (know you will not agree with that).

Was there much oil in South Korea. Or any part of Korea. Is vietnam really a new middle east?

Remember it was the french and russians that had gone behind the sanctions of iraq to make oil deals. It was france that broke the sanctions for oil deals in Lybia.

We heard gulf war 1 was about getting Iraq oil. The US proved that argument wrong by not going in to Iraq.

If it was all about oil why did the allow the Iranian revolution by withdrawing support for the Shah.

Most of US foreign policy has actually been about stopping communism and the threat is saw from there. To many in europe it was obsessed. eg McCarthy trials.


41

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 10:46:33
#44 Alan B,
Well Alan, the way I see and understand it, nobody drug the US into any conflict, but they came in because there was something to be gained and the enemies already weakened, that makes the US clever opportunists, rather than the saviours they would like us to believe.
The cold war was just another justification to beef up their military and increase an already overly gross military budget.
And I agree with you on the point that much of the world suffered and are still suffering on account of the cold war, which in fact was never a war.
We were all pawns.
42

Alan B,

29/08/2008 10:47:27
#Postmark-55

If you are going to invade Zimbabwe because it has a leader that fixes elections, then you would first have to rid the world of all countries that do not even go through the sham of having free elections.
43

Lianachan,

Highlands 29/08/2008 10:47:34
#20 "Some our media have displayed their usual anti-American tendencies - just listened irately to the Today programme where they all but blamed Georgia for instigating this."

Well, Georgia invaded South Ossetia when they thought nobody was paying attention - killing civillians and (even more stupidly) Russian soldiers. You can't help but at least partially attribute blame to them.
44

UrbanFox,

29/08/2008 10:50:49
Postmark-55, Thanks for such an enjoyable Olympic games, you really provided the world with a wonderful spectacle. There is much about China that I admire today.

However as Alan suggests you really seem to have a blinkered view of the world: "Zimbabwe has had terrible atrocities commited against its citizens". Yes, and I am old enough to have watched the raw footage from Tiananmen Square as your government massacred its own young citizens. It was horrific and sometimes you just had to look away. It was really awful, the instinctive desire for freedom and democracy being mercilessly butchered. So I think you should be a little more circumspect before you condemn any other country.

45

Alan B,

29/08/2008 10:53:38
#Postmark-55

"nobody drug the US into any conflict, but they came in because there was something to be gained"

I suggest you read some history about the start of both world wars.

Why did the US enter the first world war? Why did they come into the second?

Neither of these wars were started in any way by the US. They were very isolationist in these days.

In ww1 they came in for 2 main reasons. The german uboat campaign meant many US trade ships were attacked. And Germany also offered part of texas to Maxico if it attacked the US.

WW2 the US was attacked by the Japanese. It had stayed out the war. Should the US just have allowed Hilter to run europe or hand over to almost equally repugnant Stalinist regimes.

In many ways the US was a victim of the problems of european colonialism, and the communist dictorships and ideologies of the 20th century from the soviet union and china etc.

To a large extent is has got involved to stop it suffering from these things again.
46

Alan B,

29/08/2008 10:57:31
#Lianachan

The underlying problem is. Georgia is a sovereign nation and was dealing with an internal disput.

Russia invaded a soveign nation. Russia was also sponsoring disruption in these areas before this conflict.

Many people view the Iraq war as illegal. That was due to the fact that to go to war to invade another country you need a UN mandate.

Russia has not such mandate. As such this invasion was illegal.

In your opinion does it matter if a country goes against international law and invades another country without a UN mandate?
47

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 10:58:39
#45 Alan B,
Well Alan, that part of the world just happens to be a highway for transporting oil, thus my previous mentioning of the US controlling the tap back at post #22 to Griffe.

And you're 100% correct about the US trying to stop Communism, because Communism was a so called threat to keep the west scared and justify gross military budgets and justifying all the constant new and high-tech weapons, just to stop those dreaded Communists.

Well Alan, As you can see by my location, I live in a Communist country, and it's great here. There's nothing to fear from Communism or Communists.

If you want to talk about atrocities committed by anybody, all systems are equally guilty, as colonialism so clearly showed us, and yes Communism too, when being led by the wrong leaders.
Presently in China we have good and sound leadership under Hu Jintao, and our economy is thriving and many people are starting to see the benefits, and yes we have a long ways to go, but give us time, we'll get there.
48

Alan B,

29/08/2008 11:07:33
#Postmark-55

"There's nothing to fear from Communism or Communists"

There is nothing wrong with democratic communism. But most of the communist regimes were dictatorships. Like many regimes they were expansionist.

Look at the soviet regime of Stalin. The invade half of europe. So there was alot to fear. The whole communist doctrine was for an internation revolution.

Where hitlers socialism was of a nationistic type the communist socialism was for world wide rule.

Although in practice, soviet style communism was just as nationalistic and full of anti seminism.

The reason democracy are better, is the people can kick out bad leaders. We all know power corrupts leaders. Dictatorships obviously suffer much worse as they cannot kick out these leaders.

The totalarian communist dictatorships of the 2nd half of the 20th century were the wrong doers. The rest of the democracies were the victims of them.
49

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 11:11:23
#49 UrbanFox,
Hi there UrbanFox,
You're welcome for the great Olympic Games, but I won't take the credit, that would go to the Government, organizers, volunteers and whoever else I left out.
These Olympic Games also highlighted that China has come into its own, and has left the past behind. Tiananmen Square was nineteen years ago, and has nothing to do with the present people in charge. The present government has and is making great strides in improving its citizens lives, and considering the overly massive population, it is doing a good job. But we need more time and not criticism. We are going through our industrial revolution now so to speak, and we are making mistakes and hopefully learning from them as well from the not so good past.
The more you criticize and condemn us, the more likely things will recede, rather than go forward, and I for one don't want to revisit the past, it's there to be learned from, and of course never to be forgotten.
50

Alan B,

29/08/2008 11:12:36
#Postmark-55

People would trust China considerably more if it allowed the Chinese people to freely elected their leaders.

If the current Chinese leader is as good as you say, he should have no worries about letting the Chinese people elect him.

Only leaders afraid of the judgement of their own people would be afraid of an election.
51

The Tin Man,

29/08/2008 11:20:44
#51 AlanB

There is a difference between a sovereign nation and enclaves within a nation that have never been governed by that nation, ever since it's creation.

'Sovereign nation' is a sweeping generalisation that is not really applicable in this situation. In order to be part of a nation, surely a region has to agree to be governed by that nation, and for government to be put in place?
52

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 11:21:08
#50 Alan B,
Well Alan I never claimed that the US started either WWl or WWll, but rather that they knew when to enter and defeat an already weakened enemy, all for self interest, but making it like they were the white knights in shining armour rescuing the fair maiden.
They are kind of guilty of overkill to say the least wouldn't you say by nuking the Japanese twice.
To this day they want all but Israel and a few select allies to disarm or not enter the nuclear program, but I for one don't want them to be the world's policemen, do you? After all, they are the only ones to have tested nuclear weapons on people, and they did it twice in three days. Still trust them Alan? I know I don't.
53

The Tin Man,

29/08/2008 11:27:39
#51 AlanB

China has never been a democracy, and the UK has never strived for communism.

Get over it.
54

Mashimaro,

China 29/08/2008 11:28:39
#51 The rest of the world would trust America a whole lot more if it let people elect the leaders they wanted too.
55

Mashimaro,

China 29/08/2008 11:29:56
#49 Stalin "invaded" "half" of Europe? Are you nuts?
56

DaveK,

Edinburgh 29/08/2008 11:29:59
Well if nothing else Holywood will dine out on this one for years, not to mention the countless computer games that will spin off from this little confrontation. I can see it now, 2009 Russian invades Ukraine, America responds, Uk dragged in, Vin Diesel single handedly takes on the might of the Russian army and wins without breaking a sweat. Playstation brings out "Euroconflict" in time for Christmas.
At least that way you can blow the hell out of each other and the biggest injury you get is a sore wrist.
57

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 11:30:06
#55 Alan B,
Sorry Alan, trying to keep up here, but you're bringing up a lot of points for me to respond to.

Alan, a one party system without elections works for a country with the size of our population.
To keep this many people happy, fed, educated, looked after medically, is a huge challenge, and we just don't need the infighting that multiple party systems bring.
It isn't perfect, but it is working for us, and so we will continue on that course until its broken or stay with it if it is indeed successful over the long haul. It isn't exactly a picnic trying to keep control over such a huge population, especially when there is so much corruption at the lower and local levels, but we're trying to clean that up, ever so slowly.
Please give us time Alan, you went through your growing pains, and that's where we are at now.
58

Postmark-55,

China, 29/08/2008 11:33:24
Hey Mashimaro,
Am I ever glad to see you, there are a lot of points for me to respond to and I ain't the world's fastest typist.
59

Alan B,

29/08/2008 11:33:53
#Postmark-55

I completely disagree with your view of US reasons for entering into both World Wars. You have ignored the reasons I put for their entry. What was the self interest in ww1. They took none of the spoils that Briain and France did. In ww2 they were attacked.

Particularly in ww1, there was no glory. It was a truely awful war.

"They are kind of guilty of overkill to say the least wouldn't you say by nuking the Japanese twice."

Difficult to say as I was not old enough to have a perspective of the time. The 2nd bomb was becuase the Japanese refused to surrender after the first one. So it is easier to blame the Japanese leadership for stupidity.

From the little i really know of war with the Japanese, my perpective is those that fought them thought they were truely evil. There was actually a respect for the germans in both wars (not the nazis), but the Japanese were consider totally differently. (i am talking about a british perspective, do not know US perspective).

The Japanese had a reputation from being cruel in a way that others were not even in war. The whole torture and treatment of prisioners etc.

I do not know if that played a part in nuking them.

Also since Japan attacked the US origninally the question has to be asked, how many US people should be killed in action before you use the weapon available to you. Without nuking the Japanese would they have been beaten. Remember the fighting with Japan did not take place in Japan but proxy wars in other parts.

Difficult choice to make.
60

A Better Way,

Scottish Republic 29/08/2008 11:34:08
The posters on this forum must be green as the grass that you are smoking.

This whole mess was instigated by George Bush and his CIA to help McCain get elected by the American People. They know that Obama is becoming unbeatable after the republicans filling each others pockets out of the phony war in Iraq.

The Russians are quite correct to feel threatened by the placement of a missile shield in their former satellite countries. Would the USA allow missiles in Cuba?. Kennedy was willing to go to Nuclear War with Kruschov to stop the missiles going to Cuba. Why should Russia feel any different. Christ the majorityb of Scots dont like their neighbours especially Sarkozy, who is a bitter little short man who has napoleonic aspirations to run Europe.

The Yanks will get rid of the worst President of the United States in November. Obama will get rid of the missiles and the right wing nutters who are running the show for their big business mates.
61

Edward,

29/08/2008 11:36:27
Russians are pathetic to get faux worked up about a Coastguard cutter which has one light gun and is painted all white with a big red stripe accross its sides. Not exactly a threat!
62

Alan B,

29/08/2008 11:37:33
#56 Mashimaro

"Stalin "invaded" "half" of Europe"

If you refute that you know little of european affairs. Stalin created the soviet union and and also took over eastern europe.
63

Alan B,

29/08/2008 11:39:17
#Mashimaro

"The rest of the world would trust America a whole lot more if it let people elect the leaders they wanted too"

Explain?


The problem with America is their democracy has been so corrupted by money.

64

Edward,

29/08/2008 11:40:38
#61 A Better Way,Scottish Republic
Slight difference between the anti missile shield that the US is proposing to set up in Poland and the ICBM's that Russia tried to deploy in Cuba!
Anti Missle is exactly it says on the tin, its for knocking out any ICBM's launched (its Ground to air)
where as the ICBM's that Russia had in Cuba are Ground to Ground long range missiles
So please get it right
65

Alan B,

29/08/2008 11:40:47
#A Better Way

"Christ the majorityb of Scots dont like their neighbours especially Sarkozy"

I would doubt the majority of Scots either know who Sarkozy is and have any strong opinion on him.
66

Alan B,

29/08/2008 11:43:45
#A Better Way

If you reject the missle system to protect eastern europe, then by you should atleast spell out the implications.

ie all eastern euopean countries should be expelled from NATO as it simply does not make sense. And most probably expelled from EU.

see my post #25 to explain in detail.

You should also put in context why Poland etc the victim of soviet oppression should be punished to appease the wrongdoer.
67

The Tin Man,

29/08/2008 11:47:11
#63 AlanB

I am sure that you know that Stalin did not create the USSR.

#67 AlanB

It has been a long time since short-range balistic missiles have been sited in Poland, even when they were batting for the other side. Why did Nato not take up the offer to use Russian radar installations?
68

UrbanFox,

29/08/2008 11:48:22
#50 Postmark-55

A fair response. China is certainly on a good road. The young chinese people I have met have been well-mannered and hard-working and are welcome to live in the UK. Your young people will have their day.

Cheers
69

Alan B,

29/08/2008 11:52:50
#52 The Tin Man

"'Sovereign nation' is a sweeping generalisation that is not really applicable in this situation."

A sovereign nation is a country with internationally recognised borders. Georgia has been this way since what 93? As such Russia is invading a soveign nation. This terrerory is not part of Russia. Considering Russia ran the whole place only a few decades ago they could have carved it all up however they wanted it anyway.

I support people that want self determination. The real issue is what the process should be and how the the international community will support that process (ie through UN).

A country that simply invades another becuase it does not like its internal workings without going through the UN, particulary when Georgia is not threat to Russia, makes this not only an illegal act but wrong.

"In order to be part of a nation, surely a region has to agree to be governed by that nation, and for government to be put in place?"

Yes. Remember the whole issue like Yugoslavia is coming to terms with the falling of the soviet empire and the problems it caused and before that the other colonial empires like Autria Hungarian one.
70

Harry "Dingy" Reid,

Las Vegas 29/08/2008 11:53:56
#9 scottish person

You are wrong, even if you were right are you supporting the Russians in Georgia?
71

Harry "Dingy" Reid,

Las Vegas 29/08/2008 11:55:55
12 fons et origo

You're a voice of reason in this crowd of idiots.
72

Travis,

chi 29/08/2008 11:57:39
Christ here we go again!
73

Harry "Dingy" Reid,

Las Vegas 29/08/2008 11:58:13
2 Statsman

"The Americans seem to be winding the Russians up."

No, the Russians are winding up the Russians. And why did you leave Spain, Poland, France, and the UK out of your hateful comment?
74

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:00:37
#The Tin Man

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Stalin

Stalin took over in 1922 from Lenin.

1922 was the date of the creation of USSR treaty but 1924 before it came into being.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Creation_of_the_USSR


Anyway do you think most of eastern europe and soviet republic had the democratic choice under Stalin to choose membership of soviet union.

It has been more than 20yrs since is did this for ograde at school :)

75

Harry "Dingy" Reid,

Las Vegas 29/08/2008 12:01:48
Putin, just like the other the Middle East terrorists wants Obama as president so they can do anything they want when Obama is elected, just like in the Clinton days.

"Meanwhile, Vladimir Putin, the Russian prime minister, dragged the United States presidential candidates into the row. He suggested Georgia might have been pushed by someone in the US into using force to protect the two separatist states, saying the anti-Moscow rhetoric would help give a competitive advantage to one of the candidates."

76

Mashimaro,

China 29/08/2008 12:04:46
#64 Alan, the US interferes in elections all over the world, all the time. The UK too, for that matter. Does that show the will of the people? No.
Democracy is a lie.
77

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:04:56
#68 The Tin Man

I do not think the west yet trust Russia. They are not sure which way Russia will necessarily go.

Things like the murder of the russian in london does not help and underpins a deeper problem that is not played out in the media.

Remeber much of NATO is to protect it members from Russia.

Russia has not yet really dealt with the wrongs of the communist regimes and its effects on the europe and particularly stalin, in the same way that Germany has had to deal with the issues surrounding hitler.

78

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:08:51
#Mashimaro

"Democracy is a lie"

In some countries maybe. But for most of european and the west in general it is real. Not perfect but real. All constrained by the limitations of the different models of democracy they choose.
79

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:12:56
#Mashimaro

You are right the US has interfered in many places over the world. And in many ways it would be better if it butted out.

The problem is from the end of ww2 the world has been a mess becuase of the evils of the communist regimes and there invasions of other countries running them against their will.

Much of the areas where the US has invened in the past is part of the cold war.

If you take the view like me it was the soviets that were the "evil empire" trying to dominate others against their will as in half of europe (and would have gone further), then the west was the victim of this wrong doing.

All you are doing is pointed out the victim did things unbecoming in order to beat those intent on its destruction.
80

The Tin Man,

29/08/2008 12:19:21
#78 AlanB

Thanks for the correction.

However, remember much of NATO is to protect the military / industrail complex.

Do you seriously think that Russia poses a military threat to any Nato members?
81

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:19:30
#The Tin Man

Russia ran most of eastern europe and other soviet state with an iron fist at the hands of Stalin and the leaders that followed him. Many of these countries were taken by force against there will.

Do you honestly think that make Russia the best person to take an independent view of how to manage any disputes over territories and judge the rights and wrongs of the situation?

I think you gloss over the fact that Russia and particularly the stalinist phase was the root of so many of these underlying problems.
82

Alan B,

29/08/2008 12:27:49
#81 The Tin Man

Probably not. I was really hoping that in the fullness of time Russia would have been part of the EU.

Putin seems to be playing too many games and has apparently receded on the democracy that we thought Russia was getting with the fall of the soviet union.

I was actually against the missle systems by the US until I thought about it yesterday in this type of discussion on another thread.

I just cannot see how, you can have Poland a member of NATO (and others) and not have weapon systems in place to prevent attack. It does not make sense.

I can completely see why the Russians would be against it.

But the question comes down to. Should we allow eastern european countries into NATO (and that means promising to go to war to protect them) or do we say no we are not prepared to do what is necessary to protect you and are not prepared to let you join our security club.

It also comes down to seeing eastern european countries as the victim of 40yrs of soviet rule and whether they should be allowed the protection of NATO.

While i hate Bushisms, with Russia it almost comes down to are they with europe or against it.
83

Nevsky,

Moscow 29/08/2008 12:29:22
82:

It is not the Russia of today Alan i am afraid. Every debate about modern Russia always comes back to Stalin and the old and tired perceptions of Russia which is now at least 40 years out of date.

It's like talki