What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Russia invades Georgia! (1 Viewer)

Davej626

Davej626

5.56 solves all
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/europe/08/08...=rss_topstories

This looks like a cluster* just waiting to happen. Add in some ethnic hatred and payback, old country allegiances, and stir. How soon before someone comes to Georgia's aid and sends troops to fight the "Russian Invasion"?

And these guys were asking to be part of NATO? If they were, we would be forced (by treaty) to treat this as an attack on the US. We would be sending in the Marines right about now. Makes you wonder about those Baltic countries as well...

 
This just in: NATO is trying to mediate the conflict.

Great! That worked so well in Bosnia.

 
Jobber said:
QUEZILLA said:
Did anyone read the Time Magazine man of the year article on Putin. :shrug:
Click to expand...
:shock: At first I thought you were kidding. But yes, Time did in fact make Putin their Man of the Year in 2007. Unbelievable and pretty embarassing for them I think.
Click to expand...
It really isn't embarrassing, actually. It's not the "Super Awesome Guy Award" -- they give it to whomever makes the most news or casts the largest shadow. Putin, as one of the most powerful people in the world, as well as one of the worst (complete effing scumbag) was deemed a suitable choice by TIME.
 
"It's all very sad and alarming," Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said earlier in the day. "And, of course, there will be a response."

This part is chilling.

 
As Garry Kasparov has noted, this guy Putin is the sort of guy that the Russians want. Again, refuting the argument, spread by this President and others, that everyone in the world wants democracy and freedom. The Russians felt insecure when they had political freedom; they prefer having a strong man tell them what to do. Whether it is a Czar, or Stalin, or Putin, they desire, perhaps need a strong man to give them orders and make them feel safe.

 
Main Force Patrol said:
Jobber said:
QUEZILLA said:
Did anyone read the Time Magazine man of the year article on Putin. :excited:
Click to expand...
:shrug: At first I thought you were kidding. But yes, Time did in fact make Putin their Man of the Year in 2007. Unbelievable and pretty embarassing for them I think.
Click to expand...
It really isn't embarrassing, actually. It's not the "Super Awesome Guy Award" -- they give it to whomever makes the most news or casts the largest shadow. Putin, as one of the most powerful people in the world, as well as one of the worst (complete effing scumbag) was deemed a suitable choice by TIME.
Click to expand...
I think it was a giant warning sign by Time.
 
The Russians haven't quite invaded Georgia, they have sent more troops into South Ossetia which has been under their de facto administration anyway, it was actually the Georgians who sent their troops in first.

 
Preseason Falcons jersey sales reached a record high after Georgia attacked by Russia with Putin (aka Vlad Vladivostok) jerseys the most requested.

 
timschochet said:
As Garry Kasparov has noted, this guy Putin is the sort of guy that the Russians want. Again, refuting the argument, spread by this President and others, that everyone in the world wants democracy and freedom. The Russians felt insecure when they had political freedom; they prefer having a strong man tell them what to do. Whether it is a Czar, or Stalin, or Putin, they desire, perhaps need a strong man to give them orders and make them feel safe.
Click to expand...
This is the way that most of the world works. It's the old way. It certainly makes things predictable and secure. But if you want a quick way to understand how revolutionary the American Revolution and the ideas behind it really were (and are), look no further than the way that people tend to revert to think and be treated like sheep elsewhere in the world.

 
Tatum Bell said:
timschochet said:
As Garry Kasparov has noted, this guy Putin is the sort of guy that the Russians want. Again, refuting the argument, spread by this President and others, that everyone in the world wants democracy and freedom. The Russians felt insecure when they had political freedom; they prefer having a strong man tell them what to do. Whether it is a Czar, or Stalin, or Putin, they desire, perhaps need a strong man to give them orders and make them feel safe.
Click to expand...
This is the way that most of the world works. It's the old way. It certainly makes things predictable and secure. But if you want a quick way to understand how revolutionary the American Revolution and the ideas behind it really were (and are), look no further than the way that people tend to revert to think and be treated like sheep elsewhere in the world.
Click to expand...
Sure. But we've had our moments. If George Washington had decided that he did not want to give up the Presidency, he would have had the support of the American people, and this country might have become a typical South American dictatorship. Then in 1934, during the Great Depression, if Huey Long had not been assassinated, he would most likely have been elected President, after which he would have done away with the Constitution.

And even now, if we were to have a real economic crisis in this country, with massive unemployment, inflation, and starvation, how soon would many Americans be willing to throw away our freedoms in return for security?

 
Tatum Bell said:
timschochet said:
As Garry Kasparov has noted, this guy Putin is the sort of guy that the Russians want. Again, refuting the argument, spread by this President and others, that everyone in the world wants democracy and freedom. The Russians felt insecure when they had political freedom; they prefer having a strong man tell them what to do. Whether it is a Czar, or Stalin, or Putin, they desire, perhaps need a strong man to give them orders and make them feel safe.
Click to expand...
This is the way that most of the world works. It's the old way. It certainly makes things predictable and secure. But if you want a quick way to understand how revolutionary the American Revolution and the ideas behind it really were (and are), look no further than the way that people tend to revert to think and be treated like sheep elsewhere in the world.
Click to expand...
The whole strong man political culture is prevalent in parts of the world without a strong civic political culture, but parts of the world that have experienced movements like the Enlightenment and the Renaissance tend to be less prone to it.
 
Portis 26 said:
The Russians haven't quite invaded Georgia, they have sent more troops into South Ossetia which has been under their de facto administration anyway, it was actually the Georgians who sent their troops in first.
Click to expand...
Not sure what to think about the claims of russian planes bombing civilian targets though...
 
timschochet said:
Tatum Bell said:
timschochet said:
As Garry Kasparov has noted, this guy Putin is the sort of guy that the Russians want. Again, refuting the argument, spread by this President and others, that everyone in the world wants democracy and freedom. The Russians felt insecure when they had political freedom; they prefer having a strong man tell them what to do. Whether it is a Czar, or Stalin, or Putin, they desire, perhaps need a strong man to give them orders and make them feel safe.
Click to expand...
This is the way that most of the world works. It's the old way. It certainly makes things predictable and secure. But if you want a quick way to understand how revolutionary the American Revolution and the ideas behind it really were (and are), look no further than the way that people tend to revert to think and be treated like sheep elsewhere in the world.
Click to expand...
Sure. But we've had our moments. If George Washington had decided that he did not want to give up the Presidency, he would have had the support of the American people, and this country might have become a typical South American dictatorship. Then in 1934, during the Great Depression, if Huey Long had not been assassinated, he would most likely have been elected President, after which he would have done away with the Constitution.

And even now, if we were to have a real economic crisis in this country, with massive unemployment, inflation, and starvation, how soon would many Americans be willing to throw away our freedoms in return for security?
Click to expand...
To be fair, freedoms aren't worth much if they're not protected.
 
Portis 26 said:
Tatum Bell said:
timschochet said:
As Garry Kasparov has noted, this guy Putin is the sort of guy that the Russians want. Again, refuting the argument, spread by this President and others, that everyone in the world wants democracy and freedom. The Russians felt insecure when they had political freedom; they prefer having a strong man tell them what to do. Whether it is a Czar, or Stalin, or Putin, they desire, perhaps need a strong man to give them orders and make them feel safe.
Click to expand...
This is the way that most of the world works. It's the old way. It certainly makes things predictable and secure. But if you want a quick way to understand how revolutionary the American Revolution and the ideas behind it really were (and are), look no further than the way that people tend to revert to think and be treated like sheep elsewhere in the world.
Click to expand...
The whole strong man political culture is prevalent in parts of the world without a strong civic political culture, but parts of the world that have experienced movements like the Enlightenment and the Renaissance tend to be less prone to it.
Click to expand...
You mean like Italy and Germany? :goodposting:
 
Portis 26 said:
Tatum Bell said:
timschochet said:
As Garry Kasparov has noted, this guy Putin is the sort of guy that the Russians want. Again, refuting the argument, spread by this President and others, that everyone in the world wants democracy and freedom. The Russians felt insecure when they had political freedom; they prefer having a strong man tell them what to do. Whether it is a Czar, or Stalin, or Putin, they desire, perhaps need a strong man to give them orders and make them feel safe.
Click to expand...
This is the way that most of the world works. It's the old way. It certainly makes things predictable and secure. But if you want a quick way to understand how revolutionary the American Revolution and the ideas behind it really were (and are), look no further than the way that people tend to revert to think and be treated like sheep elsewhere in the world.
Click to expand...
The whole strong man political culture is prevalent in parts of the world without a strong civic political culture, but parts of the world that have experienced movements like the Enlightenment and the Renaissance tend to be less prone to it.
Click to expand...
Hitler down? I'm more cynical about this. I think it has much more to do with economic circumstances.
 
timschochet said:
Portis 26 said:
Tatum Bell said:
timschochet said:
As Garry Kasparov has noted, this guy Putin is the sort of guy that the Russians want. Again, refuting the argument, spread by this President and others, that everyone in the world wants democracy and freedom. The Russians felt insecure when they had political freedom; they prefer having a strong man tell them what to do. Whether it is a Czar, or Stalin, or Putin, they desire, perhaps need a strong man to give them orders and make them feel safe.
Click to expand...
This is the way that most of the world works. It's the old way. It certainly makes things predictable and secure. But if you want a quick way to understand how revolutionary the American Revolution and the ideas behind it really were (and are), look no further than the way that people tend to revert to think and be treated like sheep elsewhere in the world.
Click to expand...
The whole strong man political culture is prevalent in parts of the world without a strong civic political culture, but parts of the world that have experienced movements like the Enlightenment and the Renaissance tend to be less prone to it.
Click to expand...
Hitler down? I'm more cynical about this. I think it has much more to do with economic circumstances.
Click to expand...
It's more complex than that. You need to have a strong middle class, which by its very nature helps to disperse power out of the hands of a few. That requires a free economy.

You also need high enough education levels for the people to simply have enough understanding to care enough about and contribute to the running of the country. That requires free speech and good education institutions.

 
Tatum Bell said:
Portis 26 said:
Tatum Bell said:
timschochet said:
As Garry Kasparov has noted, this guy Putin is the sort of guy that the Russians want. Again, refuting the argument, spread by this President and others, that everyone in the world wants democracy and freedom. The Russians felt insecure when they had political freedom; they prefer having a strong man tell them what to do. Whether it is a Czar, or Stalin, or Putin, they desire, perhaps need a strong man to give them orders and make them feel safe.
Click to expand...
This is the way that most of the world works. It's the old way. It certainly makes things predictable and secure. But if you want a quick way to understand how revolutionary the American Revolution and the ideas behind it really were (and are), look no further than the way that people tend to revert to think and be treated like sheep elsewhere in the world.
Click to expand...
The whole strong man political culture is prevalent in parts of the world without a strong civic political culture, but parts of the world that have experienced movements like the Enlightenment and the Renaissance tend to be less prone to it.
Click to expand...
You mean like Italy and Germany? :shrug:
Click to expand...
I said "less prone" not "immune" ;)
 
Is this just a strategic acquisition?

Are they going to be using Georgia to mount an assault on neighboring states? Is alabama next? I doubt we'd put up that much of a fight to keep it. Hell, take Mississippi and Louisiana while you're at it.

 
adonis said:
Is this just a strategic acquisition?

Are they going to be using Georgia to mount an assault on neighboring states? Is alabama next? I doubt we'd put up that much of a fight to keep it. Hell, take Mississippi and Louisiana while you're at it.
Click to expand...
You sound like LHUCKS.
 
Portis 26 said:
The Russians haven't quite invaded Georgia, they have sent more troops into South Ossetia which has been under their de facto administration anyway, it was actually the Georgians who sent their troops in first.
Click to expand...
Sounds like that they are also bombing targets within Georgia itself while troops have moved in South Ossetia. Seems like an invasion to me but of course Georgia did put more troops into Ossetia which tried to break away from the rest of Georgia. Either way it is not like this area has been a calm place recently.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sammy Traveller said:
adonis said:
timschochet said:
adonis said:
Is this just a strategic acquisition?

Are they going to be using Georgia to mount an assault on neighboring states? Is alabama next? I doubt we'd put up that much of a fight to keep it. Hell, take Mississippi and Louisiana while you're at it.
Click to expand...
You sound like LHUCKS.
Click to expand...
I was joking, I live in the south and like it here.
Click to expand...
are there peaches in Georgia?
Click to expand...
Only when he goes commando.
 
Sammy Traveller said:
adonis said:
timschochet said:
adonis said:
Is this just a strategic acquisition?

Are they going to be using Georgia to mount an assault on neighboring states? Is alabama next? I doubt we'd put up that much of a fight to keep it. Hell, take Mississippi and Louisiana while you're at it.
Click to expand...
You sound like LHUCKS.
Click to expand...
I was joking, I live in the south and like it here.
Click to expand...
are there peaches in Georgia?
Click to expand...
Millions.
 
So, getting serious here: what should the response of the United States be? Do we publicly condemn this invasion? Do we threaten Russia with economic action of some sort? Do we publicly reaffirm that we will militarily defend NATO countries if they are threatened?

And if we sit back and allow this, will Putin figure nobody is going to stop him from taking back all of the lands of the former Soviet Union? (He's probably right about this.)

 
Redwes25 said:
Portis 26 said:
The Russians haven't quite invaded Georgia, they have sent more troops into South Ossetia which has been under their de facto administration anyway, it was actually the Georgians who sent their troops in first.
Click to expand...
Sounds like that they are also bombing targets within Georgia itself while troops have moved in South Ossetia. Seems like an invasion to me.
Click to expand...
It's mostly because Georgia has had increasingly close ties w/ the US, and has started the track towards NATO. (Their pres. went to Columbia Law) We've been training some of their troops recently and supplying some weapons as well, so they can certainly rumble w/ the Ruskies. I think anyone who doubted that the Russians have fully reverted back to their USSR ways needs to reassess.
 
timschochet said:
So, getting serious here: what should the response of the United States be? Do we publicly condemn this invasion? Do we threaten Russia with economic action of some sort? Do we publicly reaffirm that we will militarily defend NATO countries if they are threatened? And if we sit back and allow this, will Putin figure nobody is going to stop him from taking back all of the lands of the former Soviet Union? (He's probably right about this.)
Click to expand...
Timing not coincidental with Olympics starting. Story will be swamped by coverage, US probably will just bluster and talk smack, but ultimately do nothing.
 
timschochet said:
So, getting serious here: what should the response of the United States be? Do we publicly condemn this invasion? Do we threaten Russia with economic action of some sort? Do we publicly reaffirm that we will militarily defend NATO countries if they are threatened? And if we sit back and allow this, will Putin figure nobody is going to stop him from taking back all of the lands of the former Soviet Union? (He's probably right about this.)
Click to expand...
This is a lot more complicated then a simple unprovoked invasion of Georgia.
 
FFA Board Safety Tip #362:

Please don't crack any jokes in here about Georgians being "hicks". You will have a nice season. Uncle Joe is watching.

 
adonis said:
timschochet said:
So, getting serious here: what should the response of the United States be? Do we publicly condemn this invasion? Do we threaten Russia with economic action of some sort? Do we publicly reaffirm that we will militarily defend NATO countries if they are threatened? And if we sit back and allow this, will Putin figure nobody is going to stop him from taking back all of the lands of the former Soviet Union? (He's probably right about this.)
Click to expand...
Timing not coincidental with Olympics starting. Story will be swamped by coverage, US probably will just bluster and talk smack, but ultimately do nothing.
Click to expand...
What should the US do?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Chadstroma
U.S. Is Seen as Laggard as Russia Asserts Itself in Warming Arctic
2
Replies
74
Views
2K
McGarnicle
McGarnicle
(HULK)
Dave Berry's Year in Review
Replies
2
Views
790
Joe Summer
J
ren hoek
The US Prepares for War with Russia
Replies
17
Views
787
ren hoek
ren hoek

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top