A USA ally

But you cannot fire at Russian territory, remember?

Yeah, that is still within the limits of the objective.

Of course I sympathise, but that doesn't mean I can't make an impartial judgement. I simply don't see why the world needs to go to war over some small, insignificant speck of a pseudo-nation in the Caucasus. If Russia gets over-enthusiastic, shall we say, in Georgia, then, yes, steps much be taken, but, at present, the conflict is largely based around asserting the independent of the farce that is South Ossetia. That's not worth a major war.

Lets see what comes up in the NATO meeting and if Russia continues to advance into Georgia (after the world started becoming angry about it).
 
Georgian officials tonight claimed the country had been 'overrun' by Russian troops after a full-scale ground invasion.

Amid reports that Moscow forces had taken the town of Gori - and were marching on the capital Tsblisi - Georgian soldiers appeared to be in full retreat.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...sian-troops-scale-ground-invasion-begins.html

Russia has invaded a sovereign neighboring state and threatens a democratic government elected by its people. Such an action is unacceptable in the 21st century," the president said in a televised statement from the White House, calling on Moscow to sign on to the outlines of a cease-fire as the Georgian government has done.

"The Russian government must reverse the course it appears to be on and accept this peace agreement as a first step toward solving this conflict," Bush said, adding that he is deeply concerned that Russia, which Georgian officials say has effectively split their country in two, might bomb the civilian airport in the capital of Tbilisi.

He said Russia's escalation of the conflict had "raised serious questions about its intentions in Georgia and the region" and had "substantially damaged Russia's standing in the world." "These actions jeopardize Russia's relations with the United States and Europe," Bush said. "It's time for Russia to be true to its word to act to end this crisis."
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D92GG0QG0&show_article=1
 
Also, if Scotland was under attack, you would be singing a different tune.

Which is a totaly different thing. An attack on Scotland is infact an attack on the UK. Or are you suggesting that that the Scottish would have to beg the UK government for help in such a situation?
 
Only if those Russians soldiers attack from Russia. My objective was to keep Russia out not conquer Russia.

Where are you going to find all those trigger pullers you need ?
I know the Air Force will argue that ground forces are not needed, they argued that during WW2.
Supply lines through where ?
I thought the first rule they learned at West Point was never take the Russians on in their back yard ?
Navy in the Black Sea ? those Sunburn missiles would be arriving like leaves in autumn.
 
Where were you when Burma got devastated by a cyclone?

I'm not exactly sure how to take your comments, but this one kind of irked me the wrong way beings how the government flat out REFUSED to let aid into their borders for it's people.

But I supose we should invade Burma now too...

As they say, ****ed if you do, ****ed if you don't. Either way, everybody's a critic. Iraq has taught us this lesson from 1990-now.
 
Are the United States and Georgia allied? I did not know that.



If we didn't want to get involved, we shouldnt've allied with them in the first place. Alliances are a two-way street, that's why we were so warned not to enter into them. But now that we are, we should be prepared to make good on our word. I don't WANT to go to war with Russia, but if we are allies, it is our duty to do so, and stoically as is required.



Then why the hell do we have allies if we don't defend them? What should we expect from our friends, when the devil comes to town, if we behave like this towards our trestised allies?

The problem here is we could also be considered allies with Russia on several issues. So it's a very complicated situation.

And do we want to risk a nuclear armageddon over warring with Russia?

So many questions and not enough answers. This is where NATO and the EU needs to step up to the plate. The UN won't get anything done because Russia holds a veto. And just for hypotheticals, what if we happened to militarily defend Georgia? What would China, the other largest super power in the world's reaction be? There's a dangerous snowballing effect that could happen all over the world.

Henry Kissinger, JFK, FDR, Ronald Reagan, we sure could use you now.
 
The problem here is we could also be considered allies with Russia on several issues. So it's a very complicated situation.

And do we want to risk a nuclear armageddon over warring with Russia?

So many questions and not enough answers. This is where NATO and the EU needs to step up to the plate. The UN won't get anything done because Russia holds a veto. And just for hypotheticals, what if we happened to militarily defend Georgia? What would China, the other largest super power in the world's reaction be? There's a dangerous snowballing effect that could happen all over the world.

Henry Kissinger, JFK, FDR, Ronald Reagan, we sure could use you now.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_reaction_to_the_2008_South_Ossetia_War

I agree, Bush needs to get his act together and send troops to support Georgia.
 
If NATO were to fully intervene in Georgia, it would result in heavy casualties, massive amounts of destruction, and planes falling from the sky like rain. And all this would achieve exactly....nothing. We may need to rethink this.
 
If NATO were to fully intervene in Georgia, it would result in heavy casualties, massive amounts of destruction, and planes falling from the sky like rain. And all this would achieve exactly....nothing. We may need to rethink this.

No. It would prevent further Russian incursions into Georgian territory.
However, we may no longer need this.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080812/ap_on_re_eu/georgia_russia

Russian president has halted military action in Georgia.
 
If one had to intervene militarily I woulod assume airstrikes would be launched from Turkey or northern Iraq. The Georgian troops on the groun may have a chance if you can neutralise the Russian airforce and hit the russians a bit.
 
No. It would prevent further Russian incursions into Georgian territory.

It would stop them for now, but then what? Will the US military risk losing a carrier battlefleet and several billion-dollar airplanes every time Russia gets mad at one of its neighbors?
But, like you said, it's too late now.
 
I saw a Georgian woman in tears on the telly. "USSR, US, Europa, I don't care, just leave us alone"

I feel sad for the people who have to suffer so the big boys can play.
 
The problem here is we could also be considered allies with Russia on several issues. So it's a very complicated situation.

That was why I asked, I'm not aware of us actually BEING allied with Georgia. I don't think we are, but I was assuming the OP knew something I did not. If he is incorrect, then this whole thread is troll bait.

And do we want to risk a nuclear armageddon over warring with Russia?

Would you risk it to save Germany or Austria? We sure were, once upon a time. If we are indeed allied with the Georgians, then it is our responsibility to hold true to our word; quite frankly, if we didn't want to get involved, we shouldnt've joined in alliance to begin with.

So many questions and not enough answers. This is where NATO and the EU needs to step up to the plate. The UN won't get anything done because Russia holds a veto. And just for hypotheticals, what if we happened to militarily defend Georgia?


What would China, the other largest super power in the world's reaction be? There's a dangerous snowballing effect that could happen all over the world.

I don't think uninvolved nations like China would become involved, only NATO and the CIS.

Henry Kissinger...Ronald Reagan, we sure could use you now.

Why on EARTH would you want THEM around right now?
 
Would you risk it to save Germany or Austria? We sure were, once upon a time. If we are indeed allied with the Georgians, then it is our responsibility to hold true to our word; quite frankly, if we didn't want to get involved, we shouldnt've joined in alliance to begin with.

I am sorry but i don't recall you joining any Alliance other than the Nato one.
 
The US doesn't have any agreement with Georgia agreeing to defend it. Georgia was being considered for NATO it wasn't in NATO yet.
 
Are you trying to kid yourself, the only country that has the capability of invading NZ is China, and Australia would be able to do sod all about it.

Wrong, the only country that currently has the military power projection to invade New Zealand is the USA - and since Australia gets more value out of its alliance with the US we would have the choice of joining in or sitting back and watching kiwis do hakas in the face of invading American firepower. :p

Think Australia could invade NZ, dreams are free.
Of course not being paranoid we do not worry about some Muslim swimming ashore with a knife between his teeth.

Wrong again, I never mentioned Australia invading New Zealand - why in God's name would we want too? There is nothing worth taking! And Muslims? Who except you mentioned them - you need to get a grip on reality Sunbeam.

So you are saying the Georgians should not be peefed about the lack of help ?

I presume you mean 'peeved'. If the Georgians stupidly start a war they can't expect others to sort it for them by sending troops.

But lets cut to the chase, you're just using this as an excuse to bash the Americans - what the Georgians think is incidental to this.
 
The US doesn't have any agreement with Georgia agreeing to defend it. Georgia was being considered for NATO it wasn't in NATO yet.
Ya, but if they felt Georgia was enough of a friend to defend with a piece of paper, I don't see how not having the paper makes much fundamental difference. If NATO didn't exist, I am sure Canada and the US would still help each other if in need. No paper required.
 
Top Bottom