Who started the war in S.Ossetia: Georgia or Russia?

[SiD]

I think that must be war of future, plane comes drops passports and if people wants they become citizens of another state, who have majority of citizens owns the land :lol: .

[Eka]

I think that must be war of future, plane comes drops passports and if people wants they become citizens of another state, who have majority of citizens owns the land :lol: .

Geat idea, I like it but please wait untill Georgia will have goood aviation - for droping passports, because Russians will do it better than we. :-) :-) :-)
You know I suppose here was somethig like this.. on this forum.. Joke that Americans are distirbuting passports in Abxazeti and Sida Kartli, but there was stated that copirght already is owned.. by Mr. Hitler. So Mr. Putin only repeated what was already done once..So as Russia diplomacy is now saing everything begins now.maybe sid is not joking at all?

[SiD]

Geat idea, I like it but please wait untill Georgia will have goood aviation - for droping passports, because Russians will do it better than we. :-) :-) :-)
You know I suppose here was somethig like this.. on this forum.. Joke that Americans are distirbuting passports in Abxazeti and Sida Kartli, but there was stated that copirght already is owned.. by Mr. Hitler. So Mr. Putin only repeated what was already done once..So as Russia diplomacy is now saing everything begins now.maybe sid is not joking at all?

Well it could be great if one day ALL PEOPLE will be citizens of a single state. And joined not by force but becouse of thier own will. Still distributing passport is not the thing. If you get nothing exept passport why would you need it? Besides simply distributing passports wont give you anything, well you will have new citizens and nothing more, actualy it is more headacke than profit.

[Eka]

Geat idea, I like it but please wait untill Georgia will have goood aviation - for droping passports, because Russians will do it better than we. :-) :-) :-)
You know I suppose here was somethig like this.. on this forum.. Joke that Americans are distirbuting passports in Abxazeti and Sida Kartli, but there was stated that copirght already is owned.. by Mr. Hitler. So Mr. Putin only repeated what was already done once..So as Russia diplomacy is now saing everything begins now.maybe sid is not joking at all?

Well it could be great if one day ALL PEOPLE will be citizens of a single state. And joined not by force but becouse of thier own will. Still distributing passport is not the thing. If you get nothing exept passport why would you need it? Besides simply distributing passports wont give you anything, well you will have new citizens and nothing more, actualy it is more headacke than profit.

Great Sid first tome I agree wilth you "Besides simply distributing passports wont give you anything, well you will have new citizens and nothing more, actualy it is more headacke than profit" At last we can describe the situation in which poor osetians and abxazss are in Abxazei and Sida Karti. With passports, but without profits, with blood, but without reall fridom, with corupted govermants, but without prosperity for themselfs.

[nini geo]

Russia start the war of course!

[Salomo]

Salomo,
I don't think it's is correct to talk about taking sides :-) Better to say: listen to all points of views, and to approach truth as close as possible - what is behind all this.

You are very right

But it is also easy to debate for us who live more far away from the crisis… For us, this is like debating WW2, even if you are Russian… Lasha & co live closer to the crisis, knowing people directly affected… it is not maybe the easiest moment for calming down… Same would be for an Ossetian from Tskhinvali. Neither a Russian soldier having been there would have “calm” opinions.

My opinion is that you cannot say that all Mr. P is doing is extremelely bad, and all Mr. S is doing is extremely good :-) It's not a black and white world. And it's stupid to deny Saakashvili made a lot of good things for the Georgians :-) And I don't deny it. It's also out of the question, that in Russia there are a lot of problems still to be addressed, etc.

Again very right

In point 1), I return to the demonisation of Saakashvili.

1) Why demonise only Saakashvili in this crisis? If someone, who has ordered to bomb civilian towns or to kill civilians with other methods, is called a mad person and a kind of Hitler, then fine… but he is not alone here! Also Russians bombed the civilians in Gori, don’t forget that. And your beloved Putin let bomb Groznyi I do not remembered how many times… but it really was in ruins, you must admit it. So… why not call also Putin a fool who is dangerous for humanity?

Yes, Grozny was in ruins, but it's a different story, which is very long and deserves a separate topic.

Certainly deserves. But the main point is: were the Chechen independent government of Ichkeria “legal” or “terrorists” or whatever, NOTHING gives right to bomb such heavily civilian towns. I condemn German bombings of e.g. London (WW2), British bombing of Dresden (WW2), American bombing of Belgrade (1999), Georgian bombing of Tskhinvali or Russian bombings of Helsinki (WW2) and Gori. Though every bombing can militarily be said, by its authors, to having been motivated in some way. Sometimes the argument is “it is just what war is”, sometimes “there was enemy military stuff inside residence area”, sometimes “they needed humiliation and punition”. I doubt very much one bombing was much more motivated than any other. Thus: I condemn ALL bombings, the one of Tskhinvali AND that of Gori.

The thing what I do not accept is that those same people (Putin & co and their supporters) who were behind one kind of heavy bombings (e.g. Groznyi) start to compare Saakashvili to Hitler and demonise him with all methods, because of his bombings – and then, moreover, those Russians start other bombings of civilian towns themselves, in Gori! Very hypocritical.

(But ok, I admit that you too condemn hypocrisy and the errors of “your” army, the Russian army. That is good.)

But let's talk about Gori: there were military objects, they had to be destroyed. I fully approve the Russian bombing the mainland Georgia for one and only reason - to suppress the enemy and stop the war as soon as possible. This is NATO tactics used in Yugoslavia (where they even bombed Beograde), and I fully approve of it. Of course, it's better not to be in a war, but once you are in - do this way. The goal was reached. Let's imagine, that the Russians don't move to Georgia and stay in the South Ossetia, and don't bomb Georgian military in Georgia. I tell you - the war would still be there, but there would be tens of thousands dead by now, on both sides, and Tshinvali would really look like Stalingrad by now. I don't think the Russians bombed civilian targets intentionally. Again example - the US are believed to have the most precise weaponry, they have satellites, etc. The bombing process for American pilots is like a game - you see a target on a screen, you gun is guided by a satellite, just press a button. And bada-boom, wow! So, even their hi-precision weapons hit civilian targets and take thousands of civilian lives. I remember a passenger train in Serbia hit by a rocket from air. I don't understand, how can you take a passenger train for a military target. Anyway, I don't believe they did and still doing it intentionally.

I understand you do not believe it… but I believe it was intentionally. Well, I have not studied carefully what kind of city Gori is, how close from the central square there could be Georgian military installations hidden… but have got news from heavy bombings, right to the central square… I doubt the bombing planes have to fly so high that the bombing is so unprecise… or what coincidence would then bring the bomb exactly to the city centre… No, I do not believe it can be so unprecise. Bombs are expensive: why waste them if you can’t reach your goals?

I think it was just “revenge” bombs, to make Georgian civilians scared and to destroy something of their properties.

I condemn bombing of Tskhinvali too, of course. (Btw, how many victims were there in Gori, and how much finally in Tskhinvali?) But in Tskhinvali, weren’t there also some Russian planes bombing, because of Georgian military in the town? Those might have destroyed also civilians?

I have heard Georgian bombed Tskhinvali because of South Ossetian artillery shooting from the town to close villages. Like you or someone said, even if Bin Laden is in some town, this does NOT give you right to destroy the whole town. So the reason of bombing is bad… but only as bad as the Russian same argument about Gori or other places, which possible hided Georgian military. (And Georgian military, after all, has the right to exist on its own land, if not however to fire against their own civilians…They have other kind of tasks too, like to defend their country against invaders.)

So, I do not accept the Russian bombing being more “motivated” than the Georgian bombing. Especially when the land is Georgian land and not Russian land. I mean, if the main argument of bombing on Georgian territory is only “preventive”, then the Russians have even less right to do this than Georgians. Same things with Americans going to Iraq for “preventive” reasons, may there be a crazy dictator or not… Civilians suffer anyway.

About demonizing. Putin - you can call him the devil, but he's not a fool anyway. But Saakashvili is. Trust me, I say this not because Saakashvili is on the other side, while Putin is our guy. It's simply the truth. Only the fool could start this war. Or a provocateur. He's mentally not quite balanced.

They say, Saakashvili was provoked, etc. B*llsh*t. Hitler was also provoked, will we justify him? Politicians know what to do when you're provoked. The only thing they MUST NEVER DO - TO SUCCUMB TO PROVOCATION. Otherwise, you're not a a politician, but a fool, and not only fool, but a criminal. Because by this action, he made more damage to Georgia itself, just like Yeltsin to Russia in the first Chechen war.

Ok, so a “fool” is a guy too easy to provoke. But again, a fool is misfortune mainly for his own country… but anybody, fool or not, can be a misfortune for civilians being bombed. Sometimes the “author” of a bombing operation can be a “fool” and sometimes a very “calculative” person, like Putin? It does not matter for those civilians what kind of mentality the “enemy chief” has.

So, for the civilians on the enemy side, Saakashvili is not worse than Putin.

[Salomo]

2) Why don’t you blame at all the South Ossetians who shooted on the close Georgian villages or the Abkhazians who drove away hundreds of thousands of Georgians from Abkhazia? (Morally, a referendum would need to be done about Abkhazian independency, with also these away-driven people voting, don’t you think?)

I blame. And everybody blames. But you can never prove who was the first to start fire. Just never. Every side says it was the opposite side.

True.

3) Why was Russian invasion necessary in Abkhazia at all? And in close cities like Poti? I have not heard of any Georgians' heavy attack on Sukhumi like their heavy attack on Tskhinvali?

Was there a Russian invasion in Abkhazia? Never heard. Ah, yes. Russian peacekeeping force was strengthened after Georgia's inadequate behaviour in the region (and because Abkhazians asked Russians for help). But that's not an invasion. I think, they came to prevent the planned Georgian assault on Abkhazia. I don't doubt this one was also planned (otherwise, what Georgian troops were doing in Kodori?). What are we talking about, if Georgia promised to use ANY means (that was said by the DEFENSE MINISTER) to get the breakaway Republics back. And the US knew about the plans, and tried to stop Saakashvili , as they say now. So, this is not a big secret. To prevent a disease is less painful and cheaper than treating it.

But there the Russians did as wrong as the Americans, who always rush to “prevent” some crisis by fighting the possible enemy. Hey wait! Abkhazia is not Russian territory (yet) – the Russian army had NO RIGHT to penetrate on Georgian soil! This has been too often motivated by greater powers invading smaller countries, don’t you admit? It was not international UN peace-keeping force, it was the Russian army.

4) Why was it necessary to drop bombs on CIVILIAN targets in pure Georgian towns like Gori? (I can not think Russian pilots are so bad that they drop bombs on civilian residence areas just by mistake!) Russians could have had a much better image worldwide and sympathy on their side without these bombings, why did they destroy this possibility?

Already explained about Gori above. Just agree here, that Russians could have had much better image without it. And I repeat, I don't believe we destroyed this possibility intentionally, this is just war, which is not nice by definition. There are human factor mistakes, machine and electronic malfunctions, etc. I really grieve about any civilian loss, trust me or not. I know any of us can become one in case of war. Also, trust me, if the Russians really had any intentions to capture Tbilisi or bomb the civilians intentionally - Georgia would not exist now, not only Tbilisi. There was no such a goal, I'm sure and I see.

I agree that final occupation was not a goal – we are not more in WW2 – but I am sure “doing harm there” was a goal.

You cannot even call Russian occupants. Because they do not actually overthrow the government, force own rules and regulations, and control the whole life of Georgia :-) When I see those video clips about a Russian looter, with one gilded spoon in his pocket, almost attacked and heavily questioned by the Georgian reporters: "What is it? Ah? What is it? Where did you take it? Ah!!! I thought they would kill him with a camera :-) As I said earlier, I hate looters, Russian or not. And I'd sentence him to death. But 10 or 20 looters does not mean the whole Russian Army is like this. What I wanna say in this episode - the "occupied" do not talk to "occupants" in this way :-)

Temporary occupants if you prefer… But I got the point.

I am glad you condemn looters. Hope all Russians here do.

5) Why was it necessary to destroy the railway bridge in Kaspi on whole Georgia’s main railway?? Army forces would not even use railway, they would use roads! I regard the destroying of the bridge as pure terrorism. (I am btw surprised almost nobody has mentioned this bridge here.) And why burn down forests in the national park? Pure revenge and terrorism, I would say.

Do not know much about the bridge and the forest. The bridge - we don't know what this bridge could be used for by the Georgians. Maybe there were reasons to destroy it like a strategic object. Better ask the military who did this - if they did this, of course.

Bridge on the (only?) main railway from East to West. Without it, no railway connection between ports and Eastern regions. One could suspect a will to “control” the economical life of whole Georgia – until Georgians get rid of Saakashvili, for example? Together with the control stations on the roads. Our main newspaper suggested this possibility.

Especially about the park. Maybe there was Georgian army hiding in the park?

Remember this is Georgian soil. The Georgian army has the right to hide in the park. Unless perhaps from ecological point of view, if the park needs intactness… but I doubt Russians want to control the ecological intactness of the park by burning it down…

But, on the other hand, please don't say it is ridiculous - the Georgians (one man is enough) could set this forest on fire, to put another Russia's crime on the list.

Of course it is not impossible that this kind of things are stitched up. But it is too easy to always take that theory.

[Salomo]

6) Why were Gorbachev and Yeltsin shitheads, according to you? In my opinion, Gorbachev was the only pleasant leader of Russia since Czar Alexander II (whom we of course can know only through history books). Gorbachev’s politics led to the fall of an imperialistic empire, which was the best thing that could happen in the end of last century! A lot of small nations, including our small Baltic neighbours whom we have followed a lot, re-gained independence. Ok, this was not Gorby’s intention maybe, but he was finally a liberalisator after decades of dictatorship. Spasiba, Gorby! And during Yeltsin, Russia started to liberalise even more. (Though I admit many things: Russia’s economical liberalisation went too fast and out of control, it however started a war in Chechnya, Yeltsin was drunkard etc.)

Well. I have already described this difference of approach to one and the same fact. We both agree, that Gorbies policy led to disintegration of the USSR. I wanted it. Like many. But for the West Gorbie is hero number 1, ruined the USSR and f*uck the consequences. Yes? Ask in Russia - does somebody like Gorbachev? You'll hardly find anybody. Why? Because we all want USSR back? With all our "colonies" to enslave them again and suppress them? Nope. The truth is simple: such disintegrations should be well prepared, the "divorce" should be civilized, not so fast, but carefully thought over, all problems solved. Instead - each republic was given independence WITHOUT solving territorial, national, and other problems. It was a wild disintegration, reckless.

Yes, but knowing the practical truth on the simple thought of leave USSR – things would have had gone so slowly with the kind of law which Gorbachev in fact was preparing! This is why others accelerated the process. Don’t blame Gorbachev, he wanted to run this slowlier

Yeltsin is as reckless and stupid as Saakashvili, he started the first Chechen war, very stupid and bloody affair (here I don't say that nothing had to be done). All the "crimes" of the century happened under Yeltsin, like "privatisation". Again, I'm for free market economy and all possible freedoms, but Russian privatisation was really a crime of the century not possible anywhere in the West. But it's a big separate topic. As to freedom - there was less freedom than today, I would say. Because, on the one hand, everything was allowed (which I'd call permissiveness), but on the other hand all opponents were not forbidden, but just killed (I mean numerous journalists, election candidates, businessmen). We'll remember the Yeltsin era as an era of gang rule and complete lawlessness. By the way, it's under Yeltsin, that Russia led "strange" policy in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. So we have "presents" in these issues from Yeltsin time too!

7) And why do you like Putin? During his regime, freedom of speech has gone only backwards compared to 1990’s, NGO’s have difficulties to be allowed to exist, opposition’s politicians are forbidden to take part in elections, imprisoned or given very little speech in medias (Garry Kasparov and the whole Other Russia party… plus the Yabloko party, plus many others)… What is the purpose of all this? Why is Putin so afraid of opposition? Russia will soon be a dictatorship?!

I like Putin for several reasons only. The main one - this is the FIRST government that really cares about national security.

Plus, under Putin's regime the country lives much better than under "liberal" Yeltsyn. In terms of the incomes, salaries, pensions. With crime situation is not ideal, but it's definitely much better that in the "wild 90's" - we have such term, meaning there was complete gang rule.

Ok, I understand that there was too much permissiveness in the 1990’s. But Putin went to the other extremity. Less permissiveness, right, you shall put criminals and oligarchs under control, yes, right… but why has this to affect NGO’s, for which over the whole world it is completely natural and normal to have fundings from abroad? Talking about environmental, human right organisations… they are no criminals nor oligarchs!! Why harass them??

About problems with freedom of speech - there are no problems, I think. Yes, it's not like in the 90's - but that was permissiveness, remember? But the opponents have their newspapers, internet sites, radio-stations, and there are TV talk shows which do really take place with participation of these opponents. They ARE on TV.

I never heard anything about Yabloko problems, except that people do not vote for them :-). Who of the opponent leaders was forbidden to take part in elections and why? Who may be restricted by law here?

Several Russian smaller parties were not allowed to take part in the last parliamentary elections. One was Yabloko. Then think on imprisonment of leaders of “The Other Russia” (don’t know how to call this main opposition force in Russian). I don’t remember if even Garri Kasparov was in prison for some days? Why were demonstrations not permitted? Why? This all sounds that Putin & co are not accepting opposition. You know what I am talking about, don’t you? (Have no time to provide links, sorry…)

I know, there are some anti-Russian forces here, in Russia. Like in Georgia there were dissidents against Russia, but here we have "russian" dissidents agains Russia too :-) There even professional opposition, like Novodvorskaya. She's is against everybody.

Tell me more about these forces, I have never heard… Why do you call them “anti-Russian”?

I Don't think, that Putin is afraid of opposition. In fact, there's no real constructive opposition here. The are implementers of the national interests of other countries here. And, of course, they meet resistance.

I bet you in Russia are just too susceptible against “other countries’ influence”. You are too “proud”. Putin calls this “sovereign Russian democracy”, which finally is not democracy but authocracy. Come on! Other countries are open to new ideas, e.g. progressive human rights and ecology ideas always come from some other countries, to Finland they generally came from Sweden… Open yourselves to new, progressive ideas, do not be so “touchy”!

(Perhaps Georgia has similar kind of problems, yes, as I have heard even Georgian comments here that Saakashvili is not so democratic any more. It even was Lasha, I think…)

What kind of “national interests of other countries” do you speak about?

Has George Soros also something to do with all this? Tell me…

[Salomo]

8) I understand the worrying of Russia about the enlargement of NATO, but the big difference between NATO and the former Warsaw Pact was: if you asked the people of the nations concerned, they would not have joined the Warsaw Pact, but are much more willing to enter into NATO. Because they do not want to be “alone” any more when some foreign invader threats them… For example the Baltic countries were occupied by USSR during 45 years, Russian became the official language, the only until 1988 (I think, am not sure, but remember some news from Estonia in 1987 or 1988 when Estonian was re-introduced as official language of Estonia!). Do we need to wonder why Baltics and others are EXTREMELY suspicious against Russia? And as we also have Chechnya, a war without Soviet-communistic imperialism, only Russian imperialism again…

Fully agree there was occupation of Baltic states by the Stalin's USSR. The Big Guys agreed to divide the spheres of influence. A casual thing for Big Guys of that time. By the way, even small Poland had its piece of pie - under Germany's protection it got a disputed Teshen Region from Chechoslovakia. Everybody had his strategic interests, and nobody cared about whether the population of the "voluntarily joined" territories will love you or not, nobody cared about any populations at all. And what they would think about it in 70 years, and that they'd call this one more "Russian" aggression. As, I told you Cнechnya is not for this topic, very complex and long. But it has nothing to do with Russian impearialism. "Russian Threat" as an excuse for spreading of NATO. But you cannot compare that occupation of the Baltics to anything today. There were ideological differences, that is why there was Iron Curtain, Warsaw Pact, NATO, etc. But they age gone forever. Don't you agree? Then what Russian threat you are talking about?

I am talking of it because the Soviet imperialism was not only communist imperialism, it was also Russian imperialism. Russian became a compulsory language everywhere, and “regional” nationalism became forbidden as it was a capitalistic “invention”. Ideology, yes, but however it became Russian imperialism. In Estonian SSR, Estonian became “official” language only in 1987 or 1988, I remember these news on Finnish tv. It was the time when the old, very pro-Russian Estonian communist leader Karl Vaino was replaced by a more Estonian one, Vaino Väljas. Only in the end of 1980’s ?! Moreover, it was forbidden to use old national symbols, although all Baltic people loved their symbols… The cultural things allowed were generally Russian.

Perhaps I have exaggerated “Russian” imperialism, I can agree, but this is the image I have. And you, you must remember that the Soviet imperialism easily became Russian imperialism… which continued even today, for example in the Bronze Statue crisis in Estonia. Russia thinks it has rights to complain about where a statue shall be replaced in a foreign country?!

And the USSR national anthem spoke about “Velikaya Rus” but not about other nations in it…

Do you really believe that Russia could attack Estonia or Litva, if they were not NATO members?

Sorry, trivial thing, but with Litva you mean Lithuania? In that case, had you a special reason to drop Latvia out of the list?

NATO is an outdated organisation, because the country it was created against does not exist any longer. The only really effective European security system INCLUDING RUSSIA, but not confronting it, must be created instead of NATO. If a country is a member of the security system, what threats can be talked about? But, for example, Georgians in this forum are strongly against it, because (I think) they prefer opposing us, they need an enemy, to protect all Europe and the whole civilized world from the Russian threat :-) And get more funding :-)

I think it is a question of trust. Georgians, Poles and Balts would not trust Russians because of the history. Same thing could happen in America, where Latin American nations have to be suspicious against USA economic powers… I bet even in Finland, where our relations are calm, a possible plan of such a military alliance including Russia would wake up a hot discussion, “can we trust on Russians?” Sorry, but a small country has sometimes the right to be suspicious against a kind of super-power

However, this is called balance. We are afraid, they are afraid. We know, they cant start first, because we'll reply et vise versa.

What I'm driving at - with this (anti-missile) system, there's no balance any more. One side knows it has advantage. This means danger only grows - there can be a temptation to destroy Russia - maybe it'll never attack anybody, but just for seciruty reasons, "to be on the safe side", so that the world doesn't have a Russian threat anymore, and live peacefully under the US domination.

Ok. Thanks a lot, I understand now this big concern of Russians. But this sounds a bit like a relique from old cold war times, where the 2 super-powers were USA and USSR.

We in EU perhaps think it this way: yes, there shall be balance, the USA shall dominate everything, but its counterpart shall not be Russia, it shall be – we in EU! Plus Japan. At least economically, and introducing progress, human rights, ecology etc…

Militarily, I think we have not thought so far, but we surely will begin now…

Maybe for you, a European alliance without USA (or Russia) would be a quite acceptable idea also?

An adequate Russian reply would be to install a Russian shield in Cuba :-) And Mexico :-) No, not offensive weapons, not missiles. Just a radar and anti-missiles, like in Europe :-)

Hehe, I would have nothing against this This would be real BALANCE which you want.

You know, during the Cold War, if I would have voted, I would have voted right-wing in Europe, always, but in Latin America for example, I think socialism maybe worked better, so no problem if all these poor people want it, let them have it?! So it was good to diminish American imperialism there and support leftist governments. Not maybe until creating a real dangerous situation like the transport of missiles to Cuba in 1962, but…

I supported Kosovo's independence (because I think it is the will of the majority of people living there) and have nothing against independence of South Ossetia or Abkhazia either, if only referendums are held there with also chased people voting.

The reality is that after what happened (not only in 2008, but in 1990's and earlier), the Ossetians-Georgians and Abkhazians-Georgians cannot live together in one state. If you get them back by force - there still be hatred, and terrorist attacks, the fight will continue within Georgia. If you arrange a referendum - the Georgians will easily win, because both Ossetians and Abkhazians are minorities on their lands. .

If it is so, then I must change my mind. Sorry for them, but a decision of independence, which in any cases causes troubles, must be heavily justified. With demographical reasons. If Abkhazians and Ossetians are in minority in their “republics”, then they do not “earn” the independency… because all the Georgian families there, who are in majority, would vote against it. Included of course those who were driven away. You must let them vote.

And hey… this means that the cases of Abkhazia and South Ossetia ARE NOT COMPARABLE TO KOSOVO! In Kosovo, the Albanians were in clear majority, something 80 %! Kosovo is thus comparable to Chechnya.

I do not deny atrocities done to Abkhazians and Ossetians (in the thread about Abkhazia) but as all parts always commit all kinds of genocides, the only “moral” justification must be a referendum – with all people voting, included those driven away by force.

Otherwise, what do you suggest those Georgian families to do? Why can’t they live on their ancestors’ land in Abkhazia? Why should they move away? A referendum would not give majority to Abkhazian independence…

BUT – I have a solution. Abkhazians should chose a smaller territory – where they are in majority! (This could be a base for future separatist claims: ok, you get independence – with the territory where you can manage to have a separatist majority in referendum!) It is all about to decide the territory of the new state, why should old border lines be holy?? The remaining problem then is of course enclaves like Nagorno-Karabakh, I know… But this would be a good solution. In Kosovo, this would have left to Serbia some northern villages, and with enclaves you have to decide separately…

[lashachochua]

Salomo, mostly I agree with you.......... Great!
It is far more easier to be objective when you are not the party of conflict.
Thank you Salomo

[Karl.in.eu]

Salomo, mostly I agree with you.......... Great!
It is far more easier to be objective when you are not the party of conflict.
Thank you Salomo

If it is easy for regular people to figure the situation in an objective manner, why is then the international community, its representatives and organization felling to do so also?

[Platon]

:banghead Porcha miseria !!!

[Platon]

Hi guys!
What's going on in Russian-Georgian brothel? :ange

[Faw_Peter]

Hi guys!
What's going on in Russian-Georgian brothel? :ange

you found a good word to describe the conflict! ))

[lashachochua]

Hi guys!
What's going on in Russian-Georgian brothel? :ange

uper welcome back

[Karl.in.eu]

Except of the formally recognized independence of Ossetia by Russia, there’s nothing new. It is the same dirty politic strategies, accusations and mess in and near the conflict zone.

[M.Helen]

yesterday the Georgian government made the first step in ceasing diplomatic relations with Russia by entering a new regime for Russians wishing to enter Georgia. Earlier Russians had to pay 50$ at the border for entering Georgia. Now, they will have to go to councils in Russia to be issued kind of visas.

[Hakan G]

Erm.. from what I understood is that Georgia is closing any diplomatic activity in Russia, and its citizens will have to travel to Georgian councils in other countries.

[Andrewz]

Dear forum users, please note, you are not allowed to use uncensored language within the forum. Try to respect each other's opinion.
Thank you!

[IamGEORGIA]

Calm down Giovani, calm down..
About honesty, braveness, and other morale think, russians have at least no morale right to speak..
So, be quiet..or speak about blood, About great russian empire, abd Dictator Putin, and some other russian-friendly topics..better for you and betters for the rest.. uper


------

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7590719.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7590719.stm</a><!-- m -->

Russian way of democracy...

[Giovane]

Calm down Giovani, calm down..
About honesty, braveness, and other morale think, russians have at least no morale right to speak..
So, be quiet..or speak about blood, About great russian empire, abd Dictator Putin, and some other russian-friendly topics..better for you and betters for the rest.. uper


------

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7590719.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7590719.stm</a><!-- m -->

Russian way of democracy...

Hahaha you're a funny. Remember how your army and president ran....

[SiD]

Calm down Giovani, calm down..
About honesty, braveness, and other morale think, russians have at least no morale right to speak..
So, be quiet..or speak about blood, About great russian empire, abd Dictator Putin, and some other russian-friendly topics..better for you and betters for the rest..

This is from Lor in topic:Georgia ans South Osetia at war (point 105)

ANOTHER Russian argument ..." keep your mouth closed" ... Why because truth hurts? Or maybe you don't want to hear it? Why is it better for us to shut up? Are you gonna invade us like you did to Georgia?? UHHH i'm scared!! As usual the fascist in you says:"You have no right speeking about anything".... because you think that only you, Russians have all the rights!!!! WE, the rest of the world are complete idiots!!!

Same topic point (98) posted by Lenus

I Think you definitely are Russian, not Spanish ))) And if you were Catalonyan you wouldnt say you were Spanish, so Vitya, you are busted...

Only a Russian brings an argument like "you have no right to discuss it"

So see for yourself. .

[IamGEORGIA]

Calm down Giovani, calm down..
About honesty, braveness, and other morale think, russians have at least no morale right to speak..
So, be quiet..or speak about blood, About great russian empire, abd Dictator Putin, and some other russian-friendly topics..better for you and betters for the rest.. uper


------

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7590719.stm">http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7590719.stm</a><!-- m -->

Russian way of democracy...

Hahaha you're a funny. Remember how your army and president ran....

skill of logical thinking is missing..
again tipical for Liliputinians..

[Giovane]

Hey, georgian, first of all see previous post.
Then, but now, for you (I mean all georgians) is better to stop discuss and think about bravness and other such think.
Saakashvili-is georgiand and caucas man? Am I right??? So, remember., how he ran fastly or how he ate his necktie... Ramzan Kadirov (chechen president) was right saying that Saakashvili is a good sprinter...
And last, remember your army... Thay can bravely fight with peace people...
And your 2 coutryman 2 hours ago proved that you haven't honoust....

[IamGEORGIA]

Hey, georgian, first of all see previous post.
Then, but now, for you (I mean all georgians) is better to stop discuss and think about bravness and other such think.
Saakashvili-is georgiand and caucas man? Am I right??? So, remember., how he ran fastly or how he ate his necktie... Ramzan Kadirov (chechen president) was right saying that Saakashvili is a good sprinter...
And last, remember your army... Thay can bravely fight with peace people...
And your 2 coutryman 2 hours ago proved that you haven't honoust....

Oh..ramzan kadirov..he is really big authority..wow..if he said..

Are you high ? :haha
Don repeat every rubish what 1tv and ntv is sayng..better for you..friend :haha