Russian invasion of Georgia..

Excim said:
Any one of those instances could be construed as a matter of perspective. There is plenty of room for journalistic spin on them... but anyway. And, yeah yeah, we know it's the cool thing to do in the rest of the world to pick the USA apart, but w/e. Have your fun. We are the devil, we know, we know...
Click to expand...

No I don't think it's the cool thing to pick the US apart. I just hate it when people think the US does no wrong and is this global power that spreads wonderful democracy wherever it sticks its oar in. Where does the US get the right to help kick out democratically elected governments.
 
Sharpe said:
No I don't think it's the cool thing to pick the US apart. I just hate it when people think the US does no wrong and is this global power that spreads wonderful democracy wherever it sticks its oar in. Where does the US get the right to help kick out democratically elected governments.
Click to expand...

Short answer: it doesn't/we don't, but it's primarily left-over Domino Theory fears from the Cold War.
 
Saw an Ask Yahoo! question of this... Someone actually thought Russia invaded Georgia in the US... Seriously.
 
Ruffyreborn said:
Saw an Ask Yahoo! question of this... Someone actually thought Russia invaded Georgia in the US... Seriously.
Click to expand...

The person asking was probably from Georgia, in the US.
 
Ruffyreborn said:
You are correct, sir. They were wondering "where the tanks were" and "what was going on"

Im still trying to find it, it was a random stumble
Click to expand...

I've never been more ashamed to say that I graduated high school in the (United States) State of Georgia.
 
Tristam Green said:
I've never been more ashamed to say that I graduated high school in the (United States) State of Georgia.
Click to expand...

I get a lot of shit for living in Kentucky, mostly from people living within the US. Have to say, I wouldn't rather live anywhere else. Not in the US, anyway.
 
Depressing, but not overly surprising.

It's funny to me, seeing various commentators remarking that the age of realpolitik is back. Thing is, it never really left. Sure, we've had a handful of "humanitarian" interventions over the last couple decades, but those have been pretty lackadaisical efforts. The only major actions have all been matters of realpolitik, and I'm left wondering where these commentators have been living.

I suppose maybe they actually believe the government spin on events...
 
Ruffyreborn said:
I get a lot of shit for living in Kentucky, mostly from people living within the US. Have to say, I wouldn't rather live anywhere else. Not in the US, anyway.
Click to expand...

Oh, don't get me wrong, it was a great place to live, but seeing an ignorant question like that really darkens it for me.

I wouldn't want to live anywhere else than where I have for the larger part of my life (Eastern Seaboard).
 
Sharpe said:
No I don't think it's the cool thing to pick the US apart. I just hate it when people think the US does no wrong and is this global power that spreads wonderful democracy wherever it sticks its oar in. Where does the US get the right to help kick out democratically elected governments.
Click to expand...

See what Tristam wrote. And yes, it is the cool thing to do around the world, I see it all too often with foundless bashes against a country with generally good people living in it. Politics aside, it sickens me everytime some British bastard refers to a "stupid fat American" and it pisses me off to no end when the snobs over in lalalalalaPARIS bite their thumbs at us. Right. It seems to me that Europeans have an extremely short term memory when it comes to the good we actually do, but won't ever let the mistakes we make go.

That being said, you aren't wholly wrong Sharpe. There are people in this country that are what I call "Ignorantly Patriotic" that run around shooting guns whooping up AMERICA RULEZ and all that crap without really knowing wtf is going on. But they aren't the majority, and I haven't seen any of that sentiment in this thread yet.


Tristam Green said:
The person asking was probably from Georgia, in the US.
Click to expand...

The highschooler that washes our race cars asked me about this. I burst out laughing and walked off. No wonder the school rating around here are among the worst in the country. HE HAS A B+ AVERAGE!!!
 
Raesvelg said:
Depressing, but not overly surprising.

It's funny to me, seeing various commentators remarking that the age of realpolitik is back. Thing is, it never really left. Sure, we've had a handful of "humanitarian" interventions over the last couple decades, but those have been pretty lackadaisical efforts. The only major actions have all been matters of realpolitik, and I'm left wondering where these commentators have been living.

I suppose maybe they actually believe the government spin on events...
Click to expand...

This isn't realpolitik in a traditional sense due to the actors involved. If you just look at Russia or Georgia you are missing the point. Some of the major actors involved are called pseudo or quasi-states - which don't have room in a realpolitik debate because they do not have any room in a realpolitik framework which is state centric. There are many problems with realpolitik, but that is a major one - it doesn't account for non-state and pseudo-state actors. Realpolitik isn't just about power, its about a certain type of power with certain actors involved.

Went through some of my old notes and found some things. 1920s Ossetia was split by Stalin in b/t Georgia and Russia (iirc this is mainly due to the fact that at the border the Caucuses make it near impassable for half a year or more). In 1991-92 there was a war between Georgia and South Ossetia. The important point is that this has been going on for years in a way, and people have been writing about it for at least a decade, that is just how big the lapse is for the US between cutting edge and simply modern literature and foreign policy, and the actual policies that are made/formulated.

I'll say it again, keep in mind this is the area around Chechnya, Ingushetia (which is like Chechnya and often at odds with North Ossetia i.e. Beslan tragedy in 04) and North Ossetia which is often on edge.

I would not be surprised if Russia did the same thing in the TMR if Moldova invaded, because the TMR is a pseudo-state backed by Russia and that aligns itself with Russia while Moldova tries to be more western/European. Russia uses/wants to use these as a buffer zone to maintain some sort of core/periphery system imo.
 
Excim said:
See what Tristam wrote. And yes, it is the cool thing to do around the world, I see it all too often with foundless bashes against a country with generally good people living in it. Politics aside, it sickens me everytime some British bastard refers to a "stupid fat American" and it pisses me off to no end when the snobs over in lalalalalaPARIS bite their thumbs at us. Right. It seems to me that Europeans have an extremely short term memory when it comes to the good we actually do, but won't ever let the mistakes we make go.
Click to expand...

You aren't the only one who sees it, Ex. It is definitely among the "cool" things to do lately, although I haven't seen it so much from this thread as much as others. Also, Sharpe is hardly ever one to rail on the US from what I've read.

That being said, you aren't wholly wrong Sharpe. There are people in this country that are what I call "Ignorantly Patriotic" that run around shooting guns whooping up AMERICA RULEZ and all that crap without really knowing wtf is going on. But they aren't the majority, and I haven't seen any of that sentiment in this thread yet.
Click to expand...

"Ignorant Patriotism" already has a word. It's "Nationalism", and it started two world wars.

The highschooler that washes our race cars asked me about this. I burst out laughing and walked off. No wonder the school rating around here are among the worst in the country. HE HAS A B+ AVERAGE!!!
Click to expand...

I'm really glad that someone else who resides in GA has been able to corroborate this, lol. My aim was not to insult anyone, and if it did, I'm deeply sorry. It is the truth though, and not just in the State of Georgia. I'm sure there plenty of folks in BFE Catskill Nobody-Puts-Baby-In-A-Corner Mountains, New York that thought the exact same thing as that poor soul who asked the question.

It's one of the reasons I make sure I have Atlases, and that one of the first things my children will have is a globe lol.
 
Tristam Green said:
"Ignorant Patriotism" already has a word. It's "Nationalism", and it started two world wars.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but some people still think Nationalism is something to be proud of, so I put it another way.


Tristam Green said:
It's one of the reasons I make sure I have Atlases, and that one of the first things my children will have is a globe lol.
Click to expand...

The first lesson I taught my ex's daughter was geography. I remember implicitly stating "here is America, and while it is important, it is only a very small place in a giant world." I hope she still thinks that way now that she is in middle school. (Though she's probably a brainwashed bobble head by now -.-)
 
Mattaru said:
This isn't realpolitik in a traditional sense due to the actors involved. If you just look at Russia or Georgia you are missing the point. Some of the major actors involved are called pseudo or quasi-states - which don't have room in a realpolitik debate because they do not have any room in a realpolitik framework which is state centric. There are many problems with realpolitik, but that is a major one - it doesn't account for non-state and pseudo-state actors. Realpolitik isn't just about power, its about a certain type of power with certain actors involved.
Click to expand...

The attribution of particular players to realpolitik is a modern conceit. At the heart, all it means is basing your political policies around primarily practical considerations, rather than moral ones.

The Marshall Plan is an example of realpolitik, oddly enough, though it masquerades nicely as a more humanitarian policy.

Besides, South Ossetia isn't a player in this conflict. It's a piece. Much like Vietnam, in some ways. The policies of a would-be state are almost irrelevant here, since those policies are being guided and manipulated by the Russians.

Another example of realpolitik with a somewhat more direct parallel than Vietnam would be Panama. Foreign power (US) foments a rebellion in a dissatisfied segment of a greater nation (Panama and Colombia respectively) and aids the smaller country in breaking away from the larger one in return for significant monetary and strategic gains.

In the case of Russia and South Ossetia, delaying the progress of Georgia and scaring the other would-be members of NATO is a decent return on their investment.
 
Raesvelg said:
In the case of Russia and South Ossetia, delaying the progress of Georgia and scaring the other would-be members of NATO is a decent return on their investment.
Click to expand...

You gotta admit, Prime Minister Putin is one hell of a stategist. Cold and calculated...
 
Excim said:
You gotta admit, Prime Minister Putin is one hell of a stategist. Cold and calculated...
Click to expand...

... with his cold and lifeless fingers up Medvedev's ass.
 
Raesvelg said:
The attribution of particular players to realpolitik is a modern conceit. At the heart, all it means is basing your political policies around primarily practical considerations, rather than moral ones.

The Marshall Plan is an example of realpolitik, oddly enough, though it masquerades nicely as a more humanitarian policy.

Besides, South Ossetia isn't a player in this conflict. It's a piece. Much like Vietnam, in some ways. The policies of a would-be state are almost irrelevant here, since those policies are being guided and manipulated by the Russians.

Another example of realpolitik with a somewhat more direct parallel than Vietnam would be Panama. Foreign power (US) foments a rebellion in a dissatisfied segment of a greater nation (Panama and Colombia respectively) and aids the smaller country in breaking away from the larger one in return for significant monetary and strategic gains.

In the case of Russia and South Ossetia, delaying the progress of Georgia and scaring the other would-be members of NATO is a decent return on their investment.
Click to expand...

You seem to be missing the point that Realpolitik, while focused on practical, amoral policy decisions (this, in itself is problematic - I'd say realism and realpolitik while still in existence and still influencing policy - see what I said about the delay in modern foreign policy thought and what people in Washington implement - is still fundamentally flawed) still has defined actors. Its actors are in line with the umbrella political philosophy of realism which is a state-centric way of thinking. When people say "Realpolitik is outdated" sometimes they are referring to moral concerns (and legitimately so) as well as that it doesn't give space to NGOs, IGOs, pseudo-states, or terrorist organizations.

Of course you can give examples of realpolitik in action when talking about inter-state relations, because that is its realm. When you see the world from a particular framework, those are the policies you are going to implement. The state and nation-state is a human construction and is open to different types of constructions and frameworks. If you see the world and politics as solely an interaction between states, policies will mirror that and the more you as a policy will make it so in a self-fulfilling way. I.E. The Cold War.

South Ossetia is not just a piece. Each of these countries are players in their own way, and what is happening now is part of a bigger phenomenon across Eurasia and the Caucuses. South Ossetia is striving to breakaway from Georgia (which is pro-west) while Russia is trying to maintain their bloc, so actions by Georgia in S. Ossetia is bound to cause Russia to intervene in some way. Still, there are always more than one reason for a group to be separatist in which there are internal, as well as external reasons (West-East Eurasia pulling forces). These are usually practical concerns (although ideological/religious reasons are used as a pretext - a tenet of modern nationalism actually), which seems to scream omg REALPOLITIK, but once again that is a vast oversimplification of what is going on. Realpolitik would be like what is a S. Ossetia, it doesn't matter outside of its context as a tool which negates the self-advocacy of S. Ossetia which is no way to view a sustainable foreign policy. Moreover, realist philosophy doesn't even recognize the power of a pseudo-state, but it obviously matters or there wouldn't be a conflict.
 
Last edited:
Excim said:
See what Tristam wrote. And yes, it is the cool thing to do around the world, I see it all too often with foundless bashes against a country with generally good people living in it. Politics aside, it sickens me everytime some British bastard refers to a "stupid fat American" and it pisses me off to no end when the snobs over in lalalalalaPARIS bite their thumbs at us. Right. It seems to me that Europeans have an extremely short term memory when it comes to the good we actually do, but won't ever let the mistakes we make go.

That being said, you aren't wholly wrong Sharpe. There are people in this country that are what I call "Ignorantly Patriotic" that run around shooting guns whooping up AMERICA RULEZ and all that crap without really knowing wtf is going on. But they aren't the majority, and I haven't seen any of that sentiment in this thread yet.


The highschooler that washes our race cars asked me about this. I burst out laughing and walked off. No wonder the school rating around here are among the worst in the country. HE HAS A B+ AVERAGE!!!
Click to expand...


I am not calling Americans anything. However, stating "British bastard" the snobbish French comment I can take as an Englishman ;). The majority of Americans are fine. Just as the majority of any other nation are fine. At the end of the day 9 times out of 10 it's the egotistical leaders of nations that act like dicks and give other nations negative views about said nation.

I was merely stating that Russia isn't the first to do this, both Britain (Empire covering 1/3 of the world's land surface is bound to of had its fair share of toe treddding), America, in fact any powerful nation has done it to protect their interests in a country/region. It's not going to stop with Russia and Georgia, infact I doubt it ever will.

If it seemed like I was trying to compare you to the sort of person that believed Russia was invading the state of Georgia I apologise that wasn't my intention.
 
Sharpe said:
[non-anti-american sentiments]
Click to expand...

Also, to correct Excim, I believe the proper term any self-respecting Briton would call us would be "damn bloody yanks". Is that accurate?
 
Tristam Green said:
Also, to correct Excim, I believe the proper term any self-respecting Briton would call us would be "damn bloody yanks". Is that accurate?
Click to expand...

"Bloody Yanks" would do. Although British Anti-American sentiment is nothing compared to Australia's Anti-English. When we play them at cricket (and usually lose) the crowd has been known to sing "I'd rather be a Paki than a Pom". That being said you're really only enemy number 3 after the French and Germans in the eyes of "those" English people. The Scottish love anyone that pisses the English off though ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top