AndyRussian invasion of Ukraine
Siberian Light opposes the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Click here to donate to the Red Cross Ukraine appeal.
Note: I thought about not publishing this post, and just using it as one of those cathartic rants that stays forever in the drafts folder but makes one feel better. But I’m grumpy today. So here it is. It’s dedicated to the smart people out there. You know who you are!
It fascinates – and pisses me off – the way that debate about Russia has been turned into a warped zero sum game of Russophobes versus Russophiles.
The only thing that matters is whether you’re for or against Russia and whether you can consistently twist the facts to meet a twisted worldview.
“I am nothing more than a Kremlin shill.
There’s not a lot of room left for the kind of people who are prepared to accept that a bad government can do something right, and that a good government can do something bad. Or, shock horror, even that a good government can occasionally do something wrong, or stupid.
Over the past few months, I’ve written posts that have both criticised and praised Russia. I write them because I think that Russia is often right, although it’s also far too often wrong.
And, far too often, I take crap from people. Usually because of what they think I have said, in the context of their tiny little world views, rather than what I have actually said, in the context of an entire blog post, or a series of posts.
Take this post about the Russo-Georgian war, for example, in which I pointed out that Georgia had been stupid to invade South Ossetia in the face of Russian provocation. Georgia, I argued, had effectively walked into a Russian trap.
One enlightened Russophobe took one look at the article, came to the stunning realisation that I am nothing more than a Kremlin shill:
“Which Gulag in Siberia do you blog from? Perhaps you should change the title to Siberian Lightly censored. I dont know if you receive funds from the Kremlin, but you follow its line.
Before you blog, you ought to at least educate yourself instead of posting untruthful diarrhea all over the internet.
You might be too thick headed to understand. Putin wants to control the flow of oil in Russias backyard. The Georgian pipeline is not under his control. Putin has to bring about regime change in Georgia to get control of the pipeline. That is what this whole conflict is about. You can side with Putin or you can side with the Free world. I am siding with the Free world.”
Or, how about this post, from yesterday, in which I argued that Russia was running diplomatic rings around the EU because it was playing divide and conquer, and didn’t have too many qualms about using energy supplies as a tool of diplomacy.
Guess what. I’m not a Kremlin shill any more.
What a stupid, positively juvenile article. I dont know why I take your RSS sometimes.
[…]That Russia poses a danger to the EU was the basic premise of the article, and it is a moronic one.
You know, it’s not really the inane insults that bother me. Or that the people who write the inane insults almost always do so behind the illusory screen of anonymity.
It’s that there are far too many people out there who simply don’t have the intelligence, or the patience to read anything properly any more, and who are too intellectually stunted to see anything outside of their own inflexible worldview.
OK. Rant over.
This is a good Post and after reading this Post I feel much better! 🙂
Kyle
Kyle & Svet´s last blog post..A Few More Israel Pictures from Windows to Russia!
You really do a good job. I love your blog and read it all the time! Don’t let all the other ‘stuff’ in the way of you writing about Russia…!
Sometimes I just wonder if the Russophobe just isn’t very lucky with the men and that’s where all her anger comes from – sexual frustration 😉 And I’m not saying that to pick a fight, it’s just what more often than not comes to my mind while I’m reading her blog… And I’m certainly not saying that because I’m pro-Putin. Though I’m practically blogging out of some GULAG camp in Siberia!
Josefina´s last blog post..Sankta Lucia: Take 1
Heya don’t worry, I see your point. Just remember that it’s always safe to pick on Russia in the news and just about anywhere else. If people were to talk about real problems that means they would have to admit them and actually do something about it. That’s how I see the Russophobes anyway.
I’m sure most of your readers appreciate the nuance and intelligence of what you write – so don’t be discouraged by the vocal minority such as these two idiots! This sort of polarisation does seem to happen a lot in blog threads no matter what the subject (have you seen Youtube’s?), but I agree there seems to be something particularly venomous about the Russian ones.
The title of this post makes me laugh 🙂
Great post Andy. As a fellow victim of “Stupid people and Russia,” I wholeheartedly sympathize.Just remember when you piss off both extremes, it means you’re doing something right.
Sean´s last blog post..(Un)documenting Stalinism?
At least you don’t have troll like efforts which specifically target you in a clear attempt to defame and shut you up.
Beware of some of those professing to be above “both extremes.”
That’s referring to the mentioned troll like efforts which don’t appear to have been made against you.
Earnest and spirited dialogue in a respectful enough way shouldn’t be confused with some of the more disgusting manner being provoked in cyber.
Earnest folks need to be careful about getting sucked into such a web of deceit. This reality puts some people off altogether from participating.
In such an instance, a form of terrorism has won.
Which Gulag in Siberia do you blog from? Perhaps you should change the title to Siberian Lightly censored. I dont know if you receive funds from the Kremlin, but you follow its line.
Before you blog, you ought to at least educate yourself instead of posting untruthful diarrhea all over the internet.
You might be too thick headed to understand. Putin wants to control the flow of oil in Russias backyard. The Georgian pipeline is not under his control. Putin has to bring about regime change in Georgia to get control of the pipeline. That is what this whole conflict is about. You can side with Putin or you can side with the Free world. I am siding with the Free world.
Can’t take a little criticism, can you? Can admit that you might be a little wrong? Until the economic meltdown, Putin was on a course to reunite the former Soviet Republics. Now, that’s a pipe dream. He is still railing against the US. Six months ago this Mr. Putin said the US no longer really affected Russia economically or diplomatically. Now, Putin is saying the economic difficulties in Russia is the US’s fault. Which is it, Mr. Putin?
You see the guy is a master of double speak. I get upset when you accuse tiny Georgia of falling into a Russian trap.
The use of the word “trap” possibly suggests that Russia had something sinister planned.
There’s another way of looking at this particular matter.
Recent history influenced the Russian government on the need to be militarily prepared. The Kremlin knew of the Georgian military buildup and some comments made by Georgian government officials regarding Abkhazia and South Ossetia (specifically, on the desire to retake the two lands in question). Based on these points, the Russian government made sure to have contingency plans in the event of a Georgian military strike (like the one which occurred this past Aug. 7).
Anyone who writes must be aware that his words will be misunderstood, distorted, or misrepresented by somebody.
The only alternative is not to write.
@Tristan – from now on, SL will subject Russia to scrutiny through the medium of interpretative art. No words allowed…
Or maybe not.
Andy´s last blog post..What is it with stupid people and Russia?
Tristan
That’s the apparent idea some have in their overly selective efforts at replying to some individuals. I’m referring to manner that differs from having an earnest dialogue.
It’s very easy to misrepresent someone else under a pseudonym and with the assistance of others.
I usually write my stupid comments on Kyle’s blog, but now I’ve found another victim to torment, BWAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Clark´s last blog post..Zappadan Day 6: Zappa Conducts Ravels Bolero
Just do what I do, Andy – Pay no attention to those who complain about your blog being either too Russophobic or too Russophiliac.
I think that these kinds of personal attacks against bloggers or even journalists are a sign that a person has run out of things to say about a given topic. The focus should be on contributing to the conversation by debating the issues, not the voices.
James´s last blog post..Energy Blast – Dec 10th, 2008
I just wanted to let you know…that I could totally hug you. I find your blog exceptionally fascinating. Keep it up! 🙂
Andy,
I always thought you look cool, and now I know why – you look like a younger Fabio Capello!:-)
”Earnest folks need to be careful about getting sucked into such a web of deceit. This reality puts some people off altogether from participating. ”
Count me out. I’m deliberately not getting into a row with you anymore. I did go too far and you didnt deserve it.
However I do think it was a Russian trap. The Georgians were pretty dumb to walk into it though.
Andy,
The reality is quite simple – I didn’t like your previous article. It’s unoriginal, almost reads like something written by Lucas, plus the points made by Sam. I don’t think he is an “idiot”, although I agree that the two ad hominems at the start and at the end were unnecessary – but why worry over them? You’ve had more than half a million unique visitors – does it make a difference if one of them stops reading you?
Also, criticizing an article does not mean that that feeling extends to yourself, or your other articles – some of which are very good, like the one about Khalkin-Gol and Russian bond girls. I for one will continue checking up on SL from time to time, as I usually do.
Anyway, sorry if I offended you. After receiving hate mail from Russophobe cyber goons (the likes of Kolchak) since starting DR a year ago, I’ve become somewhat more predisposed to angry rhetoric in situations that do not really call for it.
Da Russophile´s last blog post..Russia Economic Crisis III: On the Importance of Self-Sufficiency in Liquids
This Kolchak fella has nothing to do with me.
😉
@Da Russophile – just to clarify – this article wasn’t really aimed at you. I’m sorry if you were inadvertently caught in the “crossfire” by my use of the phrase ‘Russophile’.
I don’t agree with most of what you said about the previous article (which is fine – you don’t agree with what I said either!), but your comments certainly don’t fit into the “stupid” category that wound me up. And they certainly didn’t offend me.
PS – I do agree, though, when you say that the previous article was unoriginal – I’m happy with the general argument it puts forward, but the article was actually a dusted off and rewritten version of a previous article, and wasn’t one of my finest.
@Irishman – it’s just a shame I’m rubbish at football.
@everyone else – thanks for the kind words. I wasn’t fishing for compliments, but it’s fascinating to see that the sentiments behind this post resonate so strongly among other Russia bloggers.
Andy´s last blog post..What is it with stupid people and Russia?
“However I do think it was a Russian trap.”
Based on what evidence?
One view claims an increase in gunfire exchanges in the days leading up to the Aug. 7 strike.
The Georgian government and its sympathizers spin this period as South Ossetian/Russian provoked. On the other hand, Georgia was noticeably rebuilding its military, with some Georgian officials stressing the need to retake South Ossetia and Abkhazia. It’s Georgia seeking to reacquire South Ossetia and not vice versa.
In the spirit of this particular blog post and what some others express, I’m communicating the following:
Whether as Chrisius Maximus, Chris, totdy, and other, this kind of manner should be ideally kept out of the process (spiteful sarcasm, targeted personal taunts that get off topic and outright rude behavior):
http://talk.guardian.co.uk/WebX?14@98.BC6ae9L2lRg@.7760b692/657
http://seansrussiablog.org/2007/02/07/andrei-vlasovs-legacy/#comment-53316
The above reflects a partial listing.
I repeatedly made efforts to keep it on the subject, only to get subjected to such obnoxious trolling. Note what someone else here recently said on the subject.
Unlike some others, I can sincerely say that I favor as open a forum situation as possible – but with a certain sense of responsibility.
What has been allowed to carry on in some circles isn’t “academic” in the true sense of the meaning. The repetitiously displayed boorish manner seems to have a certain definite intent to demean and limit the process.
It’s phony to then suddenly take a kinder approach in the company of select others..
That’s: other derivatives.
Andy
I hear you on the stupid criticisms. Some of it goes with the territory.
What you’ve experienced is nothing to the kind of horsehit that that some others besides myself have faced. Having people blatantly misrepresent what I said – sometimes in very managed situations. Endlessly interupting and pouncing in an overly selective and frankly sleazy manner. This includes seeing supposedly responsible people standing by and in some instances contributing.
That’s not what I’m about.
”@Irishman – its just a shame Im rubbish at football.”
Not to worry Andy. Arrigo Saachi was a shoe salesman and never kicked a ball professionally in his life, but went on to lead Milan to three Scudetto and one European Cup. He also led Italy to defeat against Ireland in New York at USA ’94 (sorry, had to get that one in!:-))
”I repeatedly made efforts to keep it on the subject, only to get subjected to such obnoxious trolling. Note what someone else here recently said on the subject. ”
I did and meant it. I have overdone it more than once, and forgot that you are entitled to your opinions in fairness. You should learn Russian though. My Irish is pretty bad and I’m ensconsed in a native Irish speaking region now and havent a clue whats going on half the time, in my own country. Languages are crucial. You just have to spend an hour a day at it. I know its hard, no-one wants to do it (expected the gifted Maximus, who was born loving grammar, the lucky sod) but it just has to be done.
”However I do think it was a Russian trap.
Based on what evidence?”
The Russians had the Georgians spanked in two days flat and had troops pouring through the gorge the minute Georgian troops. The Ossetians started firing (allegedly) and hit the Georgians with gradi first. Which leads to two possible conclusions:
1. The Russians give the Ossetians gradi just for the heck of it and also station a few thousand troops just over the border, again for the heck of it.
2. The Russians were waiting for a flare up and took their chance with both hands.
I think it may be two. I could be wrong though, and usually am about these things, but the speed of the Russian victory does look like they were really well prepared for this. Maybe too well prepared.
On the “trap” issue, I looked at it from both angles. Overall, I lean towards not calling it a trap.
Sean Guillory doesn’t know Russian (he acknowledges use of a translator). He’s not alone. Yet, some like Chris Doss repeatedly only highlight that point with me.
You’ve one again done the same in an overly selective manner.
This appears hypocritical and a seemingly clear attempt to belittle my input that has been otherwise accepted at a number of venues including the BBC, Inosmi.ru and Eurasian Home.
As previously noted, to my knowledge Robert Bridge, David Johnson, Ira Straus and until recently (as I understand it) Peter Lavelle don’t know Russian.
Moreover, knowledge of a foreign langauge doesn’t always mean having a great knowledge of the given country’s history, foreign policy and sports. On a number of issues, Doss has shown himself to be ignorant of Russia. He appears to try to cover this aspect by initiating obsessively rude manner at others. In this sense, I’m not as “gifted” as him. I prefer a more earnest approach that includes having a natural feel for what’s happening. This includes a civil interaction with any number of people familiar with the involved situation. I don’t mind some spirited exchanges. Doss and others like him take it beyond the pale.
Doss comes across as a frustrated individual, with thousands spent on him. All he seems to do is post comments at blogs and forums. What formal commentary has he presented? All of us have a beef at one time or another. Some of us are more up front and earnest about it than others.
For his part, Guillory hasn’t been so sincere. The two of us collaborated on work that was featured elsewhere. I don’t see Doss and him doing the same. Doss and Guillory have a left of center way of seeing things. That’s fine on the basis of it. I take an eclectic approach, which attempts to interact with others in disagreement with me – in relatively free form situations.
IMO, this makes for better interaction. Too bad it periodically gets abused by others.
Awhile back, Guillory blasted LR while carrying on in similar manner as that entity. I recall Guillory’s reply to an LR post which included shots at LR and me. Guillory brought me up in a negatively inaccurate way. That’s not my idea of being “academic.”
On the surface, among other points, paragraphs three and four might appear strong in relation to what has been recently communicated.
On the other hand, its main premise has legitimacy. Some creepy things have been said and I’m understandably perturbed (for lack of a better word)
http://www.russiablog.org/2008/06/next_time_spain_defeats_russia.php
In retrospect, in some instances, I could’ve chosen a different way of addressing such manner. This doesn’t negate my repeated efforts at earnest dialogue. One galling aspect dealt with a host/moderator claiming to advocate the same – only to contradict himself. as was noted by someone here, i didn’t deserve such treatment. It hasn’t stopped me.
Over the years, I’ve interacted with a number of intelligent and well educated Russians and non-Russians with an interest (professional and otherwise) in the sort of subjects I comment on.
I greatly appreciate the exchanges and am pleased to know that the feeling is mutual.
IMO, It’s beastly to privately or publicly seek to limit such activity in one form or another.
Andy’s post seems to touch on these aspects.
“The Russians had the Georgians spanked in two days flat”
Not hard to do.
“and had troops pouring through the gorge the minute Georgian troops.”
It took them a day to get there. And the general headquarters was closed.
“The Ossetians started firing (allegedly) and hit the Georgians with gradi first. ”
Allegedly, that is, according to Saakashvili, who also claimed that Tskhinvaili was destroyed by the Russians, who also claimed that the Russians had attacked the pipeline, who also claimed that the Russians were marching on Tbilisi.
The only person in the world, other Saakashvili, who still asserts this stuff is you. The OECD doesn’t seem to believe it. Nobody in the military seems to believe it. The US government doesn’t believe it. Nobody argues it anymore, because there is no actual evidence for it. Of course the Russians are going to be prepared for this and had troops in the area. Georgia tried to do this THREE TIMES ALREADY. The Russians aren’t morons.
”i didnt deserve such treatment. It hasnt stopped me. ”
You didnt deserve it in fairness, and I wont be doing it again. Although I fundamentally disagree with you on a number of things, I shouldnt have went so far in my criticisms of you. It was poor debating indeed. And it has be said you do genuinely love Russia – and that deserves respect. I didnt bring up languages to offend you – I did it cos I know that even a bit of a lingo will give you a new and refreshing spin on things. I dont doubt you have read more on Russia in English than I have and many others. The only reason I bring up languages now is not to offend you – dont be offended – simply to show that its a great help. I’m in the local and the lads have to turn around and speak English to me. Its well worth the effort getting the books out, painful though it is.
”The Georgian government and its sympathizers spin this period as South Ossetian/Russian provoked. On the other hand, Georgia was noticeably rebuilding its military, with some Georgian officials stressing the need to retake South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Its Georgia seeking to reacquire South Ossetia and not vice versa. ”
I have heard a lot of Russians say that Georgians are prone to bravado and may well have been under the impression that they could actually hurt Russia. Clearly the reverse was true.
“On a number of issues, Doss has shown himself to be ignorant of Russia. He appears to try to cover this aspect by initiating obsessively rude manner at others.”
Hey man, at least I know “multi-opionated” isn’t a word.
NEVER MIJND THAT SEAN GUILLORY AND OTHERS DON’T KNOW RUSSIAN, WITH YOU NOT HIGHLIGHTING THAT.
There’s no doubting that I’m more well versed than Guillory and others on a number of Russia related issues.
This knowledge doesn’t just involve reading.
BTW, the latest Doss crank involves a moniker with a comic book twang and Doss’ repetitious suggestion of poor grammar on my part.
Never mind that Doss’s own grammar has been found to be faulty. In additon, he doesn’t go out of his way correcting the faulty grammar of others. A sleazy SOB for sure.
So we’re criticizing grammer now? Me do thinks dis blog eez goin teh ‘ell.
”The only person in the world, other Saakashvili, who still asserts this stuff is you. The OECD doesnt seem to believe it.”
I didnt assert anything; I simply said thats the impression I got. The Russians were there very quickly, closed headquarters or not. And it was a lot faster than a day – on the day the Olympics started the Russians were beating the shit out of Georgia when the fun had only started in earnest the previous night.
”Allegedly, that is, according to Saakashvili, who also claimed that Tskhinvaili was destroyed by the Russians, who also claimed that the Russians had attacked the pipeline, who also claimed that the Russians were marching on Tbilisi.”
This is great stuff – pity it has no relevance. You’re simply using what you believe to be a lie to prove something else you believe to be a lie. You may be right, but it doesnt prove your case.
”Nobody in the military seems to believe it.”
”The OECD doesnt seem to believe it.”
Plenty of ‘seems’, are there any ‘doesn’ts’?
Scrat
That’s what Doss does at some other venues. Someone else observed that it serves to cover his own limits.
Seeing how this conversation gets off topic with repetitious and selectively applied observations, l’ll procceed to do the same in a more constructive manner:
Re: http://www.russiaprofile.org/page.php?pageid=Experts%27+Panel&articleid=a1229105949
An example of how individuals with a certain background and views get their reasonably stated opinions presented at a relatively high profile venue.
It sure beats Russia Today’s repetitious comments about Alexy’s “nationalism.” An example of that network taking to some of the biases evident in Western mass media.
Like I said in another recent instance, I’ve had my share of contact with the ROC and Jewry. This has to do with my own background, in relation to both faiths. The N word (nationalism) continues to be selectively applied towards some, but not others. If used consistently, a number of leading Jewish spiritual leaders can be considered “nationalists.” In modern day political jargon, “nationalism” has come to have a negative connotation unlike “patriotism.” When observed in a non-chauvinistic manner, there’s nothing particularly wrong with having a patriotic outlook.
Andy
I think it might be best for me to ignore this thread. It’s certainly not because I duck unlike some others.
As you know, I’m interested in meaningful discussion, minus the trolling that has been encouraged elsewhere.
I hope you take my advice and consider hosting intelligent panel discussions. Unlike some others, you’re more sincere in trying to get different perspectives. I’m sure you can attract a decent panel of contributors.
Very true Irishman Russia was there quickly, get on Google Earth and look at the distances involved. We’re not talking about distances of 100s of miles/kilometers here were takling about 10s of. Flight time for warplanes was minutes in most cases.
From what I gather the Russian aircraft were hitting the Georgians at dawn, within 12 hours of the opening bombardment Russian army units were crossing the mountains and into SO. Why? Because the Russians had their forces in a high state of readiness, they expected something to happen. Events prior to that such as Condi Rices visit to Tblisi and Israel breaking some armaments deals were clues.
I don’t think the Russians set a trap, they just sat and waited for the idiots in Tblisi to do something and it turns out they took the opportunity and got their asses handed to them.
Micheal. I’ll stay out of that part of the debate, I do see what you’re saying.
Just wanted to ck, on something I wrote – which is why I came back.
Scrat:
As you no doubt know, the term “rapid deployment force” refers to quick responces.
I suspect we’ve not been given all of the particulars.
There’re instances when one side in a conflict can get a tip in advance.
All things considered, I don’t think the Russians were really looking to cruise for a bruise in this one.
I guess that’s a good way to describe it but look at where it is. The Caucasus, I guess Shakeasswilly forgot that Russia had fought and largely won a war that lasted about a decade there and maintains a sizable force there for various reasons.
I have no doubt that there were some people involved on the Russian side that wanted something to happen, I think Russia needed it to happen to teach the west a lesson, especially the US. It appears to have worked.
I see the EU apparently is dealing with it and starting to recognize that Russia is more important to them and that US meddling in places like the Caucasus will come to no good.
” have no doubt that there were some people involved on the Russian side that wanted something to happen, I think Russia needed it to happen to teach the west a lesson, especially the US. It appears to have worked.”
”Therere instances when one side in a conflict can get a tip in advance.
All things considered, I dont think the Russians were really looking to cruise for a bruise in this one.”
I would agree with the above I guess. Whilst not a trap I suppose, I do think the Russians were itching for a chance, and lets face it, they bloody took it.
”Very true Irishman Russia was there quickly, get on Google Earth and look at the distances involved. Were not talking about distances of 100s of miles/kilometers here were takling about 10s of. Flight time for warplanes was minutes in most cases. ”
Its a fact, by friday lunchtime Russian troops were spanking Georgia, and it supposedly started on the thursday evening. It just struck me that the Russians were very quick indeed at getting down to business. Now that may be down to experience, but it was very fast deployment.
”It sure beats Russia Todays repetitious comments about Alexys nationalism. An example of that network taking to some of the biases evident in Western mass media.”
But he was a nationalist. He blessed troops heading to Chechnya on their dirty mission. If that isnt nationalism I dont know what is. Nationalist does have negatibe connotations, and I think RT are right to use this word about him. To me patriotism is criticising your country constructively when its wrong; nationalism is supporting it even when its wrong.
Two more quick points (sorry):
1. Who said “multi-opionated (not that I’ll likely ck. back)?
An example of not providing specifics on a quote – a not so academic way of referencing.
“At least”, I don’t repeatedly insist that “there’re” isn’t valid English language shorthand (which is what Doss did).
Scrat:
Don’t get me wrong, many Rusisans weren’t/aren’t unhappy with what transpired. This shouldn’t be confused with actively seeking to instigate a situation. As previously noted in this thread, the Georgian government did its share. I suspect that it was of two possible views having to do with thinking there was a chance that the Russians might not respond and the predominating biases against Russia working in Georgia’s favor – regardless of the outcome (the first of these two stated views isn’t as likely IMO).
BTW, I’m not too keen on the Russian government’s decision to recognize South Ossetia’s and Abkhazia’s independence at this time. The reasons are stated in the article starting with “Ramifications” at my hyperlinked name. This is reflecting a view that’s certainly not anti-Russian.
Like I said, I’ll try to avoid this thread as per my previous note.
Still yet one more (as soon as I posted my last set of comments, I noticed a new post)
The last Alexy follow-point doesn’t negate the selectivity in how “nationalism” is applied. A specific was given at this thread.
As for Chechnya, there was extreme brutality on the Chechen separatist side. A point which has been authoratitvely detailed elsewhere. Blessing troops doesn’t necessarily mean supporting manner considered unacceptable in warfare.
The poorly funded and trained Russian armed forces got caught in a difficult situation. Like I said before, this no doubt influenced the better Russian military performance on former Georgian SSR territory. Another factor has to do with the Georgian government side not having the same overall brutal aspects that was evident in Chechnya.
Among the best of the recently released articles (IMO) on Alexy have been in Russia Profile (Zolotov and Babich) and The NYT (Kishkovsky)
Here’s some distances. Just for added information. The main military base in the region for the Russian army is in Vladikavkaz. In a straight line thats 92mls/150km from Tblisi and 60mls/100km from Tshkinvali.
The road through the mountains is significantly longer but not more than 50% so it is easy to see the speed with which the Russian responded. The Caucasus forces there are ALWAYS on alert, it is a all but a warzone anyway. The SU-25 Frogfoot bombers would have been over Tblisi at cruise altitude in minutes had they been flying south. What Russia did was no great exploit of strategic movement on the battlefield but it sure as hell was an example of how to execute an operation in a tactical sense in not too friendly terrain.
Politcally this sends the message to the EU and US that Russia is not to be trifled with. Disrespect is not productive. Meddling is not productive and if you go to far, you may not like the result. This was the wake up call, The US and Britain and others have been meddling in that region for the last 15/20 years destabilizing it creating all these colored revolutions. Innocent people are dying for politics and power, it is not right. Let Russia take the burden of maintaining the peace there, she has done it for hundreds of years and had been largely successful at it.
”The last Alexy follow-point doesnt negate the selectivity in how nationalism is applied”
I do agree that it is selectively applied. But in Alexei II’s case it is not. He was a Russian nationalist.
”Blessing troops doesnt necessarily mean supporting manner considered unacceptable in warfare.”
Of course that is true, but Alexei knew well what was going on in the South and made no protest. Surely he claimed to represent the Russian Orthodox Church and by blessing troops was he not at the very least endorsing their mission? If I was an ROC and didnt want war I’d be pretty unhappy that the Patriarch was doing what he was doing. I know this stuff is common in many countries, but that doesnt make it right. It doesnt take much reading of the Bible to figure out that Jesus was against killing. Who exactly was Alexei answerable to, The Lord or Boris Yeltsin? I suspect he was pre-occupied with more earthly matters, such as funding church rebuilding and avoiding getting banned again like back in the early 1920s.
Scrat – thanks for the interesting and informative comments. They were quick but I think you, MA and CD are right, it wasnt a trap. More like opportunity knocked on the door.
”As for Chechnya, there was extreme brutality on the Chechen separatist side. A point which has been authoratitvely detailed elsewhere.”
Actually the Russians kicked off the extreme brutality. The first Russian tank forces captured in November 1994 were actually imprisoned underneath the Presidential Palace and eventually handed back (courtesy of the soldiers mothers , not the efforts of the Russian state which were zero, and tried to deny for ages that they even were Russian troops!). A few weeks later the Russian bombardment began, followed by the New Years Eve massacre, where the Chechens beheaded many Russian tank-troops and put them on lamp-posts. I’m not condoning that at all, it was dreaful, but Russia should not have bombed Grozny with planes and artillery in the first place – I think that this was the single biggest mistake of the First Chechen War (apart from being spanked in Grozny in 1996). It turned what could have been a small series of battles with intermediate negotiations into an all-out war in the worst sense.
Anyway, we can never agree on this subject I think!
Not likely. I personally believe the Russians did them a favor, it wasn’t long after the Chechen declaration of independance before slave markets were open again. With that declaration the country moved backwards a thousand years.
That war was a bloody mess, hopefully its all bot over now. Off to work.
I’m guilty for sure of not keeping away.
In Chechnya, Russians were being persecuted there by extremists, with many Russians fleeing.
There’s no legitimate denying the gruesome behavior of some of the Chechen separatists. Ignoring this isn’t accurate. Scrat touches on this point, concerning the non-Russian human rights abuses in Chechnya. This explains in good part why separatist appeal has declined in Chechnya. The situation in Chechnya became unbearable for reasons that can’t be accurately pinned on Russia – but on the internal flaws within Chechnya. Saying all this doesn’t excuse how Rusisa conducted itself militarily.
As noted before and in relation to this subject, greater autonomy doesn’t necessarily mean better human rights conditions. In the American south, “states’ rights” advocates were known to use an otherwise earnest appeal to better enact restrictive measures against Blacks. In post-Soviet Russia, places like Tatarstan, Kalmykia and Chechnya of the last decade (the two instances when it had noticeable autonomy) haven’t been considered among the most democratic or humane of places in Russia (the “humane” points especially relate to the last two).
In this sense, I believe Scrat to be right. Chechnya still has a way to go in returning to what can be considered a reasonably normal state.
Yeah, I kind of prefer not discussing what has already been discussed at length before among the same people – with nothing new offered.
On the use of the n word (nationalism), how often are American leaders called nationalists?
Among other examples, when the UK responded to the Argentine takeover of the Falklands, I don’t recall there being a stated wave of British nationalism.
When it comes to foreign policy, the idea of one power having the greater right to determine the fate of others isn’t a Russian invention.
There’s nothing wrong with a healthy Russian patriotism over some of the Russia unfriendly, if not anti-Russian advocacy getting preference in some circles.
”Not likely. I personally believe the Russians did them a favor, it wasnt long after the Chechen declaration of independance before slave markets were open again. ”
Scrat there is no doubt there were incidents of slavery, people put in pits etc but this was not systemic or widespread in 1991-1994. Indeed according to a Russian acquintance of mine who’d lived in Grozny and another Russian commenting at SRB there were no gang rapes, mass murders or much of the other horrors that Russian media were claiming happened during that period, and indeed the guy at SRB (I’ll find the thread and link it) said that life was reasonably OK during that time. The Chechens did admittedly allow lunatics out of hospitals and murderers out of jail – of that there is no dispute. Most Russians did not leave Chechnya until after the Russian invasion. I have no doubt that the place was dangerous and unstable but a Russian invasion was hardly the right response. In fact Chechnya had one of the few working economies of the whole RF at the time, although of course most of it was illegal. But people were fed and life continued.
”Yeah, I kind of prefer not discussing what has already been discussed at length before among the same people – with nothing new offered.”
The only person who offered nothing new here is actually you. Were you even aware that Russian troops were captured in November 1994, before the war proper started, and were denied as being Russian by the Kremlin for ages? They were fed and watered under the Palace. Not too much of that happening at Mozdok I would think. You have engaged in the usual whataboutery and made the same statements about human rights again as if Russia herself was some sort of saint at the time. To CD’s and Scrat’s credit they know something about Chechnya; you however do not and are right to withdraw from the conversation.
”Among other examples, when the UK responded to the Argentine takeover of the Falklands, I dont recall there being a stated wave of British nationalism”
You dont recall because you arent from this part of the world. There was a huge wave of Brit nationalism at the time of Las Malvinas – indeed it saved Margaret Thatcher’s job. If you doubt me ask Tim Newman or Andy. Argentina would have her revenge 4 years later at Mexico City though:-)
”On the use of the n word (nationalism), how often are American leaders called nationalists?”
I thought we were talking about Alexei II. So, was he answerable to God or Vladimir Putin and Boris Yeltsin? Which was it? The Russian Constitution or the Bible?
You got it wrong again and this time I’ll really make an effort to stay away from here. I’m not into rehashing inaccurately stated impressions of what has been previously discussed.
Before the start of the first Chechen war, there was plenty of imperfecftion to be found in Chechnya. The not so Russia friendly English language mass media even acknowledged this.
Once again, saying this doesn’t excuse the conduct of the poorly trained/poorly funded Russian military.
Try being more original when you use such terms as “whataboutery,” that originally come from people who contradict themselves.
I probably have a better recollection of the Falkands war than yourself. I don’t recall the N word (nationalism) being used to describe the British reply to the Argentine takeover.
My point on that matter pertains to how the N word has a negative connotation and how it’s selectively applied in an unbalanced way – that leads to some of the inaccurate perceptions out there.
With plenty of evidence, Russians left Chechnya en masse because of some of the extremist bullying against them.
This included signs that read along the lines of Russians don’t leave, we need slaves.
At a now downed forum, a couple of Russians and one other person pasted the silly nonsense of overwhelmingly evil Russians against virtuous Chechens.
In Russia, a mass released movie dealing with Russia’s military campaign in Chechnya touched on the aspect of indiscriminate bombing of civilian areas. This instance and others show that Russians en masse didn’t see the war from a completely good versus evil perspective.
Keep in mind that the more “cleaner” of wars have involved collateral damage as well. It can become difficult to avoid, when the armed combatants are residing in a given civilan area.
Post-Soviet Rusia seems more aware of the need to have an efficient conventional fighting force capability.
” probably have a better recollection of the Falkands war than yourself. I dont recall the N word (nationalism) being used to describe the British reply to the Argentine takeover.”
You probably do, being of greater vintage than me. But clearly you are unaware of The Sun newspaper and its importance in Britain, or how it whips up nationalism anytime Britain heads off to a foreign war. If you think that nationalism does not motivate a majority of Brits when it comes to foreign wars, then you know nothing of Britain at all. Without The influence of the likes of The Sun it is debateable whether or not Britain could actually send troops anywhere. At any rate Las Malvinas asked for help, and I dont see what this has to do with Alexei II in the first place. You took issue with RTs labelling of him, I replied they are right. Do you actually have a counterpoint, or are you going to waste your time pointing at Britain, the US or everywhere else?
”With plenty of evidence, Russians left Chechnya en masse because of some of the extremist bullying against them.”
There is no evidence of the mass migration of Russians from Chechnya before the war started, cos it didnt happen. Admittedly Russians would be loathe to leave their apartments – far and away the biggest thing in the life of a Russian – but life was not unbearable for Russians pre-December 1994. Russian bombing did that.
”At a now downed forum, a couple of Russians and one other person pasted the silly nonsense of overwhelmingly evil Russians against virtuous Chechens.”
This is a total Red Herring. I never described Chechens as virtuous; indeed they are difficult people and most definitely tend towards violence far more quickly than most nationalities. But evil and virtue have no place in the discussion – these are subjective terms with no use. Both the Russians and Chechens were brutal, the main difference being the Russians levelled the place.
”You got it wrong again and this time Ill really make an effort to stay away from here. ”
The first clause is not yours to judge and the second clause has obvously not been borne out. I have made a conscious effort not to offend you here and listen to your points, but as usual you cannot handle disagreement. Its pretty sad, and bearing that in mind I think I should exeunt myself.
No, even Mike is not old enough to remember much about the Falklands War. By his own description, he was back then a “blonde California surfer” who wasn’t “taken seriously among academic types” because of his looks.
I was about 7 or 8 at the time of the Falklands war, but even I remember the wave of nationalism / patriotism that came back with the British Navy…
Nationalism doesn’t tend to be a particular problem in America as far as I can tell – largely because America doesn’t really have a national (racial) identity that underpins its society to the extent that it underpins European societies.
Andy´s last blog post..Word Cloud
”No, even Mike is not old enough to remember much about the Falklands War. By his own description, he was back then a blonde California surfer who wasnt taken seriously among academic types because of his looks.”
db you’re just a total legend:-)
” was about 7 or 8 at the time of the Falklands war, but even I remember the wave of nationalism / patriotism that came back with the British Navy ”
I was the same age then, and its the first war I remember on tv – they used to show the ruins of the Argentine ships. I have read subsequently that there was a massive show of Brittannia Rules the Waves at the time and that Thatcher, who’d been in serious political trouble, was saved by her intervention. I dont actually know why Mike brought up Las Malvinas at all.
db (Chris Doss)
Another example of how disturbed an individual you are.
Of late, I understand that you’ve somewhat acknowledged that alcohol might explain your demented state at these venues.
You’re a “legend’ among trolls.
Andy
Alexy’s so-called “nationalism” embraced the other main faiths in Russia. Key Muslim, Budhist and Jewish leaders in Russia seemed to have been on good terms with him.
I brought up the Falklands for the clearly stated reason I gave.
Not being able to comprehend it explains part of the problem, which is certainly no fault of my own.
Contary to the once gain displayed trolling here, I’m the one being the more earnest.
Sucking up to the db moniker of Chris Doss serves as a confirmation.
Later with the dreck.
There was much havoc in Chehnya before the lead up to the start of the first Chechen war. Russian did in fact leave in liarge numbers for the reason stated. Not all Checehens displayed neagtyive manner. This explains why a good number of Russians remained.
Pardon misspell.
On the matter of looks, Chris Doss’ apparent friend looks like he can lose some weight:
http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/
See how he plays up to the Chris Doss kook.
http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20080602/009552.html
Sorry Andy.
I sure didn’t initiate this.
”Contary to the once gain displayed trolling here, Im the one being the more earnest.”
Not to start a flamewar here, but I havent been trolling. And db is not Chris Doss.
” brought up the Falklands for the clearly stated reason I gave.
Not being able to comprehend it explains part of the problem, which is certainly no fault of my own.”
You brought up an example – which in any case 3 seperate people have shown to be wrong – which had no relevance whatsoever to your point that RT incorrectly called Alexei II a nationalist. He was a nationalist. No, methinks the confusion lies not in Connemara or London or Moscow, but in New York.
And I havent trolled against you. You’re always saying you want earnest discussion; thats what I am giving to you. Stop turning everything into a zero-sum game.
db is an obnxious troll in the Chris Doss manner. Showing the kind of approval for such input constitutes trolling.
You once again overlook what was actaully said pertaining to nationalism and Alexy.
”db is an obnxious troll in the Chris Doss manner. Showing the kind of approval for such input constitutes trolling.”
Its just amazing how he finds the stuff he does. I dont think most actual Californian surfer dudes would even call themselves that!:-)
”You once again overlook what was actaully said pertaining to nationalism and Alexy.”
I overlooked nothing at all and anyone reading can see this. You have not provided a shred of evidence that he was not a nationalist, and worse referred to an example – a wrong one – that Britain was unnaffected by nationalism during the Falklands War. I dont think you even know what you’re trying to get at.
There he goes again with his ongoing misrepresentations.</