Putin's speech, very interesting. - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Ongoing wars and conflict resolution, international agreements or lack thereof. Nationhood, secessionist movements, national 'home' government versus internationalist trends and globalisation.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14303050
I used Putin's speech to illustrate that international law is increasingly being used as a tool for political gain.
You can find the short article here: http://lawandgeopoliticsdotcom.wordpress.com/2013/09/12/international-law-is-in-danger/

Im trying to improve my writing and research skills so all comments, either positive or negative, would be greatly appreciated.
#14303055
Mauzeris wrote:The hypocrisy is strong with this one. A mere five years ago it took Russia about five hours to decide and invade a sovereign country without any sort of UN authorization and approval.


What hypocrisy? Georgia had seccessionist troubles in pro-Russian territories. Georgia decided to solve them through a policy of ethnic cleansing, occupation and genocide. Russia actually has autonomous Abkhazian and Ossetian oblasts in its federation. Russia had no reason to have their Ossetian citizens watch their brethren in Georgia be massacred, and rightly chose not to and guaranteed the security of the Abkhazians and Ossetians.

The situation in Georgia remained tense for basically two decades: Georgia attempted to join NATO as part of America's strangle Russia military policy, to ensure Western military cover for their genocide. Immediately after achieving a preliminary agreement with the West, Georgia started their genocidal campaign with an egregious war crime: Specifically, perfidy. Georgia declared a unilateral ceasefire (with the intent to deeceive) to in order to immediately escalate the conflict without warning and invade the entire region. Seriously, Yanks: If Pearl Harbor wasn't aight, Georgia's attack wasn't neither.

Russia was clearly not amused, and intervened to prevent it. And let's be fair: It was a fairly limited intervention. The Russians enforced the Ossetian people's right to self-determination and that's about it. Georgia was not occupied, the regime wasn't toppled, there wasn't a strategic plan to bomb Georgia back into the stone age or to cause particular devastation other than required to achieve the war goals... It was fairly neat, far neater than any intervention the West has ever pulled.

I don't think Russia's policy of guaranteeing the security of certain minorities in the Caucasus or Central Asia is comparable to the West's fairly gratuitous blood for oil adventures in the middle east, or the regime changes that America is so fond of in order to further a right-wing hegemony all over the globe.
#14303405
KlassWar wrote:
What hypocrisy? Georgia had seccessionist troubles in pro-Russian territories. Georgia decided to solve them through a policy of ethnic cleansing, occupation and genocide. Russia actually has autonomous Abkhazian and Ossetian oblasts in its federation. Russia had no reason to have their Ossetian citizens watch their brethren in Georgia be massacred, and rightly chose not to and guaranteed the security of the Abkhazians and Ossetians.

The situation in Georgia remained tense for basically two decades: Georgia attempted to join NATO as part of America's strangle Russia military policy, to ensure Western military cover for their genocide. Immediately after achieving a preliminary agreement with the West, Georgia started their genocidal campaign with an egregious war crime: Specifically, perfidy. Georgia declared a unilateral ceasefire (with the intent to deeceive) to in order to immediately escalate the conflict without warning and invade the entire region. Seriously, Yanks: If Pearl Harbor wasn't aight, Georgia's attack wasn't neither.

Russia was clearly not amused, and intervened to prevent it. And let's be fair: It was a fairly limited intervention. The Russians enforced the Ossetian people's right to self-determination and that's about it. Georgia was not occupied, the regime wasn't toppled, there wasn't a strategic plan to bomb Georgia back into the stone age or to cause particular devastation other than required to achieve the war goals... It was fairly neat, far neater than any intervention the West has ever pulled.

I don't think Russia's policy of guaranteeing the security of certain minorities in the Caucasus or Central Asia is comparable to the West's fairly gratuitous blood for oil adventures in the middle east, or the regime changes that America is so fond of in order to further a right-wing hegemony all over the globe.


Russia couldn't give two shits about Ossetians or Abkhazians. Their intervention was purely to weaken Georgia and demonstrate to them what happens when they try and leave the Russian sphere of influence. It was also a direct threat to the Ukraine and any of the other Caucus nations about who runs the neighbourhood.
#14347170
Mauzeris wrote:The hypocrisy is strong with this one. A mere five years ago it took Russia about five hours to decide and invade a sovereign country without any sort of UN authorization and approval.



Short lines of communication !

Sounds efficient ! :-)
#14367507
Mauzeris wrote:The hypocrisy is strong with this one. A mere five years ago it took Russia about five hours to decide and invade a sovereign country without any sort of UN authorization and approval.
Yes its sad that it took so long for them to make their mind up. Georgia raised its hand against mother Russia, they should suffer accordingly.

Zionism was never a religious movement basing i[…]

Russia-Ukraine War 2022

Interesting video on why Macron wants to deploy F[…]

https://x.com/Maks_NAFO_FELLA/status/1801949727069[…]

I submit this informed piece by the late John Pil[…]