WAR Georgian officials in US warn of Russian buildup

(I didn't see this on the forum, and it looked important. As for text I bolded, it is not directly on-topic, but it made me think of something. How long have we been "trying to improve relations with Russia"? It seems like forever. Is it really plausable that we can be in the doghouse with them so often, unless Russia likes to keep us there?)

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gPjlYSiO-EKxcDXuB6c662zsLkhQD98J288O0

By DESMOND BUTLER – 10 hours ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — Georgia's defense minister is warning about Russia's military buildup as he meets with Obama administration officials in Washington this week.

In an interview with The Associated Press, Defense Minister Vasil Sikharulidze and Georgia's ambassador to Washington, Batu Kutelia, said that Russia has vastly improved communication and supply lines on breakaway Georgian territory since the two countries fought a war last August.

Sikharulidze is meeting officials this week, including Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Thursday, at a time when the U.S. administration is trying to improve relations with Russia.

President Barack Obama is heading to Russia next month for a summit meeting with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, as the United State seeks Moscow's cooperation on vital policy goals including reining in North Korean and Iranian nuclear programs. Though Washington considers Georgia a close ally, Tbilisi fears that U.S. support could flag.

The Georgian officials said that Russia has been building military bases, storage facilities for supplies and roads in South Ossetia and Abkhazia, Georgian breakaway territories that Moscow has recognized as independent. Georgia also says that the Kremlin maintains 6,000 Russian troops in each of the two regions in violation of cease-fire agreements.

"They are better prepared than they were last year," Sikharulidze said.

The five-day war in August followed a buildup of tension over Russian support for the separatist regions and pro-Western Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili's drive for NATO membership.

The Georgian officials would not speculate whether Moscow is preparing for another war but said the buildup in positions very close to Tbilisi, the capital, left Georgia more vulnerable.

"If they made the decision, it might require five hours for them to reach the capital," Kutelia said.

The United States and European Union have urged Moscow to withdraw its recognition of the separatist provinces and says Russia's military presence violates a cease-fire agreement that stipulated troops must return to prewar positions. Russia has ignored the criticism and recently signed deals giving it control over the borders separating Abkhazia and South Ossetia from Georgian-controlled territory.

But on Tuesday, Moscow denied that it was building up forces and said it may station fewer troops in the breakaway regions than it planned after last year's war. At the time Russia said it would maintain 3,800 troops in each region, but First Deputy Defense Minister Alexander Kolmakov said Tuesday the target numbers could be smaller.

Sikharulidze said the buildup also could be intended to exert psychological pressure on Georgia's government.

"They may be trying to imbalance us with this threat," he said.

Copyright © 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

From AlJazeeeeerrrrraaaa:

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2009/06/20096284247607487.html

Blast damages Georgia railway line


The blast comes just days after the breakaway
region of South Ossetia held elections [EPA]

An explosion in Georgia has damaged a railway line connecting the east and west of the country.

Local officials were quick to describe the blast that struck the Tbilisi-to-Zugdidi line on Tuesday as a "terrorist attack".

"I think it's a pure terrorist attack because some explosives and a clock mechanism were used," Zurab Gogokhia, the chief of Georgian Railways for the west of the country, said.

The blast occurred at about 3.30am (23:30 GMT), two hours before a passenger train was due to travel the route.

"Several metres of the railway line are destroyed and repair works are under way and it will be reopened very soon," Gogokhia said.

The explosion took place near the village of Ingiri, about 300km from the capital Tbilisi, on one of the main routes for passenger and cargo trains.

But an interior ministry official said the route was not one of those used to ship Caspian oil from Azerbaijan to Georgia's Black Sea coast.

The blast comes just days after Georgia's breakaway region of South Ossetia held elections.

Georgia attempted to retake South Ossetia last year, sparking a five-day war with Russia, which backs the province.

Moscow subsequently recognised both South Ossetia and Georgia's second breakaway region of Abkhazia as independent countries.

The site of the explosion was close to the de facto border with Abkhazia, but there was no immediate evidence of any separatist involvement.

Communism always has envisioned world domination, either through subversion or force of arms. I believe the original Bolsheviks believed that, and that Russia has never really deviated from that objective.

So exactly what does the U.S. protecting Geogia do *for* the U.S.?

Sort of goes for Taiwan. Hell China floods us with all their cjeap crap so why exactly do we need to protect Taiwan? So they can add to the crap flood coming in?

We are broke folks. We need to fix *us* and start telling some of these other little countries to fend for themselves with a few exceptions.

Satanta said:

So exactly what does the U.S. protecting Geogia do *for* the U.S.?

Sort of goes for Taiwan. Hell China floods us with all their cjeap crap so why exactly do we need to protect Taiwan? So they can add to the crap flood coming in?

We are broke folks. We need to fix *us* and start telling some of these other little countries to fend for themselves with a few exceptions.

Click to expand...

NATO mission, Sat. We are part of NATO, and NATO has interests to defend Georgia. So there we are.

The countries counter to NATO would love for NATO to dissolve, starting with us.

TheSearcher said:

NATO mission, Sat. We are part of NATO, and NATO has interests to defend Georgia. So there we are.

The countries counter to NATO would love for NATO to dissolve, starting with us.

Click to expand...

I don't disagree, Searcher, but couldn't some of those NATO countries A COUPLE OF THOUSAND MILES CLOSER get involved?

Wilbur said:

I don't disagree, Searcher, but couldn't some of those NATO countries A COUPLE OF THOUSAND MILES CLOSER get involved?

Click to expand...

I believe they are, but we are certainly the big guns.

this

is a spurious argument:


NATO mission, Sat. We are part of NATO, and NATO has interests to defend Georgia. So there we are.

The countries counter to NATO would love for NATO to dissolve, starting with us.



NATO is involved because both Klintoon and gw and the NWO were making it a point to encircle the old Soviet Union with military and missile bases to expand the NWO empire. It was a plan of bankers, politicians, and certain military types when it appeared that Russia had collapsed and couldn't prevent encirclement. It was pushing by the USA trying to make Georgia part of Nato as a larger plan to take over and possess and control former Soviet client states that supposedly made Georgia 'important'.


NATO in and of itself, other than the US it is basically a EUROPEAN entity, and the EUROPEANS showed just how willing they were to fight for Georgia.

They WERE NOT. Even gw and condi had to back down when they stood alone, and it became evident the Russians WERE willing to fight this time in their own backyard and in territory they used to own.

Like Sat said, OTHER than the now defunct dreams of 'empire' on the part of American neo-cons and die hard Soviet Union haters, WHAT STRATEGIC GOAL of either Nato or the USA is worth getting into a nuclear war with Russia over?


What do they have that we ABSOLUTELY NEED to be willing to go to war, a nuclear war, with Russia over?


Besides of course, Sat's comment that is so true today that very few members can miss it - WE ARE BROKE. WE can't afford any more foreign adventures.

dragonslayer2001 said:

is a spurious argument:


NATO mission, Sat. We are part of NATO, and NATO has interests to defend Georgia. So there we are.

The countries counter to NATO would love for NATO to dissolve, starting with us.



NATO is involved because both Klintoon and gw and the NWO were making it a point to encircle the old Soviet Union with military and missile bases to expand the NWO empire. It was a plan of bankers, politicians, and certain military types when it appeared that Russia had collapses and couldn't prevent encirclement. It was pushing by the USA trying to make Georgia part of Nato as a larger plan to take over and possess and control former Soviet client states that supposedly made Georgia 'important'.


NATO in and of itself, other than the US it is basically a EUROPEAN entity, and the EUROPEANS showed just how willing they were to fight for Georgia.

They WERE NOT. Even gw and condi had to back down when they stood alone, and it became evident the Russians WERE willing to fight this time in their own backyard and in territory they used to own.

Like Sat said, OTHER than the now defunct dreams of 'empire' on the part of American neo-cons and die hard Soviet Union haters, WHAT STRATEGIC GOAL of either Nato or the USA is worth getting into a nuclear war with Russia over?


What do they have that we ABSOLUTELY NEED to be willing to go to war, a nuclear war, with Russia over?


Besides of course, Sat's comment that is so true today that very few members can miss it - WE ARE BROKE. WE can't afford any more foreign adventures.

Click to expand...

Sure. Let's let Russia have Georgia, then. Maybe that'll be enough breathing room.

I trust Czar Putin, and his appointed lackey Medvedev just slightly less than our own Fascist-in-Chief Barack "Benito" Hussein Obama...

Just sayin'...

yeah

it is called realpolitic.


Sure. Let's let Russia have Georgia, then


First, define Georgia's vital strategic interest for a now broke United States.

Second, tell what you are willing to do to defend Georgia. In detail. How far are you willing for all of US to go to defend Georgia?

dragonslayer2001 said:

it is called realpolitic.


Sure. Let's let Russia have Georgia, then


First, define Georgia's vital strategic interest for a now broke United States.

Second, tell what you are willing to do to defend Georgia. In detail. How far are you willing for all of US to go to defend Georgia?

Click to expand...

In the first two World Wars, the enemies gained ground through open, naked aggression. After WWII the USSR in particular kept taking ground, but despite the cost, the West, led by the USA, stood in gap as much as we could.

In this current age, the gaining of ground is predicated on how much shame we can tolerate for being labeled "imperialist" ourselves, or placing fiscal constraints on just how much we're willing to risk in defending the weak. With your attitude, I guess you don't mind the other side winning, just so long as this technique is used and you have no blame tied to YOU.

As for strategic interest re: Georgia, let's look back at WWII. What was the strategic case for US going to war over the taking of the Sudetenland? None, which is why we didn't plunge in when Hitler took it. We helped a little when things spread to England, but still didn't quite enter the war at that point, either. But when we did get in, we were forced to confront ALL OF THAT in the end.

So, Russia takes Georgia in 2009. Do you think they'll stop there? Does history support a country stopping at just ONE conquest if someone doesn't stand in the way? In particular, do you think Russia will just take Georgia and STOP? History doesn't support any of that.

We are, once again, faced with multiple threats, and our biggest supposedly-former enemy is trying to once again consolidate power. If the cosolidation proceeds, their sights will be trained more solidly on us. Letting Russia just suck a former USSR member back in is just the same old road that will lead to a conflict at some point between the USA and Russia, that's the trend that always transpires when a blind eye is turned on this sort of thing.

I do not have a simple solution to this particular situation, but putting our fingers in our ears and staring at our navels is certainly not it.

Regardless, we ARE there, as a NATO member, and if Russia goes forward with their feasting on Georgia, NATO will either crash that party or will limp away in disgrace. We shall see.

TheSearcher said:

In the first two World Wars, the enemies gained ground through open, naked aggression. After WWII the USSR in particular kept taking ground, but despite the cost, the West, led by the USA, stood in gap as much as we could.

In this current age, the gaining of ground is predicated on how much shame we can tolerate for being labeled "imperialist" ourselves, or placing fiscal constraints on just how much we're willing to risk in defending the weak. With your attitude, I guess you don't mind the other side winning, just so long as this technique is used and you have no blame tied to YOU.

As for strategic interest re: Georgia, let's look back at WWII. What was the strategic case for US going to war over the taking of the Sudetenland? None, which is why we didn't plunge in when Hitler took it. We helped a little when things spread to England, but still didn't quite enter the war at that point, either. But when we did get in, we were forced to confront ALL OF THAT in the end.

So, Russia takes Georgia in 2009. Do you think they'll stop there? Does history support a country stopping at just ONE conquest if someone doesn't stand in the way? In particular, do you think Russia will just take Georgia and STOP? History doesn't support any of that.

We are, once again, faced with multiple threats, and our biggest supposedly-former enemy is trying to once again consolidate power. If the cosolidation proceeds, their sights will be trained more solidly on us. Letting Russia just suck a former USSR member back in is just the same old road that will lead to a conflict at some point between the USA and Russia, that's the trend that always transpires when a blind eye is turned on this sort of thing.

I do not have a simple solution to this particular situation, but putting our fingers in our ears and staring at our navels is certainly not it.

Regardless, we ARE there, as a NATO member, and if Russia goes forward with their feasting on Georgia, NATO will either crash that party or will limp away in disgrace. We shall see.

Click to expand...

All true, however the one REAL BIG issue is....

WE.
CANNOT.
AFFORD.
IT.

The U.S. is on the edge of becoming Socialist or owned by the Chinese. At this particular point in time if Russia decided to go full-scale into Georfia we might mont an defense but it will not last with things going on in two countries and overt threats from two more.

Then add in the dept and the Chinese.

We got problems bro and trying to rescue everyone else on the planet is only going to exasperate it.

Satanta said:

All true, however the one REAL BIG issue is....

WE.
CANNOT.
AFFORD.
IT.

The U.S. is on the edge of becoming Socialist or owned by the Chinese. At this particular point in time if Russia decided to go full-scale into Georfia we might mont an defense but it will not last with things going on in two countries and overt threats from two more.

Then add in the dept and the Chinese.

We got problems bro and trying to rescue everyone else on the planet is only going to exasperate it.

Click to expand...

We don't need to go full scale into Georgia, but merely stand in the way. Our forces are ALREADY THERE. Whatever mission we mount will start with assets already waiting to do so, if required. Bringing them back stateside or redeploying to another hot spot will not cost us any less.

As for how long we'd last, it may not be long. But it may not have to be long, because I'm not too sure how bad Russia wants Georgia as it stands now. Why make it easy for them when we don't have to?

Of course, if we up and leave, then we have the fine knowledge and happy certainty that another chink of the New Soviet will have fallen into place. We will be no stronger, but they will be.

And we have the chance at some really CHOICE guilt to savor in the knowing we just let Georgia fall...

I know full well all the things we face, all the impediments to action that cloud our judgement. If you look at the players, it is almost like a plan was coming together...

It seems to me, with us knowing we've been manipulated to this perilous point by our rivals, perhaps fighting back is the best response? Or do you suggest we back down, and let their plans come to full fruition?

As I tried to say: The plans of conquest by one's enemies don't halt when you cooperate. I do not have a specific game plan to stop those plans, but tucking tail hoping the alligator eats us last is not it.

once

again you speak in generalities that can be argued till the cows come home. And you may not have been keeping up on current events, but it is US who bombed the hell out of Serbia to support a massive drug/criminal cartel who took control of Bosnia (much of our involvement was based on lies about how bad the Serbians actually were - the Muzzies were just as horrible - we just didn't hear about it in our controlled press).

We also invaded and destroyed and occupied Iraq based on lies and deceptions.

We have also invaded and occupied Afghanistan for years and years longer than we should have stayed - and since the neo-con plans for a Greater American Empire predated 911, I think that was all planned out in advance also.

As for Georgia, it was the Georgians who invaded S. Ossetia and shelled and murdered Russian peacekeeping forces, and the Russians retaliated. Kinda like we would I am sure if Mexico shot and shelled New Mexico and then invaded it to 'take it back'.

Whether you like it or not, much of the world considers the USA the military aggressor after 8 years of gw.


Georgia has no strategic interests for a failing American Empire. We are going to have to do what all Empires have done when the money needs far exceed our ability to pay for. Pull in the horns and pull back.


That is reality. You had better get used to it, cause there ain't NO WAY AROUND IT. A lot worse is about to follow. gw and the gang shot our wad, all for naught. They should have saved it for when we really needed it, and that time is fast approaching.

I'm not trying to absolve myself of blame. I argued years ago that Iraq and Afghanistan were a WASTE - and that we WOULD NEED OUR MILITARY RESOURCES IN THE NEAR FUTURE. I'm not against the projection of military force for the right reasons and I never have been. I am not a pacifist.

I rightly saw years ago what is now happening, and I warned against the squandering of our military power and our financial resources. Right here on TB. Many many times. You can look it up. Don't get mad at me because I am now proven right.

He who defends everything defends nothing.

I

suggest you resurrect the old thread on the first Georgian War.


But it may not have to be long, because I'm not too sure how bad Russia wants Georgia as it stands now.


There is ample evidence there that the Russians WERE willing to go all the way, including nuclear war. And at that time the USA hadn't fallen into the financial catastrophe that we are now in, though we were hovering then and even years before.


Other than 'standing' up to the Russians, a nebulous argument if there ever was one, WHAT IS THE STRATEGIC NECESSITY OF FIGHTING FOR GEORGIA?



What the hell do they have that is worth one American life? And what makes them different from all the other nations in the world that ARE currently in military strife ? (Georgia is NOT being attacked right now -the idiot that started the whole thing last time is just 'worried' at the present time).

dragonslayer2001 said:

again you speak in generalities that can be argued till the cows come home. And you may not have been keeping up on current events, but it is US who bombed the hell out of Serbia to support a massive drug/criminal cartel who took control of Bosnia (much of our involvement was based on lies about how bad the Serbians actually were - the Muzzies were just as horrible - we just didn't hear about it in our controlled press).

We also invaded and destroyed and occupied Iraq based on lies and deceptions.

We have also invaded and occupied Afghanistan for years and years longer than we should have stayed - and since the neo-con plans for a Greater American Empire predated 911, I think that was all planned out in advance also.

As for Georgia, it was the Georgians who invaded S. Ossetia and shelled and murdered Russian peacekeeping forces, and the Russians retaliated. Kinda like we would I am sure if Mexico shot and shelled New Mexico and then invaded it to 'take it back'.

Whether you like it or not, much of the world considers the USA the military aggressor after 8 years of gw.


Georgia has no strategic interests for a failing American Empire. We are going to have to do what all Empires have done when the money needs far exceed our ability to pay for. Pull in the horns and pull back.


That is reality. You had better get used to it, cause there ain't NO WAY AROUND IT. A lot worse is about to follow. gw and the gang shot our wad, all for naught. They should have saved it for when we really needed it, and that time is fast approaching.

I'm not trying to absolve myself of blame. I argued years ago that Iraq and Afghanistan were a WASTE - and that we WOULD NEED OUR MILITARY RESOURCES IN THE NEAR FUTURE. I'm not against the projection of military force for the right reasons and I never have been. I am not a pacifist.

I rightly saw years ago what is now happening, and I warned against the squandering of our military power and our financial resources. Right here on TB. Many many times. You can look it up. Don't get mad at me because I am now proven right.

He who defends everything defends nothing.

Click to expand...

I do not consider you a pacifist, never would I suggest it. As much as we might spar, I have never considered that a possibility.

My general point (yes, general) is that we ARE already there, and leaving does not save us any money, especially considering that leaving would really mean going to another hotspot. We'll spend that money we don't have, anyway. We always do.

Look, the cut-n-dried response of leaving for fiscal reasons doesn't work, because with the way things are now, other factors will ensure that our fiscal situation doesn't improve if we do so. The logical thing to do in that case is to fight the enemy. It's like walking into a bear's den, and saying to yourself "Gee, this was stupid. Mr. Bear please eat me, since I'm kinda dumb." No, rather, you fight and kick and push your way out of the den rather than die without a fight.

For all the libertarian arguments of avoiding entanglements, we are indeed entangled. George Washington can wag his bony finger at us from the grave all he wishes, it doesn't remove the reality that we ARE entangled. If we have some blame in letting the geopolitical situation go so sour, then we bear some responsibility in affecting a remedy. Can't do that if you go away and hide, hoping the enemy sees pity.

Here are some specifics:

1. We leave, Russia takes Georgia. Morally, it's wrong, but we can't feed our people morals, I get that.
2. Russia now has an enhanced control over the gas lines running through Georgia. Great, more blackmail. But at least we're saving money.
3. More ex-Soviet states fall in line due to the blackmail. Well, at least we don't buy gas from Russia, why do we care. Wish we were saving some more money, but we're still broke, and our trade overseas is beginning to drop.
4. Russia decides to keep pushing, and we can't fight back now, because we "pulled in the horns" while they extended theirs. What will the Bear devour next?

Russia, in my estimation, has a specific plan of domination that includes closing us out and encricling us. We may be witnessing that right now, and the speed with which that happens may make this quaint argument we're having moot.

Actually, this whole argument between you and I may never reach closure, since you believe the lies about 'Russian Peackeepers' and who started what over there.

dragonslayer2001 said:

What the hell do they have that is worth one American life?

Click to expand...

That's not what this is about. It is about what will the other side use against us when we let them get the prize.

dragonslayer2001 said:

And what makes them different from all the other nations in the world that ARE currently in military strife?

Click to expand...

Nothing, strangely. Do you suggest we ignore the Korean penninsula, too? Why should they get the benefit of our assistance if we won't render it to Georgia?

dragonslayer2001 said:

(Georgia is NOT being attacked right now -the idiot that started the whole thing last time is just 'worried' at the present time).

Click to expand...

Funny, the second article I posted was about sabotage to the rail line into the city. Was that not an attack?

BTW, from Sakashvilli's point of view, he was repelling an impending, if not active, invasion by Russian forces from Abkazia.

Hello

Searcher. It is a huge problem, I agree. There is a lot of pain coming to US now and it is only going to get worse. I am not running the show, and neither are you. There have been a handful of people who have been in control, made the rules, decided to heavily depreciate the US greenback and flood the world with them, and try to dominate too much to chew for the last two decades. And that is not counting LBJ's 'great society' welfare state that we have been saddled with for decades.

The politicians and central bankers have ruined US. I hate it. And I have to learn how to deal with it.

Your last post pretty well lays out what is going to happen. Russia is going to eat Georgia, or at least call the shots there. As much as Russia is also hurting financially, they most likely won't hurt nearly as badly as we are going to.

But that is the reality. Cicero said 'the sinews of war is gold' and he was right. You CANNOT finance war or far flung military outposts without it. And if the banksters can't come up with another workable scheme that doesn't include China buying more worthless debt we are going to have a lot of very bad, tough choices to make.

I don't think you can even imagine a time where we cannot afford to have a military presence somewhere, but where we cannot afford to even SHIP them home. I can.

We are broke. That is going to sink in more and more and more. By the end of summer I expect another huge financial bomb to hit. Derivatives.

You and I didn't create them or play with them. The people at the top did. But they are going to blow all of US up.

It is a hard ugly future we now face. A lot of 'allies' are not going to be 'affordable' very soon. They will have to fend for themselves. We won't have the money to fend for them.

I don't like it, but that is what is happening now and will continue to happen.

dragonslayer2001 said:

Searcher. It is a huge problem, I agree. There is a lot of pain coming to US now and it is only going to get worse. I am not running the show, and neither are you. There have been a handful of people who have been in control, made the rules, decided to heavily depreciate the US greenback and flood the world with them, and try to dominate too much to chew for the last two decades. And that is not counting LBJ's 'great society' welfare state that we have been saddled with for decades.

The politicians and central bankers have ruined US. I hate it. And I have to learn how to deal with it.

Your last post pretty well lays out what is going to happen. Russia is going to eat Georgia, or at least call the shots there. As much as Russia is also hurting financially, they most likely won't hurt nearly as badly as we are going to.

But that is the reality. Cicero said 'the sinews of war is gold' and he was right. You CANNOT finance war or far flung military outposts without it. And if the banksters can't come up with another workable scheme that doesn't include China buying more worthless debt we are going to have a lot of very bad, tough choices to make.

I don't think you can even imagine a time where we cannot afford to have a military presence somewhere, but where we cannot afford to even SHIP them home. I can.

We are broke. That is going to sink in more and more and more. By the end of summer I expect another huge financial bomb to hit. Derivatives.

You and I didn't create them or play with them. The people at the top did. But they are going to blow all of US up.

It is a hard ugly future we now face. A lot of 'allies' are not going to be 'affordable' very soon. They will have to fend for themselves. We won't have the money to fend for them.

I don't like it, but that is what is happening now and will continue to happen.

Click to expand...

I can't say I disagree with the dire situation we're in. We're getting screwed, no doubt about it, and it's not consensual.

One

more quick post, I gotta go.

Korea.

I do expect a REAL WAR there soon. It will eat US up in a lot of ways if it happens. I call it a REAL WAR because we are going to face a huge, well armed (even with their old tech), hard core people for the first time since, well probably since WWII.

I think the N. Koreans are now as well armed as the Japanese or Germans during WWII. Neither they nor the Chinese were as well prepared as the N. Koreans are now during the last Korean War.

I don't think the Vietnamese had the military wherewithal the North seems to have right now.

If we fight there it is going to get very bad. I think we will 'win', but I also think it will be a Phyrric victory in the worst way. It will finish collapsing US financially and militarily if it happens.

dragonslayer2001 said:

more quick post, I gotta go.

Korea.

I do expect a REAL WAR there soon. It will eat US up in a lot of ways if it happens. I call it a REAL WAR because we are going to face a huge, well armed (even with their old tech), hard core people for the first time since, well probably since WWII.

I think the N. Koreans are now as well armed as the Japanese or Germans during WWII. Neither they nor the Chinese were as well prepared as the N. Koreans are now during the last Korean War.

I don't think the Vietnamese had the military wherewithal the North seems to have right now.

If we fight there it is going to get very bad. I think we will 'win', but I also think it will be a Phyrric victory in the worst way. It will finish collapsing US financially and militarily if it happens.

Click to expand...

I share your concerns, and the gulf between what we can do and what may need to be done may force our hands to push "THE" Button. And then, all bets are off.

As much as you worry about Russia nuking us over Georgia, and I don't really blame you, I think hostilities in NK have a much greater chance of starting a nuclear conflict. The Norks seem very determined to start WWIII.

One good reason to keep Georgia free and independent is because there's a major oil pipeline running across it from the Caspian Sea area.

Yeah, I'm sure the usual suspects around here will trot out the old, tired, Code Pink "no blood for oil" faggoty, peacenik horse shit, but try as you might you can't make your car run on tap water.

Oil is a strategic necessity - like it or not.

Last time Russia went after Georgia, we didn't lift a finger. Sure, we protested a lot. But, in the end, Georgia thought we were a bunch of crank yankers.

As for Russia keeping us in the doghouse, it's not that hard. Everytime we turn around, our POS POTUS is apologizing for the actions of the last, and every other president before him. So, they tend to keep the upper hand in this mess.

Jmho