Did the Russian invasion of Georgia actuly hurt them mroe than it yhelped them...?

Question

I mean what ever kind of statment they were trying tio make it didn't work the internation comunity is basily taking georgia's side and all the European nations that were refusing the missle defence sheild and other US programs are now singing on do you think russia did it to intdmate their neibors? but it actuly backfired and went the other way and push them closer to the US?

Answer 1

no because it showed the limit we would get involve in that part of the world we sent their troops home from iraq and humanitarian flight the Un would do nothing , russia has veto power, and nato would do nothing , its not a member,

and its pullout can be on its terms , no military intervention to force a quicker pullout of forces

now the rest of the former republics have something to think about  

Answer 2

It hurt them tremendously.  I hope we can soon finish what we started in Iraq, so that we could have better ability to 'deal' with Russia.  They know we are busy now, and need them to help w/Iran (see where negotiation gets you).  And during the Olympics.  Smart, or are they ... ?

Answer 3

There were no invasion. The goal was and is to protect the civilians, according to its obligations as the peacekeeping force and approved by all sides in the conflict and UN.

All russian behaviour is explained as the goal to protect civlians.

Answer 4

The Russians were already in South Ossetia as peacekeepers, pursuant to the truce signed by Georgia and russia in the late 90s, so technically there was no invasion.  The incursion past S. Ossetia into Georgia proper, however, is a response to Georgia's breaking of the truce.

I would argue that Russia succeeded in showing how impotent the west is in supporting Georgia. We can only lob a few rhetorical support bombs and a couple of salvos of UN sanctions, but that's about it.  We're seen as impotent and Georgia will be left high and dry, under the sphere of influence of the Russians.... the same way we left the Hungarians and Czechs high and dry in the 50s and 60s when they too called for western support after a Ruskie military clamp down.

Answer 5

Russia's intent was to strike fear into its enemies and neighbors, that worked fairly well.

Answer 6

The future will tell.  Although, so far I haven't seen any angry mobs protesting in front of any Russian embassies.

Answer 7

Pretty much, they wanted to show military prowess, but this isn't 1939 invasion of Czechslovakia, or the later Russian invasion of Czechslovakia.

This is 2008 and the U.S. and surprisingly the EU and UN won't stand by and watch a democracy be overtaken by the energy goliath in the north, Russia. If Russia provoked a world war the sides would be,

Russia,China,Iran,North Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, Venezuela

U.S., European Union, South America (no Venezuela), Whatever Africa could supply, and basically any other nation.

But that is what a large scale conflict would look like (i.e. WWIII)

But Russia couldn't last through that kind of conflict. The U.S. in WWII proved it could supply a war all by itself. Every weapon used by the Allies was basically American made (Russia being an exception)

But even now, with many factories outside the U.S. we could still produce enough to basically double or triple what Russia would put out.

And Aircraft and Navy wise, we could totally annihalate any country on the face of the planet.

But Russia whatever they intended backfired, they put themselves into this, and if they don't stop soon, we are going to have to take some course of action, what that will be, well that is up to President Bush AND congress.