Georgian conflict is none of the USA's business

Question

I may not agree with what russia is doing in Georgia... but what right does the USA have telling Russia to stop what they are doing as they went into Iraq on false pretences?

Answer 1

Did George Washington run away like a coward? No, he didn't.  

Answer 2

I totally agree, let them figure it out. If we get involved, we might have to support them with resources, which either means taken them away from Iraq.  We have our own problems, and they are in Afghanistan, if we take away resources from Iraq, let them go to where we need them.  

Answer 3

i'm with ya on this one..    this civil strife has been going on for years..  usa has no right in this.  

allies ? friends ?  bush has friends right in his own borders he ought to be 'helping'.  

and really.. he needs to clean up the iraq mess he made first.

Answer 4

You don't care that people are even dying.  You're just using this as another excuse to hate on Bush about Iraq.  The two are not comparable.

Answer 5

Russia had no problem condemning the US invasion of Iraq.

Russia has invaded an ally, without provocation, and we have every right to tell Russia to stop.

Answer 6

Finally, a reasonable post.

I find it interesting that the same people that complain about being in Iraq are the same ones demanding that we do something about Russia.

We have two choices: 1. Continue being the world police. This does not seem to be too popular nor worked out all that well for us.

2. Do nothing about Russia.

So, for you people that complain about Bush and complain about being in Iraq and now want us to do something about Russia- which one is it that you want?

Keep in mind that if we even think about going near Russia it will not be quick or easy. You talking several years (if not decades) of American occupation.

Answer 7

Sooooo we should turn our backs and whistle?  

Answer 8

Georgia is a friend and ally of the US.

We have not yet signed any binding treaties thus we are not obliged to fight WWIII over this issue and likely will not.  However if Russia occipies Georgia I think they will have their second Afghanistan.

Eartern European countries that border Georgia have every reason to want Russia out of Georgia.  they DO have binding treaties with NATO.  They will have every reason to prodive material and logistical support to the Georgian people, whether it be official, like Nato support of the muhajideen in Afghanistan, or not.

The situation is dangerous.  Lets hope the Russians understand that and limit thier incusion and their objectives to only include the two "breakaway republics" within the state of Georgia.

Answer 9

Well, first Georgia is a US ally that is attempting to get entrance into NATO.

Secondly- Russia is overthrowing a democratic, free country.  The US deposed a despot dictator in Iraq, who tortured, raped, and killed millions of his own citizens, as well as Iranians.

If you cannot see the difference, I feel very sorry for your limited intellect.

Answer 10

I have to agree with you.

Answer 11

We don't have any right to tell the what to do, and your last statement was just stupid!

Answer 12

first of all it is not a question, second of all   are you insane?  Russia destroys  Georgia to spread control over the oil pipeline. Never mind humanitarian crisis.  We do need  to act!  

Answer 13

Well sorry is Georgia run by a ruthless murdering dictator. Georgia is a democratic breakaway state, that has chosen to be pro western. II am old enough to remember the Cold War. It was always a menace. Subversive operations, Afghanistan, Vietnam, you could even argue US backing of Israel came from the fact that the arabs aligned with Russia. The US did not barrage into Iraq in a tantrum it was planned as early as the first Gulf War, back then requiring 300,000 troops. Iraq could of at any time rolled back, capitulated and it would have been very difficult to justify. I never agreed with IRaq but these two can't be compared. This is just as blatant a land grab as you can get.    

If Russia thinks we will all sit by in Europe and the US and not restart the cold war because we want cheap gas and a strong economy,then they are wrong. 7 of the G8 have demanded this invasion halts, Russia is isolated so I'd have to say we're already on a good footing with a new Cold War. If Russia want to behave like "OLD RUSSIA" then we shall treat them as so, leaving them with a pittance of trading partners and bankrupting her all over again.  

Answer 14

You are exactlyy right. America has lost its power to lead, and to be an example for other country's. We also started a war on resources, mainly oil, what is next....food, water?

Answer 15

Well, the only other option is to ignore it and that is something we cannot really do. I doubt that if this escalates into a full out war, that Georgia could defeat Russia. So, America is somewhat obliged to give Georgia support.

Answer 16

Bush never does good in your eyes does he.

Answer 17

Why is it that the USA supports Tibet's independence from China, but refuses to accept that South Ossetia is independent from Georgia ( has been since 1991 ) and the fact that most South Ossetians want to be reunited with North ossetia and become Russian civilians?

You are ALL brain dead . Learn a little bit of history and you'll see Georgia has been ethnically cleansing and murdering civilians to try and gain back old territory

Go Russia. **** them up.

Answer 18

No it is not you are correct ad if the Ukraine, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Lithuania, Estonia, Romania, and so on are attacked next that will be none of our business either.  Might get to be our business after Germany, Austria, Italy, Denmark, Holland and France fall but not even sure about that.  The comparison to Iraq is laughable if it were not for the fact that people make it as a serious comparison; the Iraqi government brought the war on themselves by refusing to abide by the cease fire agreement and thumbing their nose at the world for years.  Georgia has abided by UN rules and the separate areas deemed independent by Russia are not recognized by anyone else including the UN; they were part of the nation of Georgia when it was made a member of the UN and the fact the Russians made the residents of those areas Russian citizens instead of citizens from those  "independent areas" says a lot about the true reason the Russians invaded.  The closest parallel to this would be the first Gulf War but that was not a unilateral action but a multi-national one.  Even in this example the Russia should be viewed as Saddam Hussein's forces moving into Kuwait and not the coalition,  Their was no false pretenses about the invasion of Iraq-they violated the cease fire by not allowing UN weapons inspectors to verify that the WMD's they had were all destroyed and that is a legal justification for war.  What UN requirement has Georgia violated that gives the Russians the right to take unilateral action?

Answer 19

It is, because Georgia wanted to join NATO of which the USA is a member, and that may have been a contributing factor for Russia invading.

Its the business of several countries.

Answer 20

http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2008/0...

So yeah, the United States is telling Russia what to do (well "requesting", although I expect the distinction is lost on most everyone here).  Keep in mind though this call for a cease fire is for the sake of peace negotiations, which is the standard form.  It's generally considered to be not in good faith to be discussing the peace you want while elsewhere your soldiers are trying to kill each other.

And why not?  Russia has made their point.  Perhaps now it's time to call the dogs off.

On the Iraq issue, well it was just far too complicated to really get into here.  Bush wanted a cause for war, AND a breach of the cease fire treaty.  I have to say that even if the WMDs had been real, we would have only had the latter not the former.  Beyond that it's not like we didn't have causus belli, just none that Bush really put any effort into selling.  (I like to say that his was a failure of leadership not of command.)

Jimosai, I think Georgia wanted to join NATO because they knew that would tick off the Russians.  I don't believe any of the NATO members were seriously entertaining the notion.

And, even if they were, that's not the United States' interest in this.  I mean your right.  It is the business of several countries.  It's the business of the world even.  The U.S. poking their nose into things is just their actually participating in world affairs.  As opposed to taking a let's everyone mind their own business attitude, that is more typical of the nations of the world.

Brent E, the U.S. should not get too involved in affairs that are the affairs of Europeans?  Where have I heard that before?

swf42, the U.S. has a right and an obligation as a member of the world community.  It's what neighbors do.

Uber Patriot, that is a joke right?  If it is, it's a good one.  Although I would never characterise George Washington's running away as "like a coward", he did do plenty of it.  The Revolutionary War amounted to one retreat after another for us.  The Continental Army was retreating when they crossed the Delaware the first time, but not the second time.

Oh Phate, Phate, Phate, your point would be a good one, if it were true that the United States supports Tibet's independance from China.

http://www.voanews.com/english/archive/2...

"We believe that the Dalai Lama could play a very favorable role... given his stated position that he does not seek political independence for Tibet"

That there are people in the United States who support Tibetan independance is irrelevant.

bartliddy, um no?  I guess it wasn't a "yes or no" question, but I'll pick "no" as my answer still the same.

bmwdrive, the difference is, well if you want to find the bad guys look for the military aggressors.  In Saddam's time Iraq=military aggressor (Iran & Kuwait).  Now Georgia=military aggressor (against Ossetia).  It's really not more complicated than that.  And no, Russia is not a militray aggressor for attacking Georgia (except perhaps by the most strict definition), because they were coming to the aid of their neighbor Ossetia.

Oh and Putin as far as I know is not "a despot dictator" ... "who tortured, raped, and killed millions of his own citizens".

Bear F, the 7 out of the G8 thing is not a good thing to draw conclusions from since, just as with the earlier State Department statement these are practically required for appearances' sake.  Which, since I think of it, makes it interesting that people need to make a big deal out every foreign policy statement that comes out of this government.  Do people get into as much of a huff when the Foreign Minister of Denmark makes an official statement?  No they do not.

GunnyC, you make an interesting point about the separatist provinces of Georgia not being recognized by the U.N.  However I have to say that military aggression is not a point of law.  It is something someone's tanks are doing to someone else's people, regardless of the way it says things are supposed to be on paper.

Oh but they are Russian citizens regardless of the devious nature of that.  What that means is they would count as foreign (Russian) nationals on Georgian soil, with all the international legal implications.