Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Boeman

Russian Tanks Invade Georgia

Recommended Posts

Or afflicted with a seriously blocked nose you doofus! :P

BTW does this war finally break the "no democracies have ever declared war on each other" thingie?

No, because the people that subscribe to that theory always have umpteen caveats to go with it. Like the democracy has to be more than five years old, has to be in a certian part of the world, has to have a certain type of constitution etc etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By no I mean no. Because the theory was blown away a long time before Russia v. Georgia.

A more important question now. What's with Georgia and beach volleyball? Australia has had to play Georgia in both mens and womens beach volleyball and the Georgian teams are just Brazilians. How does that come about?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Russia, they are not waging a war against Georgia, they are doing some peace keeping with live rounds.

And if current Russia is democratic, so were Mussolini's fascists state in Italy then.

Which democratic states have been at war with each other? Democracy is something more than just a word, for example, "People's democracy" is not necessarily a democracy, rather a one-party dictatorship. Even if these states favored the word "democratic". This can't be that hard, can it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Which democratic states have been at war with each other? Democracy is something more than just a word, for example, "People's democracy" is not necessarily a democracy, rather a one-party dictatorship. Even if these states favored the word "democratic". This can't be that hard, can it?

Here is some discussion of examples, along with the pro and cons arguments for whether they are exceptions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_possible_exceptions_to_the_democratic_peace_theory#Modern

The problem I, and many others, have with democratic peace theory is that it is such an easy and glib thing to toss off: "democracies don't make wars on each other". But technically they do. Then the quibbling starts about what sort of democracies, how many people were killed, what the powers of the executive are.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've never concealed when my military aerospace career ended, so spare me the shocked expressions. Now that we've dealt with that, even though my knowledge base is somewhat dated, so is much of the hardware and equipment out there. In fact, most of the U.S. and threat systems I dealt with are still in service, and the "notional" threats (too hot to officially admit) are in service beside them, many being exportable.

The UAVs in 1989 are but the beginnings of what we have now, though the Pioneer was in limited service with the Navy, the BGM/MQM-74 drone series had been used for recon and aerial decoy work over Vietnam and was in test for aerial weapon delivery (Maverick), the Israelis had used TALDs (Tactical Air Launched Decoy) in smashing the Syrian defenses in the Bekaa Valley, and the Russians were flying the strategic drone Yastreb, and we'd done super secret brief work with D-21s over China, D-21s piggyback launched from SR-71s.

Yes, I know about Moore's Law, but do you know, without looking it up, Augustine's Law?

As for faking moving images, if you stop and think about it, it's not just the number of stills you have to alter, it's the ensuring that every single dynamic element is consistent and rings true across the sequence. The more elements in the scene and the more dynamic the situation, especially with everything in color, the more the workload goes through the roof.

Regards,

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russia is considerably more democratic than Fascist Italy was - paranoia of its Finnish neighbours notwithstanding. Russia only represses its opposition by relatively indirect means (state control of media, dodgy criminal charges that usually contain at least an element of truth (which would also be the case for the same charges against Govt politicos of course) - Mussolini came to power by Coup d'etat, and took less than 2 years to declare an official one-party state.

To compare this to current Russia is just hyperbole.

whether you like it or not, Russia is not a one party state, and the last attempt at a coup failed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And if current Russia is democratic, so were Mussolini's fascists state in Italy then.

Which democratic states have been at war with each other? Democracy is something more than just a word, for example, "People's democracy" is not necessarily a democracy, rather a one-party dictatorship. Even if these states favored the word "democratic". This can't be that hard, can it?

Exactly. Trying to call Russia a democracy is way out there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh it's certainly not a great democracy....but it has universal adult sufferage - which is more than, say, the whole of "the west" had up 'til 100 years ago (depending on exactly which country you want to look at), and it's repression is not a lot worse than has been experienced in the US vs blacks, Japanese-Americans, and anyone the FBI didn't like in the 1950's and 60's in their "counter intelligence program "

and it's still a lot better than Mussolini's Italy! :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wilhammer,

Disproof of your proposed law requires but a single exception, right? Here goes.

You, Wilhammer are behaving toward me here in a boorish and obnoxious manner. This is readily observable, is explainable by common sense (have written at length on this in the past) and is demonstrably true. Q.E.D., you need to go rethink your alleged law!

Regards,

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is to be noted that any country worth living has two (2) elements in it: 1) Democratic system and 2) respect for "rule of law", or rather "checks and balances" in place, to protect individuals from the state's use of power, which among other things requires a functioning court system. Written laws are nice, but if they are not enforced and honored, there's no point of talking about "rule of law".

It is especially number two where the Russian system is lacking, not that their democratic side is situated on the top of any shining hill either, practically they are a one-party state, but with several power centers, the most important being people associated with the former KGB and the current structure of FSB/SVR. This includes people like Putin and Medvedev, both of them spent lots of time in Finland during the Yeltsin era, to point out the interesting tidbit here. Then there are industrialists/ogliarchs (some of which shares the western beliefs on democracy and market economy), traditional chauvinistic nationalists (they tend to stress the role of the Russian Orthodox Church) among some armed forces people and the members of the ROC. It is not a multi-party system, all of these elements work inside one party and one power structure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

you know it's quite good that you can't go back and edit posts - but clearly JK has edited his memory and doesn't want to read his own posts - so here's what you said John -

You, Wilhammer are behaving toward me here in a boorish and obnoxious manner. This is readily observable, is explainable by common sense (have written at length on this in the past) and is demonstrably true.

What part of it did I twist?

the bit that "boorish and obnoxious manner" is " explainable by common sense" requires no great gramatical contortions for me to string together - I don't know the words for all the parts of the sentence, but that's what is says to me.

Perhaps you didn't quite say what you meant?

none-the-less you managed to tell what a lot of people think is the truth - me included.

changing that perception is largely in your own hands...has been for a long time...don't blame us if you fail to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Stalin's Organist,

Wilhammer made certain claims in setting forth "Kettler's Law," and you can check those for yourself. I replied by stating a fact about his behavior, characterized said fact, as applied to him, as being readily observable, then said that the basis for his behavior was explainable using common sense. In this way, I systematically dismantled the underpinnings to his supposed law, one exception being sufficient.

You, though, have chosen to twist my words by deliberately broadening what I said to mean that behaving toward me in a boorish and obnoxious manner was common sense, which it obviously is not. In doing so, it stops just short of actively inciting people to go after me here. The meaning is clear to anyone not being deliberately obfuscatory and tendentious. Also, you've been around here long enough to have read one or more of my commentaries on Wilhammer's apparent motivations in behaving toward me as he does.

In case you're still even slightly confused, I expect people, particularly my critics, to treat me in the manner required by the Forum Rules we all agreed to abide by. I'll happily discuss issues, events, concepts, observed behavior and more, but I absolutely refuse to be anyone's whipping boy, target sleeve, or target butt here, and there's a big difference between the occasional good natured bon mot and the often vicious treatment some here have dished out to me time and again. I'm not going to put up with it if it happens again, and I can and will take appropriate action. This is a discussion forum, and my idea of discussion doesn't consist of letting one side outshout and intimidate the other into silence. Are we clear?

Regards,

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An observation: Russia seems to be the only party behaving rationally in this. Bush really does seem a second rate politician when compared to Putin, with far less moral and intellectual discipline.

What chance a more thoughtful set of Russian neighbours for a little while?

From what I've read, most cannibalism took place in geographic locations where there was limited access to digestable protein. What better way to celebrate a victory in battle than with a BBQ? Mmm, long pork.

Lets throw some more fuel on this fire....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

costard,

The equivalent of this thread (p. 7) on the CMSF Forum has a real find: a Stratfor geo-strategic analysis of the war and related matters, complete with the best map I've yet seen of the area. Left some of my own commentary on the article there, too.

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=82992&page=7

Regards,

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An observation: Russia seems to be the only party behaving rationally in this. Bush really does seem a second rate politician when compared to Putin, with far less moral and intellectual discipline.

Now that's so far off it's funny! You fit right in with Heckel and Jeckel from New Zealand here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...