Russian Soldiers Take Hostages In Georgia

[sabra]

Source: CBS News/AP

About 20 Georgia Soldiers Held Prisoner At Key Port; NATO Slams Moscow For Occupation


(CBS/AP) Russian soldiers held blindfolded Georgian servicemen at gunpoint on top of military vehicles Tuesday and commandeered U.S. Humvees in the key Black Sea port of Poti. Elsewhere, Russia exchanged POWs with Georgia and pulled back some troops from the strategic city of Gori.

It was a day of deeply mixed messages that left the small, war-battered country full of anxiety about whether Russia was aiming for a long-term military presence in Georgia or was just trying to inflict the maximum damage before adhering to a troop withdrawal that Russia promised under a EU-brokered cease-fire.

At an emergency meeting in Brussels, U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and her 25 NATO counterparts demanded that Russia immediately withdraw its troops from Georgia, a U.S. ally that wants to join NATO. The NATO foreign ministers announced Tuesday that the alliance "cannot continue with business as usual" with Russia as long as its troops remain in Georgia.

Russia's Foreign Minister shot back, saying NATO is pursuing anti-Russian policies and supporting an aggressive Georgia.

Read more: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/08/19/world/main4361385.shtml

[Barack_America]

1. Oh dear.

Not good.

[TwilightGardener]

2. Well, what are we gonna do about it? Not much--and they know it.

[The Family Guy]

3. And why would we?

It's time that we stop interfering in this stuff. It's not really any of our business, and other than a concern for oil, we would be paying no attention.

Africans dieing in civil wars? <crickets>

"christians" with oil get invaded for being militaristic and oppressive assholes to a minority group? OH MY GOD! We must rush to help out. Break out the pitch forks and torches!

BLECH!

[TwilightGardener]

4. Well, we passed a bill in the Senate last year (a Biden bill, actually) that

promised almost-NATO-like support for Georgia, so apparently we feel we owe Georgians some back-up. However, we led them to believe erroneously that we would literally fight for them. McCain had a hand in that, with his "close relationship" with Saakashvili. We helped provoke Russia, and misled Georgia, and now we are nearly powerless to contain what we helped bring about--unless we want a military showdown with Russia. They've got us by the short hairs, and they know it. And of course, we sure would hate for anything to happen to that big BP oil pipleine...

[The Family Guy]

7. Time to admit our mistake, apologize, and move on.

We need to apologize for our interference and let Russia handle the situation. It's not in our interest to butt in to other peoples problems. Why on earth are we even still in NATO? It may be the most archaic and obsolete alliance in history.

[AlphaCentauri]

8. It's about the market and corporate greedy

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3821645&mesg_id=3821645

[TwilightGardener]

9. We can't let Russia handle the situation. They're not trustworthy--

they are acting solely in their own interests and they are not behaving like a responsible international partner or neighbor. We'll have to do the stuff that you do when military action isn't an option--economic/trade punishment, membership punishment, treaty punishment, that sort of thing.

[The Family Guy]

10. They are fighting a war....more legitimate than our "war"

The Georgians have been trying to repress two different areas that want to be self-governing. They claim democracy, but repress those who disagree with them. russia had troops there to keep the peace. Georgia provoked them and now they pay the price. We have no business telling Russia what to do. Did they send aid to Iraq or punish us for our fake "war" there? They had 100 times the reason to invade Georgia that we had to attack Iraq.

[TwilightGardener]

11. Russia was licking its chops, priming the situation in S. Ossetia

to go off like a bomb so that they could kick Georgia's ass and show the world (well, mostly the US) that they won't be challenged in their neighborhood. Saakashvili made a huge mistake--but if Russia only cared about keeping S. Ossetia out of Georgian hands, they would have limited their actions to that area--instead, they made a point of invading Georgia itself and they aren't in a hurry to leave, even though the cease-fire was signed. They are overplaying this, taunting the international community. Neither side, IMO, is innocent or trustworthy, but we are simply duty-bound to side more with Georgia because of our past relationship with them.

[Fedja]

12. err

I'm pretty sure NO country on this planet would agree with your view of the US as a friendly and responsible and.... well, what you wrote.

[TwilightGardener]

13. Err...Is the United States always a responsible international player?

No--I didn't say it was. Are we a little hypocritical in the face of our own invasion of Iraq? Of course--we gave up some of our moral authority years ago in terms of justification for military action. Does that make Russia's current behavior right, or their motives innocent? Of course not.

[Fedja]

16. What behavior and motives?

Are you going to deny that Georgia SHELLED the CIVILIAN CAPITOL of a region with a majority Russian population?

How are current Russian actions any different than the US bombing of Serbia in light of the Kosovo crisis?

[TwilightGardener]

19. You're obsessed with "who started it"--we're beyond that now.

Russia's response in Georgia was dramatically out of proportion to the initial insult. Russia is seeing what it can get away with, seeing how much muscle it can flex before the EU and the US take definitive action against them. They are sending a message to the world. They have a right to protest what seems to them to be US/NATO overinvolvement in their backyard, and they have been--but military invasion of another country is not acceptable behavior, even if we stupidly do it ourselves at times. We deserved condemnation for Iraq, and Russia deserves condemnation for its refusal to leave Georgia quickly and without further destruction.

[Fedja]

22. It's called history

Even if recent, it can't be ignored.

It's a sequence of events. The Georgian military attacked civilians and Russia decided that would be a good time to dismantle said military.

You're still avoiding my question on how this is different from the Kosovo crisis.

[TwilightGardener]

23. The sequence of events matter, but they don't exclusively dictate our response

in the face of over-the-top aggression. And Kosovo, which I understand the Russians were and are still touchy and sore about, does not have any bearing on this immediate situation.

[Fedja]

25. Errr yes it does.

Kosovo wanted independence, Serbia slapped them around, US bombed serbia.
S. Ossetia wanted independence, Georgia slapped them around, Russia is shanking Georgia.

Russians are doing the exact same thing the US did in the Kosovo conflict. However, the US were liberators, and Russia is an aggressor?

[IggyReed]

30. Moral Authority?

We deserved “condemnation”, Russia deserves the EU and the US taking “definitive action against them”. What would this entail? We’ve killed as much as 1 million Iraqis, internally displaced millions, have dropped thousands of tons of depleted uranium on the country, have fought tooth and nail to fight any democratic moves within Iraq, have forced economic policies on them in opposition to their wishes which have destroyed their economy and are privatizing their oil even though over 70% of Iraqis are opposed. The US lost its moral authority FAR before the Iraq War anyway. Did they have moral authority in Nicaragua or the other Central American, murderous and reactionary dictatorships (which every human rights organization condemned)? We caused hundreds of thousands of deaths in the region, destroyed numerous countries and destroyed any semblance of democracy. Our policy towards Cuba is in opposition to international law (which we don’t acknowledge) and opinion. Not only are we committing economic war against them, we’ve attempted to kill their head of state on average over once a month for 50 years, with attempted coups over once a year, we’ve committed terrorist attacks and have protected terrorists (with the Bush family helping) that have bombed airlines and hotels. These disgusting people live free in Southern Florida. One likes to paint, so that’s nice. How about the groups we support and supported in Haiti? Is there any more of a violent or anti-democratic group in the country? The “Group of 184”. How about our support for Colombia (worse human rights record in the hemisphere), our arming of the Mexican police and army (with consistent human rights abuses) now with “Plan Mexico”? We apply standards to our human rights record that others don’t accept, since they aren’t blind US nationalists and pay attention to actual facts. We’ve never had the moral authority on these issues, we’ve claimed we’ve had moral authority because we offer warm and fuzzy platitudes about “freedom” and “democracy”. We say this while we’re attacking the democratic wishes of other countries and don’t even blink.

[stillcool]

14. Who in your opinion is trustworthy?

and on what 'facts' do you base your opinion?

[TwilightGardener]

17. ??--neither side in this conflict is trustworthy, IMO. That doesn't mean

we let Russia invade and gain control of an entire sovereign nation (one we promised to support) without some sort of protest or punishment. And my "facts" come from news sources and quotes that indicate that Russia is not complying very well with the terms of its brokered cease-fire. Do I think there's a push to incite a big pro-Georgia/anti-Russia sentiment in the media and by politicians? Yeah, I think there's a little bit of propagandizing going on--restarting the Cold War is good for ratings and Republicans. That said, I don't think Russia is an innocent actor here. We aren't, Georgia isn't, and Russia certainly isn't either. The point is to defuse this situation responsibly, in our best national interests.

[Fedja]

18. And that's how the cookie crumbles.

YOUR national interests in Georgia. That's not a valid platform for moral judgment. US national interests in Georgia don't include promises of support. They begin and stop at the Caucasus pipeline.

[LanternWaste]

21. Wars are neither begun, nor ended on decisions based on moral judgments

"That's not a valid platform for moral judgment."

I believe that wars are neither begun, nor ended on decisions based on moral judgments. They are however, always based on political and economic issues. Some countries are simply better at dressing those decisions up in attractive, moral wrapping paper.

(Paraphrasing the eternal military genius of von Clausewitz's 'On War'...)

[stillcool]

20. I believe that our national interest

is the only thing that is certain in any of these conflicts. Everything else, in my opinion, has to be considered bullshit.

[IggyReed]

31. "National Interest"

“I believe that our national interest is the only thing that is certain in any of these conflicts. Everything else, in my opinion, has to be considered bullshit.”

What an immoral mindset. If that were generalized there would be no international law, every country would simply justify their actions based on “national interest”. Forget that an elite group of people in this country, who don’t fight but profit off of these wars, have a monopoly on determining what is in our “national interest”, I guess it is our duty to agree and then argue about their premises. It surely isn’t in our “national interests” to be moral, and to make the world less violent now is it? No, because that would require us changing and being willing to sacrifice for others, and as Cheney said, “the American way of life is not negotiable”, so us changing is not an option. So if other countries disagree with us we attack them or force them to comply.

If Iran decided that it was in their “national interest” to bomb, say, Lockheed Martin, because they might be making weapons that could be used against Iran, would that be ok with you? Logically, it would be in their national interest, right? So if they blew the LM plant up, killing hundreds of Americans, would that be understandable in your eyes, or should we believe in this thing called international law? If we believe in international law (which we don’t) we have to be willing to accept uniform standards and have to bar ourselves from certain actions. If not, we’re hypocrites who believe in nothing more than the laws of the jungle.

How about Cuba? Is Cuba justified using your logic in bombing Southern Florida? After all, the US (especially the Bush family) protects right wing terrorists in Southern Florida who attack, and have attacked, Cuba, killing countless people.

It is telling for me to see so many Obama supporters with this imperialist mindset. There is no way in hell I’ll support anyone who has backing from people who make excuses for the elites in the US determining what is in our “national interest”, no matter how immoral the repercussions. The CIA concept of "blowback" is something Americans just don't seem to grasp, no matter how many times it bites us in the ass.

[stillcool]

36. I am a person...not just an "Obama Supporter"

and I was speaking of the National Security Issue of Oil..in case you missed the maps...

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/oil/2003/2003companiesiniraq.htm

Oil Companies in Iraq:
A Century of Rivalry and War
By James A. Paul
Global Policy Forum



US military/security policy has served the oil companies as comprehensively as have the tax and legal rulings. Virtually every US presidential security doctrine since World War II has aimed at protecting company interests in the oil-rich Persian Gulf. The Truman Doctrine, the Eisenhower Doctrine, and the Nixon, Carter, and Reagan Doctrines all asserted Washington’s special concerns in the Gulf and arrogated to the United States special rights to “protect” or “defend” the area. Recently-released secret papers show that during the oil crisis and Arab oil embargo of 1973, Washington seriously considered sending a military strike force to seize some of the region’s richest fields – in Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Abu Dhabi.18

In 1979, President Jimmy Carter set up the US Central Command, a permanent military force designed to intervene in the Middle East on short notice. Presidents have expanded and strengthened this force several times since. Headquartered in Florida, but with a number of bases in the Middle East, the command maintains pre-positioned supplies and heavy weapons at Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean and it can call on strike aircraft units, global satellite intelligence, cruise missiles, rapidly deployable ground troops and carrier-based naval fleets.19

In testimony to Congress in 1999, General Anthony C. Zinni, commanding officer of the Central Command, affirmed the importance of the Persian Gulf region, with its huge oil reserves. It is a “vital interest” of “long standing,” he said, and the United States “must have free access to the region’s resources.”20

Close Personal Ties between Companies and Governments

Given the close political relations between the oil companies and their governments, it should be no surprise to find close ties at the personal level binding companies and governments together. The career of Allen Dulles serves as a case in point. He began as a US diplomat in the Middle East and rose to be chief of the Near East section of the State Department. In the early 1920s, he led the campaign to win US oil firms’ participation in Iraq. Later he served as a corporate lawyer at Sullivan and Cromwell, New York’s leading counsel for the oil industry. After wartime intelligence service, he was named head of the CIA by President Eisenhower. As CIA chief, he arranged for the overthrow of Mossadegh, winning a place in Iran’s rich oil fields for US firms. In every assignment he consistently served company interests.21

[Fedja]

39. protect?

"Protect" and "defend" are poor substitutes for "occupy", "intimidate", "plunder", and "subordinate".

[stillcool]

40. How do you think the U.S. protects and defends?

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Blum/KillingHope_page.html

[Fedja]

5. Disgusting bias

The article is so hideously transparent it burns.

Russian SOLDIERS held blindfolded Georgian SERVICEMEN... HOSTAGE?

Let's see... Russian soldiers captured Georgian soldiers.

See how it changes? If two opposing armies run into each other and one takes the other as captives to exchange for its own, that sounds pretty humane to me. It's either that or kill em. What the hell were they gonna do with "enemy troops"? Give em cake and hugs and send them home?!

"among other news, Russia scales down hostilities and pulls troops out of Gori".

Such vile disgusting bias. Maybe if they did like the US, bombing the shit out of the region first and then locking up some civilians in cages, called them enemy combatants and threw away the key... Maybe then...

[bushisanidiot]

26. Yeah, why haven't we heard reports of the russian troops that Georgian troops

have held hostage? they obviously captured some because they did an exchange of hostages. I don't get the one-sided reporting happening with this conflict. (?)

[bitchkitty]

6. Another pile of steaming propaganda from the good folk of AP. n/t

[bemildred]

15. CBS disgraces itself further. nt

[SlingBlade]

24. What , No babies being thrown from incubators yet ???

WTF, Where are the real journalist when you need them ? :puke:

[progdonkey]

27. regardless of which side you believe...

Can't we all agree that CBS News is exhibiting an awful bias against Russia? Uniformed troops taken prisoner by another country's uniformed troops is a "hostage" situation? They're POWs. Calling them hostages shows an obvious bias by characterizing uniformed Russian troops as random thuggish marauders and Georgian troops as innocent bystanders.

"Held at gunpoint"? It's a fucking war zone.

[Fedja]

28. The image tells more

The Russian "soldier" in the image appears to be a member of Spetsnaz, considering that he's holding an Vintorez covert sniper rifle. These guys are not trained to capture their enemies, and probably went out of their way to do so.

[hankthecrank]

33. What are spetsnaz, they russian dancers

[Fedja]

34. Pretty much

It's the Russian army's special forces units.

[hankthecrank]

35. yeah they look like girlie man to me

[951-Riverside]

29. The American Propagandist changed the headline

Now its "Russian soldiers take prisoners in Georgia port"

[bobd0]

32. This is the funniest line on the Georgia/Russia conflict I've read so far

It's from Gordon Johndroe of the NSC and I still can't believe he said it.

The White House, meanwhile, pressed Russia to remove its troops from Georgia more quickly.

"It didn't take them really three or four days to get into Georgia, and it really shouldn't take them three or four days to get out," Gordon Johndroe, a spokesman for the National Security Council, told reporters in Crawford, Texas, where President Bush is spending time at his ranch.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26294314

Just who the hell do these arrogant assholes think they are? Hey, Johndroe, it didn't take the U.S. three or four weeks to get into Baghdad but there we still are -- OVER FIVE LONG YEARS LATER.

By Johndroe's own reasoning it shouldn't have taken us more than three or four weeks to get out! What the hell are we still doing there and how the hell can we criticize Russia in light of our own unprovoked attack and occupation of Iraq?

PS And there's Bush ON VACATION IN CRAWFORD AGAIN. Better get ready to duck and cover, everyone. Bush is on vacation in Crawford in August in an election year!

[hankthecrank]

37. So they had no prisoners to exchange and had go get some to make it look good

So they killed everyone before that huh

Had to get some exchange with

Put hand cuffs and mask on them and still they were scared huh had to cover them with guns

Also went to the port not where this stuff started.

[mbperrin]

38. "commandeered U.S. Humvees"

The bastards!!!! Taking advantage of fine advanced Murikan engineering!! This outrage must stop! Give back the keys, now!!!!!!!!

(Just trying to find another reason to rage and shout - seems to be the norm.)