By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - Georgia Shoots Down Russian Drone

Jackson50 on 23 September 2008
Kasz216 said:
Jackson50 said:
What I find most interesting is that President Sarkozy apparently lost his temper with President Medvedev and the Russians during recent negotiations. Reports describe him as "very angry."

Well the Russians are keeping troops well past the accepted boarders breaking their last treaty STILL.  So it is pretty hard to negotiate with them when they aren't following the last treaty.

 

It would not be easy to negotiate. This instance, however, was more of a personal slight against President Sarkozy. Apparently, President Medvedev left the negotiations with the French and left Sarkozy to deal with the negotiators and not Medvedev himself. 

You can read it for yourself here.



Around the Network
hunter_alien on 24 September 2008
Kasz216 said:
Jackson50 said:
What I find most interesting is that President Sarkozy apparently lost his temper with President Medvedev and the Russians during recent negotiations. Reports describe him as "very angry."

Well the Russians are keeping troops well past the accepted boarders breaking their last treaty STILL. So it is pretty hard to negotiate with them when they aren't following the last treaty.

 

 

Every one of them can read the treaty in a differetnt way. Thats what the sittuation was during the Russian drawback and its the same now. This "treaty" was fritten in a small ammount of time, and if Russia consideres the Osetian teritories to be 2 new countryes now, well then they actually dont violate Georgias boarder ;)



Vote the Mayor for Mayor!

Kasz216 on 24 September 2008
hunter_alien said:
Kasz216 said:
Jackson50 said:
What I find most interesting is that President Sarkozy apparently lost his temper with President Medvedev and the Russians during recent negotiations. Reports describe him as "very angry."

Well the Russians are keeping troops well past the accepted boarders breaking their last treaty STILL. So it is pretty hard to negotiate with them when they aren't following the last treaty.

 

 

Every one of them can read the treaty in a differetnt way. Thats what the sittuation was during the Russian drawback and its the same now. This "treaty" was fritten in a small ammount of time, and if Russia consideres the Osetian teritories to be 2 new countryes now, well then they actually dont violate Georgias boarder ;)

Even then they are breaking the treaty.  As they are still in land that was never a part of Osetia and Abkhazia. 

Also calling Abkhazia an ossetian territory is kinda ignorant.



hunter_alien on 24 September 2008

Hey... lets be honest, in the 21st century war is not only what you can see on the battlefield, its what happens after, and this is the part where we see a diplomacy war going on. I think its obvious that Russia only stays there as proof that they can do it, and I dont hear news about mass murders or anything, so in my book thats ok ;)



Vote the Mayor for Mayor!

Kasz216 on 24 September 2008
hunter_alien said:
Hey... lets be honest, in the 21st century war is not only what you can see on the battlefield, its what happens after, and this is the part where we see a diplomacy war going on. I think its obvious that Russia only stays there as proof that they can do it, and I dont hear news about mass murders or anything, so in my book thats ok ;)

That's because they took care of all the mass murderings DURING the war.

That and everyone in those areas fled... because of the mass murderings during the war.  Burning down villages for no reason and such.

 



Around the Network
coolestguyever on 24 September 2008

Russia should just nuke the fuck out of georgia so we can stop hearing about this silly conflict.



hunter_alien on 25 September 2008
Kasz216 said:
hunter_alien said:
Hey... lets be honest, in the 21st century war is not only what you can see on the battlefield, its what happens after, and this is the part where we see a diplomacy war going on. I think its obvious that Russia only stays there as proof that they can do it, and I dont hear news about mass murders or anything, so in my book thats ok ;)

That's because they took care of all the mass murderings DURING the war.

That and everyone in those areas fled... because of the mass murderings during the war. Burning down villages for no reason and such.

 

 

Mass murdering... is that what you call mass murdering... like what?... 300 dead, and most of them military personel? Man, youve obviously never watched History Channel in your life ;) Again, if the Russians would have wanted they could have left Georgia even more cripled then it is... no my firend, this is just the demo, and you dont want to know just how big the real thing can get ;)

 

 



Vote the Mayor for Mayor!

Kasz216 on 25 September 2008
hunter_alien said:
Kasz216 said:
hunter_alien said:
Hey... lets be honest, in the 21st century war is not only what you can see on the battlefield, its what happens after, and this is the part where we see a diplomacy war going on. I think its obvious that Russia only stays there as proof that they can do it, and I dont hear news about mass murders or anything, so in my book thats ok ;)

That's because they took care of all the mass murderings DURING the war.

That and everyone in those areas fled... because of the mass murderings during the war. Burning down villages for no reason and such.

 

 

Mass murdering... is that what you call mass murdering... like what?... 300 dead, and most of them military personel? Man, youve obviously never watched History Channel in your life ;) Again, if the Russians would have wanted they could have left Georgia even more cripled then it is... no my firend, this is just the demo, and you dont want to know just how big the real thing can get ;)

 

 

300...?

I thought you believe the Russians on everything in this.  They're reporting over 3,000 deaths... just on soldiers.

Not to mention that basically every georgian town in Ossetian was burned to the ground.

But yeah.  I'd  consider 300 mass murder.  It is after all a matter of scale based on the size of the country.

 



hunter_alien on 25 September 2008

From over 4 million 300... hmm, well I dont know how many would consider that mass murder but hey...

Oh, and BTW, I dont know where you are getting the 3000 figures, because... true if you take into consideration all the civilians that died before the conflict and after the so called "war" ( if you can call that a 5 days long conflict ) than probably the death-toll is much higher, but still nothing compared to a real war, or hell, I would go as far as saying that a bigger terrorist attack might actually do more victims...



Vote the Mayor for Mayor!

Kasz216 on 25 September 2008
hunter_alien said:
From over 4 million 300... hmm, well I dont know how many would consider that mass murder but hey...

Oh, and BTW, I dont know where you are getting the 3000 figures, because... true if you take into consideration all the civilians that died before the conflict and after the so called "war" ( if you can call that a 5 days long conflict ) than probably the death-toll is much higher, but still nothing compared to a real war, or hell, I would go as far as saying that a bigger terrorist attack might actually do more victims...

 

3000 was soldier deaths.  On the georgian side.  According to the Russians.

It wasn't counting all the deaths caused by the russian shellings that started it, or the towns the russians burned to the ground.