Russia invades Georgia

[Policenaut]

Observe it.



It's a surface ship. Russia would have few problems into sending it to the bottem if it chose. Naval operations in the area are only really an option for Russia and with modern anti-ship weaponry even that is pretty marginal.

I think the real deal here is that this is all a giant stale mate. We COULD do this. They COULD do that. But neither WILL do anything unless one side wants to jump start WW3.

 

[geni]

I think the real deal here is that this is all a giant stale mate. We COULD do this. They COULD do that. But neither WILL do anything unless one side wants to jump start WW3.

Russia could probably roll up the rest of Georgia without starting WW3 but that would leave them trying to occupy an area that really doesn't want them and they get enough of that in Chechnya.

 

[CapelDodger]

And yet the Russians are not at all pleased with this development. This mission surely represents a message to the Russians, we didn't send cruise ships or cargo ships into the Black Sea to haul the humanitarian aid.

A cargo ship would have been more efficient than a warship, and could have been organised more quickly. Using a warship is posturing, which surely has the Russians chuckling into their beards, pleased as Punch.

When US warships get through the Bosphorus for warlike purposes, I'll be impressed. Not before.

 

[CapelDodger]

Russia could probably roll up the rest of Georgia without starting WW3 but that would leave them trying to occupy an area that really doesn't want them and they get enough of that in Chechnya.

The Russians could roll through Georgia, link-up with the Azeris and roll through Armenia, and do a mutually advantageous deal with the Turks, cutting out the US entirely. The situation would revert to the old days, but with a Turko-Russian understanding.

An intriguing scenario, and possible, but unlikely.

 

[CapelDodger]

Indeed, you were very careful to complain about Christian Zionists' nefarious influence.

I didn't claim that they control the US government.

 

[Darth Rotor]

A cargo ship would have been more efficient than a warship

Yes, in terms of tonnage delivered

, and could have been organised more quickly

.
No. The warship was available, and could get somewhere reasonably quickly. No need to go out and contract someone for this, load that, etc. One hopes the follow on flotillas will be escorting merchant ships and container ships who are even now being loaded/contracted/etc.

Using a warship is posturing, which surely has the Russians chuckling into their beards, pleased as Punch.

Likely so.

I am still wondering what sort of humanitarian JTF Washington is dreaming up for Sixth Fleet to command and control in Georgia.

Puzzled.

When US warships get through the Bosphorus for warlike purposes, I'll be impressed. Not before.

The Turks will have a say in that.

DR

 

[DanishDynamite]

Or at least a separatist region/country that Georgia regards as part of it. This was in response to a Georgian offensive a few hours earlier.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/aug/08/georgia.russia2

I wonder how the situation will play out. Given that Georgia has quite close ties with both NATO and the US, it could have the potential to escalate, but I can't see anyone really wanting to take on Russia.

The President of Georgia was an idiot. Subsequently, Russia overreacted.

That's what happened, as far as I understand.

Being almost a member of an organization, means just that. Perhaps the Georgian President has now learned the difference.

 

[egslim]

So much for the logistics of getting US materiel to Georgia!

55 tons is practically nothing! Barely a single Abrams, not counting fuel or supplies.

Here's the (alleged) problem: http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=150914&bolum=102
According to reports, the US had planned to send two (70,000 ton) hospital ships to deliver humanitarian aid to Georgia but Turkey refused to grant access to the ships, saying they do not conform to standards set by the 1936 Montreux Convention.
If they can't even get permission for hospital ships, military transports certainly won't be allowed through.
So, they loaded up a much smaller destroyer with a few supplies instead. That's arguably more a pathetic demonstration of logistic impotence than anything else.

Sure, this is a humanitarian mission but it also sends a strong signal to Russia in case they get second thoughts and decide to stay a little bit longer.

55 tons is a tiny fraction of what the Georgian army lost or expended fighting Russia. The few hundred US sailors won't cause any more pause than the 100 US advisors already present in Georgia when Russia attacked did. So how is this operation making any difference?

The trouble with symbolic gestures like this is that they annoy Russia, without making any substantial difference to the strategic situation.

 

[egslim]

I think the real deal here is that this is all a giant stale mate. We COULD do this. They COULD do that. But neither WILL do anything unless one side wants to jump start WW3.

Russia already did what it wanted to do. They created a stale mate in their own favour. So far there's been a whole lot of posturing and symbolic gestures from the US, but little substantial.

 

[Policenaut]

Russia already did what it wanted to do. They created a stale mate in their own favour. So far there's been a whole lot of posturing and symbolic gestures from the US, but little substantial.

I meant the current situation (post invasion and troop withdrawal stalling) is a stale mate. Russia did end up with a better hand but after this nothing major will happen. Well it could but then the real **** would hit the fan.

 

[egslim]

I meant the current situation (post invasion and troop withdrawal stalling) is a stale mate. Russia did end up with a better hand but after this nothing major will happen. Well it could but then the real **** would hit the fan.

I agree, I'm just pointing out that since Russia already obtained a better hand, a stale mate with Georgia is entirely to its liking.

 

[Darth Rotor]

I agree, I'm just pointing out that since Russia already obtained a better hand, a stale mate with Georgia is entirely to its liking.

This needs a comment. The term is stalemate. From Chess.

A stale mate is your friend who needs to get more fresh air, or whose company no longer has flavor.

DR

 

[egslim]

This needs a comment. The term is stalemate. From Chess.

Darn it, that's what I thought. Should teach me not to copy spelling mistakes from (suspected) native English speakers.

 

[CapelDodger]

This needs a comment. The term is stalemate. From Chess.

Another chess term that might apply is zugzwang.

 

[Garrette]

Another chess term that might apply is zugzwang.

I admit I had to look that up, but it doesn't necessarily apply. Not moving (in relation to the Georgian situation) is certainly an option.

 

[CapelDodger]

I meant the current situation (post invasion and troop withdrawal stalling) is a stale mate. Russia did end up with a better hand but after this nothing major will happen. Well it could but then the real **** would hit the fan.

That's what I expect. We'll probably see the long tail of attention for a year or two then it'll fade from sight.

Unless Russia has it eyes on the Crimea, in which case all bets are off.

 

[CapelDodger]

I admit I had to look that up, but it doesn't necessarily apply. Not moving (in relation to the Georgian situation) is certainly an option.

No analogy is perfect . The US, Nato, Europe and others have felt obliged to do make moves, and have damaged their own credibility in the process. Their best option now is to let it drop.

 

[Garrette]

Unless Russia has it eyes on the Crimea, in which case all bets are off.

Agreed.

No analogy is perfect . The US, Nato, Europe and others have felt obliged to do make moves, and have damaged their own credibility in the process. Their best option now is to let it drop.

And agreed again, mostly. I'd couple public nothingness with a behind-the-scenes mix of congratulations and warnings, something along the lines of "Okay, Vladdie, that was pretty sharp. Well done. Now sit back down and be happy with what you've got or the rest of us are going to have to stand up, too, and nobody wants that."

 

[CapelDodger]

Agreed.


And agreed again, mostly. I'd couple public nothingness with a behind-the-scenes mix of congratulations and warnings, something along the lines of "Okay, Vladdie, that was pretty sharp. Well done. Now sit back down and be happy with what you've got or the rest of us are going to have to stand up, too, and nobody wants that."

Absolutely; the last thing anybody should do is draw attention to their own failings.

NATO, the EU, and the UN have only highlighted their own flabby impotence. At minimal cost to the Russians, and quite possibly at a profit, considering all the NATO-grade kit and copper wire they've shipped home from Georgia.

Talking quietly is cheap and easy, but where's the big stick to come from? The G8? The WTO? I don't think so.

Russia has ditched the USSR and become Russia again. A place with a name and a history and a grudge. Much like France, except that the Russians can do something about it.

 

[CapelDodger]

Here's the (alleged) problem: http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/detaylar.do?load=detay&link=150914&bolum=102

Alleged, but

'"The Spanish ships are here for a programmed exercise visit within the framework of the NATO task mission," the sources underlined, in apparent reflection of Turkey's policy of not antagonizing Russia.'

rings true. Turkey and Russia go way back; they've been an item since before there was a US, let alone a NATO. It hasn't always been the happiest of relationships, but it isn't currently confrontational. Turkey and Spain have an even longer history of antagonism, but they're friendly enough now.