Georgia NATO/US Relations

Elites make less than 1%. Culturaly and socialy Russians are accepted without any issues whatsoever in all of Europe. Particularily Germany, France, Greece etc.

Crusade against the Russian Church ..... right.

Just the fact all 3 countries even came togheter to suggest and form it, is a small miracle in itself.

It wouldn't be a greater threat than having NATO bases in the South Caucasus.

..eliminating any prospects for Georgia to join either NATO or the EU, which back then was not even in the minds of anyone in Georgia, let alone dreamt about.

They forcefully took and incorporated countries that didn't belong to them and never consented with it. Any legitimacy of such a claim is nonexistent.

Not really.

So do their partners benefit from it more than being under Russian influence. That's just an observable fact.

You can't and won't get any of those benefits remotely in that scale with Russia in its current state.

Oh you mean like Russia.

There was no "NATO expansion" in 1991, only artificial sessession instigated by Russia.

The Georgian Democratic Republic was larger and the Georgia as part of the Russian Empire even larger,..

Facing permanent internal and external problems, the young state was unable to withstand invasion by the Russian SFSR Red Armies, and collapsed between February and March 1921 to become a Soviet republic. ..
The year 1920 was marked by increased threats from the Russian SFSR. With the defeat of the White movement and the Red Armies' advance to the Caucasus frontiers, the republic's situation became extremely tense. In January, the Soviet leadership offered Georgia, Armenia and Azerbaijan an alliance against the White armies in South Russia and the Caucasus. The Government of the DRG refused to enter any military alliance, referring to its policy of neutrality and noninterference, but suggested negotiations towards a political settlement of the relations between two countries in the hope that this might lead to recognition of Georgia's independence by Moscow. ..In April 1920, the 11th Red Army established a Soviet regime in Azerbaijan, and the Georgian Bolshevik Grigoriy Ordzhonikidze requested permission from Moscow to advance into Georgia. ..In the meantime, in response to Georgia's alleged provision of assistance to the Azeri nationalist rebellion in Ganja, Soviet forces attempted to penetrate Georgian territory, but were repelled by Kvinitadze in brief border clashes at the Red Bridge. .. After Azerbaijan and Armenia had been Sovietized by the Red Army, Georgia found itself surrounded by hostile Soviet republics. Moreover, as the British had already evacuated the Caucasus, the country was left without any foreign support. ..According to Soviet sources, relations with Georgia deteriorated over alleged violations of the peace treaty, re-arrests of Georgian Bolsheviks, obstruction of convoys passing through Georgia to Armenia, and a strong suspicion that Georgia was aiding armed rebels in the North Caucasus. .. Georgia's 1918–1921 borders were formed through the border conflicts with its neighbors and ensuing treaties and conventions. ..
The territory of the Democratic Republic of Georgia included some territories that today belong to other countries. It was circa 107,600 km2, compared to 69,700 km2 in modern Georgia. The Soviet occupation of the DRG led to significant territorial rearrangements by which Georgia lost almost a third of its territory. ..
Although the republic had access to almost 200,000 veterans of World War I with skilled generals and officers, the government failed to build up an effective defense system, a factor that greatly contributed to its collapse. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Republic_of_Georgia#Downfall

and you were implying Georgian collaboration with Nazis. Didn't work out so well now did it?

It's their business. their personal fight.

Tbilisi has no dirty hands in that business to clean in the first place.

Are Russian mercenaries and volunteers being prosecuted for attacking Ukraine?

Except the Georgians aren't invading Ukraine like the Russians. They are defending their homes there in the Ukrainian army. ..Has nothing to do with Georgia whatsoever.

Tsavo Lion wrote:
The elites have the final word, not rank & file citizens.

....from abroad....

'' This is a pledge of unity '': the patriarch of Georgia supported Ukraine on its way to autocephaly https://www.obozrevatel.com/society/eto-zalog-edinstva-patriarh-gruzii-podderzhal-ukrainu-na-puti-k-avtokefalii.htm

That's why it won't happen in our lifetime, if at all.

That union would have been a "major non-NATO ally" like Japan, Australia, Sweden & Finland

Russia is interested in peace between the Azeris & Armenians

; that 's why she tries to have good relations with both.

But Georgia is too proud of itself & was counting on US/NATO support in 2008.

But by their belligerence

Georgians crossed the line...

Starting wars is easy ..... Russia is very good at it!

They forcefully took and incorporated countries that didn't belong to them and never consented with it. Any legitimacy of such a claim is nonexistent.

That's besides the point

Rhetorical questions: did Abkhazians .....

Did Mongols, Han Chinese, Tibetans & Koreans consent to be part of the Manchurian Ching Empire? Did the Kurds consent to be part of Turkey, Iraq, Iran, & Syria? The above list can be even longer.

Maybe so, but in the long run they'll go their own way

, & Georgia isn't guaranteed prosperity by associating with the West.

In the '70s ... Iran

Yugoslavia was outside of the Moscow control, but we all know what happened to them.

Now the Serbs r asking Russia for help.

Like those Ukrainians doing jobs in Poland & Slovakia that the locals won't take.

that didn't belong to it[/u].

been sending arms & allowing fighters go to Chechnya

& Georgia before & during 2008 war that were used against the Ossetians & the Russians

, civilians & military!

These US-NATO bases provide instability and insecurity rather than peace.

They have only themselves to blame!

They also collaborated with the Bolsheviks & some rose to the very top in Moscow

so it's as much a Georgian question/problem as it is the Russian 1 that u invoke in this context!  It did work out well for me, since u switched to others instead of discussing Georgians.

Code:

Tell that to Russian judges!

Regardless, Georgia will be blamed, & with dire consequences!

Tbilisi has no dirty hands in that business to clean in the first place.

Oh yes they have in the RF eyes

Are Russian mercenaries and volunteers being prosecuted for attacking Ukraine?

Those r helping their fellow Russians .....

need to prevent genocide in Donbass?

Silly excuses!

Their "homes" r in the trenches now; if their Georgian citizenship is now revoked, they r not welcome back

A tiger can't change its stripes

.....to absolve Georgia's complicity in that conflict....

Sorry, but Georgians r now like those ancient Greeks & medieval Swiss  mercenaries ready to fight any1 for pay, even if it means killing their ethnic brethren & fellow countrymen!

Neither the "elites" nor "mid rate" citizens promote hostility or different treatment towards Russians. At least not in Germany and Western Europe.

So Russia is just as responsible then, in your implication of foreign involvement.

In fact it calls for intervention by Moscow and Constantinople to solve the issue.

Care to provide any argument as to why?

While consistently supplying both sides with weapons, heavy & advanced military hardware and ammunition.

Relations are not just built on weapons

how dare we regain our independence!

You said it not me.

How does the Russian claim over Crimea a peninsula they controlled as Russian nation for barely 2 centuries, hold more legitimacy....? if anything it should be declared autonomous Republic and given back to the 'Tatars'.

The area remained the site of overlapping interests and contact between the early medieval Slavic, Turkic and Greek spheres. [After] the Mongol invasions ..the peninsula's status quo changed in the 1230s, as all but the Perateia of Crimea was incorporated into the territory of the Golden Horde throughout the 14th century CE. In the course of the 13th century CE, portions were controlled by the Republic of Venice and by the Republic of Genoa, the Perateia soon became the Principality of Theodoro and Genoese Gazaria, respectively. ..
The Crimean Khanate, a vassal state of the Ottoman Empire, succeeded the Golden Horde and lasted from 1449 to 1783. In 1571, the Crimean Tatars attacked and sacked Moscow, burning everything but the Kremlin. Until the late 18th century, Crimean Tatars maintained a massive slave trade with the Ottoman Empire, exporting about 2 million slaves from Russia and Ukraine over the period 1500–1700. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimea#Ancient_history

Exactly! did the Georgians in whole ever consent being part of the Russian Empire and then the Soviet Union? nup. Neither did any of the single principalities including Abkhazia.

Good old days.

Completely irrelevant whether it was under Russian 'control' or not. It's as if you were trying to say that ethnic conflicts didn't happen in countries that were under Russian control ...

Difference is, US/NATO completely respects that Serbia is an independent sovereign country in its right to ask and receive aid from Russia as well. Can't say the same about Russia.

Ukrainians aren't part of anything and they are at war ...

Oh the glorious hypocricy.

To their own peoples, they were traitors.

Name me one event with evidence where supposedly Chechen fighters hired by Georgia attacked Russian & Ossetian military and civilians before and during the war.

and frankly despite all the suffering Russia of today is in eternal debt to those people.

So Georgians served for the Nazis (mostly Soviet POWs and those ppl didn't really have a good alternative).

Russian judges are not the world court. Nor do they have any relevance or weight to Georgia and/or Ukraine in any regard. What kind of argument is that?

oh damn, that made me actually choke on my food.

what "genocide"??

A tiger isn't a human. Russians aren't mindless savage animals.

Confucius and his disciples were often persecuted by fearful despots. Having been deported from another state, the band – passing through a remote region – encountered an old woman crying beside a grave. Confucius asked her why she wept. A tiger had killed her husband and his father, she explained, and had recently attacked her only son.
“Why do you live in this savage place?” Confucius asked. “Because there is no oppressive government here,” the woman replied.
“My children,” Confucius said, addressing his disciples, “remember that oppressive government is worse than a tiger.” https://zendictive.wordpress.com/2012/02/18/confucius/

No matter how loud you bark. Not even Russia claims anything of the sort.

How much of "Swiss mercenaries" is Wagner Group and the thousands of Russian "mercenaries" (lets be real here) sent to Ukraine by order of high command? but you see no "complicity" in that
It's especially rich since Russia's entire military doctrine of the past 26 years is based on sending mercenaries who'd kill their own mom for a 100 dollars and expandable troops as vanguard.

Tsavo Lion wrote:
But in 2000 Russia wasn't even considered for associating with as a candidate for joining NATO.

Constantinople already decided against Moscow, so it's a moot point.

I can only speculate

While consistently supplying both sides with weapons, heavy & advanced military hardware and ammunition.

They want to have leverage & make $. selling arms to Israelis & Arabs

True, but given the frozen conflict there it's a big component of relations.

(not autonomous like Chechnya) didn't do anything to start a direct war with Russia.

U, OTH, opposed the independence of others, & that was ur undoing!

Russia is good at finishing wars

mostly on it's own terms.

If/when they do lose anything, others lose as well.

Before the Tartars, there were Greeks, Persians, Romans, Byzantines;

Crimea is too important for Russia to allow the Tartars there call the shots.

Some did

But later the Abkhazians got tired of being part of Georgia.

Good old days.

That ended with Islamic revolution, Iran-Iraq War, Desert Storm, 9/11/01, Iraqi Freedom, & the current war in Syria.

Although it wasn't a Warsaw Pact member, ethnic conflicts there were also influenced & exploited from abroad, to break up Yugoslavia & eliminate Serbia as a viable (& historic) Russian ally in the Balkans.

Serbia is trying to sit on 2 chairs, just like Belarus. So they play both sides. But a time will come when they will get tired of it &/ NATO breaks apart.

Ukrainians aren't part of anything and they are at war ...

.... providing cheap labor, some becoming 2nd class residents/citizens.

Oh the glorious hypocricy.

Those peoples were divided & that's why they were not able to defend their new independence, just like the Chechens under Kadyrov today.

No, I meant Ukraine (& Germany)was exporting arms & allowing fighters to go to aid Georgia.

https://www.dw.com/en/georgians-illegally-armed-with-german-weapons-report-says/a-3571263  https://news.am/eng/news/10892.html
https://jamestown.org/program/were-ukrainian-arms-supplies-to-georgia-illegal/
https://carnegie.ru/commentary/75483

They didn't have homes in Ukraine: https://www.rt.com/politics/ukraine-georgia-elections-scandal/

Tell that to Ukrainians whose relatives died in Holodomor they blame on Stalin's policies & from which Ms of Russians,etc. suffered as well, & Poles who lost their best officers in the Katyn forest!

Indeed, Russia today would be far more advanced w/o the collectivization of agriculture, the GULAG & the "Great Social Experiment", just like China w/o Mao's so called Cultural Revolution.

There's always a choice; they could have escaped & joined the Resistance with better chance of staying alive.

See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_jurisdiction
If others can use it, why not Russia?

They r not "attacking Ukraine", but defending against Ukrainian Army/MVD & nationalist volunteers i.e. death squads.

genocide

Humans r worse! Confucius & his pupils once saw a woman crying. She told him: a tiger killed my husband, my son & my brother! But when asked, "why r u still here?", she said: oh, there is no repressive local government here! Then Confucius said to his disciples: see, a government can be worse than a tiger!

Yes, Russians r not animals, but those who help the Kiev junta (for lack of a better word) on their own free will r worse than animals!

Ex-Georgian citizens suddenly became "patriotic Ukrainians defending their homes" just so they could avenge their losses in the 2008 war- those r the "tiger stripes" I'm talking about!

Prostitutes of war, whether they r mercenaries or not!

I'm not a dog to bark. If they allowed/turned a blind eye on fighters from Georgia going to Ukraine, then they can be held to account for it.

At least there r not there to kill local peaceful civilians

& in hybrid war in Ukraine, Russia is justified

Relevance?

Regardless, a lie is a lie.

Irrelevant. Azerbaijan is not Turkey.

But whatever justification for the most terrible massacre and actual ethnic cleansing of the 1990s, makes them sleep better at night.

If it wasn't for Stalin insisting on finaly constructing somewhat of an industrial power no matter the cost, the Germans would have in great likelyhood achieved decicively more during Operation Barbarossa then they actualy did.

Invading foreign countries and fighting its security assets is an offence not defense. You're trying to twist it so hard it's become comedic.

Mate, first of all, plse, you and others, learn the definition of that term ....
you can keep posting Russian sites accusing Ukraine of whatever they want. The deliberately crude misuse of terms means it are lies, not fact. No such thing has or was even attempted, least committed, at any time since the beginning of the conflict.

You keep quoting him, but put it out of context and only applies to repressive governments, not all.

Georgia doesn't even consider those people bullet catch and even Russia seperates Saakashvili and his goons, openly from the rest of Georgia.

Just like the ones fighting on the Russian side. You try to make a difference where there is none.

Russia would have at least openly brought up such an inflated issue if it felt that way.

But then being a complete hypocrite about the rest of the world.

After the collapse and dismemberment of the USSR, the United States felt the last restraints on its power fall away. NATO was expanded up to Russia’s western frontiers. Yugoslavia was destroyed and dismembered without any reference to international law. The United States and its NATO vassals backed Islamist terrorists and gangsters in Bosnia and Kosovo, following the Afghan pattern. «They’re our terrorists and gangsters,» the Americans might have said, «and therefore we’re alright». Serbia was bombed, its infrastructure destroyed, civilians were killed. Not even crocodile tears were shed in the west over the dead Serbian civilians.
Since the destruction of Yugoslavia, the list of US and western covert or overt wars of aggression is long. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Ukraine, Syria, Yemen have all been destroyed or are being destroyed by the United States and its NATO or regional vassals in the name of «responsibility to protect» (R2P) and «democracy» proselytization. The west’s allies are Wahhabi terrorists (again), Daesh, Nusra, Al-Qaeda and various iterations of them, as well as fascists in the Ukraine. It is an extraordinary American rogues’ gallery, like a long police line-up of felons. But «not to worry», the Americans would no doubt repeat, «they’re our Islamists and our fascists, and working for us, which makes everything alright».
Everywhere the United States leaves its footprints, along with those of the British and French depending on location, you will find ruins and victims. Iraq and Libya are in chaos and infested with Al-Qaeda terrorists. War drags on in Afghanistan after fifteen years. In the Ukraine the US-backed fascist coup d’état has only partially succeeded and a crisis there could irrupt at any time. In Yemen a Saudi invasion has butted into formidable resistance.
In Syria the US and Anglo-French-led attempt to overthrow the Syrian government has failed. Not only did the United States run up against a formidable Syrian resistance inspired by Syrian president Bashar el-Assad, but it has run up against the Russian Federation, Iran, and Hezbollah. They are allied with the Syrian government against the invasion of US and western supported Islamist mercenaries, armed, financed, trained, and sheltered by Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Jordan, and Apartheid Israel.
Russia has played the principal role in checking the US-led war of aggression against Syria. Of course, President Vladimir Putin has tried to finesse the United States into abandoning its terrorist allies and joining a coalition to destroy the Wahhabi invaders. As I write these lines, the Russian effort has failed; as well it might, since the United States is addicted to subversion and wars of aggression as a drug user is addicted to narcotics. But Russia had to try, and I suppose, will continue to try, to persuade the United States to go cold turkey.
In the meantime its French and British vassals accuse Russia and Syria of war crimes, fulminate about the surrounded, victimized Wahhabi terrorists in Aleppo. The very same who have made films showing their decapitation of Syrian POWs and officials, Christians and any others who don’t embrace their practice of Islam. Further forms of cruelty include execution by drowning or being burned alive in cages, or crushed by tanks. Women are raped, and stoned if they don’t submit; refugees seeking to escape Al-Qaeda authority are flogged, crucified, decapitated, buried alive, or shot (the latter form of execution being for the Wahhabis a rather banal, merciful way of killing victims).
It is these terrorists who the United States and its vassals support in Aleppo and elsewhere in Syria. They have abandoned the argument about the Wahhabis being «our terrorists» for another to the effect that they are «our moderates». This line is just as preposterous and bogus as all the other US justifications for war, though President Putin and his foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov, have played along trying to persuade the United States to see reason. The Russian strategy has failed, as its other peace strategies have failed, because, inter alia, there are no Islamist «moderates» to separate from the so-called genuine terrorists. «Our moderates» is a fiction and a US cover for its support of Al-Qaeda and its various allies, largely foreign mercenaries fighting against the secular, legitimate government of Syria.
The only result, so far, of Russian efforts is that US generals threaten «to beat» Russia as never before. The French president threatens Russia and Syria with war crimes indictments, and various British politicians, including the Foreign Secretary, fulminate about Nazi-like bombardments of poor, innocent «moderates» who in fact use Aleppo civilians in their diminishing zone of occupation as human shields, summarily executing those who attempt to escape. In the much larger part of Aleppo which the «moderates» do not control, they deliberately target civilians. Will there ever be an end to the hypocrisy and double standards? From Wilson to Johnson, to Obama, we have been subjected to a pack of lies. The US and western narrative about Syria, as elsewhere, is false to the last syllable. The «shining house upon the hill» is a myth. A dark charnel house filled to the ceiling with victims of US and European neo-colonialism would better represent the reality. But don’t expect any western governments to look inside that house. «Collateral damage,» the Americans would say, «and a price worth paying». Myths and lies conceal the real foreign conduct of the United States and its vassals, but that unfortunately is nothing new. The question now is whether Americans, Europeans and Canadians are willing to risk a gratuitous war with Russia for a pack of lies, in defence of the US-led Al-Qaeda invasion of Syria. We, all of us, need to decide quickly, before it is too late. https://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2016/10/16/western-hypocrisy-why-makes-world-dangerous-place.html
Washington is opposed to any government whose leaders cannot be purchased to perform as Washington’s puppets. This is why George W. Bush’s regime invaded Afghanistan, why Washington overthrew Saddam Hussein, and why Washington wants to overthrow Libya [done!], Syria, and Iran. ..Frustrated by their failure, the Americans and their NATO puppets increasingly murder women, children, village elders, Afghan police, and aid workers. ..In a June 27 interview on National Public Radio, Ban Ki-moon, Washington’s South Korean puppet installed as the Secretary General of the United Nations, was unable to answer why the UN and the US tolerate the slaughter of unarmed civilians in Bahrain, but support the International Criminal Court’s indictment of Gadaffi for defending Libya against armed rebellion. Gadaffi has killed far fewer people than the US, UK, or the Saudis in Bahrain. Indeed, NATO and the Americans have killed more Libyans than has Gadaffi. The difference is that the US has a naval base in Bahrain, but not in Libya. https://www.counterpunch.org/2011/06/29/a-world-overwhelmed-by-western-hypocrisy/
Clearly there are two standards operative in the world today: one for the vast majority of nations and another for those comprising the dying but dangerous collection of European colonial capitalist nations that have decided to use military means to maintain their global hegemony. https://www.counterpunch.org/2013/09/02/the-human-rights-hypocrisy-of-the-west/
'I can't understand why Catholic Europe is standing up behind Saudi Arabia, and yet no Christian can stand in Riyadh with a beer. The Vatican man smiled and responded by saying nothing'”. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/aug/14/syria-australia-battle
Here, then, is the hypocrisy of the West, which seems hell-bent on singling Israel out for exceptional protection from criticism or meaningful sanctions despite its 50-year long illegal occupation of Palestinian, Syrian and Lebanese land, and its 70-year ethnic cleansing of the Palestinian people. Just like Russia and Iraq, Israel has annexed illegally-occupied land, including East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights. The US has been severely critical of Russia for its use of the veto when it comes to Syria and Iran. In 2015, the then US Ambassador to the UN, Samantha Power, claimed that Russian vetoes were “putting the UN Security Council’s legitimacy at risk.” Her successor Nikki Hayley even threatened that if Russia continues to use its veto then the US may have to take unilateral action against Iran. This was after Russia vetoed a resolution that had been watered down from a condemnation of Iran for violating an arms embargo on Houthi leaders in Yemen to “noting with particular concern”.The particular hypocrisy of the US lies in its own use of the veto power on 43 occasions in support of Israel, the last of which was against criticism of its own action in recognising Jerusalem as capital of the Zionist state in December last year. This does not include the number of times that the threat of the US using its veto resulted in resolutions not even making it to a Security Council vote, including an attempt by the PLO to secure recognition of Palestine as a state in 2014. Britain’s hypocrisy can be demonstrated in its support for sanctions against Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq and its support for sanctions against Russia but its absolute refusal to consider sanctioning Israel for any matter, including its illegal colonial-settlement enterprise and alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity. The UK has actually worked to oppose any boycott or sanction against a state that stands accused of Apartheid by an ESCWA report which was sanctioned by the UN but was then taken down under pressure from the US and Israel. ..Britain has now indicated that it might not send members of the Royal family to the World Cup in Russia but has announced that Prince William — second in line to the throne — will make an official visit to Israel this year despite its continued illegal occupation of Palestinian land, its illegal annexation of Jerusalem, its Apartheid Wall and its illegal siege on Gaza which has been said to constitute collective punishment and is thus a war crime.
Palestinians and their supporters, therefore, have ample reason to call out the international community for its hypocrisy and double standards when it comes to dealing with Israel, whose illegal actions and breaches of international law have accompanied its whole 70-year existence. Remember this fact the next time that a Western politician defends Israel’s breaches of international law as “acts of self-defence”. It is the only country in the world to which the permanent members of the UN Security Council and others in the West grant such exceptional immunity.
https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20180320-israel-the-west-and-shameless-hypocrisy/
The hypocrisy goes back a long way in the wars waged and insurgencies supported by the West in the Crescent from Libya to Afghanistan.
https://www.counterpunch.org/2017/04/14/western-hypocrisy-about-airstrike-killings/
It is relevant to recall that it was British and French colonial ambitions in 1917 that carved up the collapsed Ottoman Empire, imposing artificial political communities with borders reflecting European priorities, rather than natural affinities, and taking no account of the preferences of the resident populations. This colonial plot foiled former US President Woodrow Wilson’s more positive proposal to implement self-determination based on affinities of ethnicity, tradition and religion of those formerly living under Ottoman rule. ..
It is also helpful to recall the 1999 Kosovo War and the 2011 war in Libya, both managed as NATO operations carried out in defiance of international law and the UN charter. Because of an anticipated Russian veto, NATO, with strong European backing, launched a punishing air attack that drove Serbia out of Kosovo. Despite the presence of a strong case for humanitarian intervention within the Kosovo context, it set a dangerous precedent, which Iraq hawks found convenient a few years later.
In effect, the US found itself backed into insisting on an absurd position, to the effect that the veto should be respected without any questioning when the West uses it, most arbitrarily to protect Israel from much more trivial, yet justifiable, criticisms of its policies. Evading the veto to launch this missile attack on the basic sovereign rights of a member government is a much more serious challenge to the spirit and letter of the UN charter.
Cognitive dissonance
American diplomats do not try to justify, or even explain, their inconsistent attitudes towards the authority of the UN veto, despite the starkness of the contradiction. Perhaps it is a textbook example of what psychologists call cognitive dissonance. More accessibly, it is a prime instance of American exceptionalism.
The US, as the anointed guarantor of virtue and perpetual innocence in world politics, is not bound by the rules and standards by which we judge the conduct of others, especially adversaries.
Because the people of the Libyan city of Benghazi truly faced an imminent humanitarian emergency in 2011, the UN case for lending protection seemed strong. Russia and China, permanent members of the UN Security Council, were persuaded to suspend their suspicions about Western motives and abstain from a Security Council resolution specifically authorising the establishment of a no-fly zone to protect Benghazi.
It didn’t take long to disabuse Russia and China, mocking their trust. They were quickly shocked into the realisation that NATO’s real mission in Libya was regime change, not humanitarian protection. In other words, these Western powers who are currently claiming at the UN that international law is on their side with regards to Syria, have themselves a terrible record of flouting and manipulating UN authority whenever convenient and insisting on their full panoply of obstructive rights under the charter when Israel’s wrongdoing is under review.
Reigniting the Syrian war
The Syrian attack, and its legal rationale at the UN, puts the world back at square one when it comes to restraining the international use of force. Imagine the indignation that the US would muster if Russia or China proposed at the Security Council a long-overdue peacekeeping mission to protect the multiply abused population of Gaza. And if these countries went further, and had the geopolitical gall to act outside the UN because of the urgency of the humanitarian justification, the world would almost certainly experience the bitter taste of apocalyptic warfare.
The charter framework makes as much sense, or more, now than when crafted in 1945. Recourse to force is only permissible as an act of self-defence against a prior armed attack, and then only until the Security Council has time to act. In non-defensive situations, such as the Syrian case, the charter makes clear beyond reasonable doubt that the Security Council alone possesses the authority to mandate the use of force, including in response to an ongoing humanitarian emergency. The breakthrough idea in the charter is to limit, as much as language can, discretion by states to decide on their own when to make war. Syria is the latest indication that this hopeful idea has been crudely cast in the geopolitical wastebasket.
Bombing Syria is a Saudi-sponsored adventure that will achieve nothing
It will be up to the multitudes to challenge these developments, and to use their mobilised influence to reverse the decline of international law and the authority of the UN. Trump’s boastful tweet after the Syrian attack, which used the words "mission accomplished", weirdly recalled the time in 2003 when the same phrase was on a banner behind George W Bush as he spoke prematurely of victory in Iraq. Those words soon came back to haunt Bush, and if Trump were capable of irony, he might have realised that he is likely to endure an even more humbling fate.
The end result is the reigniting of the Syrian war just when it seemed to be nearing its end, with the widespread recognition that Damascus prevailed, for better or worse. Now Israel has been given the opportunity to pour oil on the dying embers in Syria to sustain its policy of making sure that chaos and conflict persist, with neither side being allowed to win and end the violence. In the process, the West, led by the US, has again shown its contempt for international law and UN authority.
https://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/what-mission-did-us-really-accomplish-syria-851586713

Didn't u write that W. Europeans r not hostile to Russians? Where & what is ur logic? to me, it's rather very selective!

Yes, but I didn't originate that news.

Neither is Greece, but both r in NATO. The US is using NATO members in Eurasia & would've  used Baku against Moscow & Tehran.

Russia returned the favor in the Caucasus, Syria & Ukraine.

Stalin was preparing to attack Germany in 1942

..... hence Barbarossa. W/o Stalin, the 1941-1945 war may not have started at all, with the Cold War following it. Russia could have reformed & become powerful enough had Stalin....

, a Georgian expelled seminarist, terrorist & bandit turned revolutionary, didn't end the NEP that Lenin himself wanted to last for several decades.

Invading foreign countries and fighting its security assets is an offence not defense. You're trying to twist it so hard it's become comedic.

....sphere of influence....

The facts on the ground speak for themselves- civilian areas were bombed, creating Ms of refugees. Kiev propaganda then blamed everything on the rebels.

If the nationalistic gov. of Ukraine isn't repressive, I don't know which is!

Saakashvili

but what Russia will do with Georgia regarding ethnic Georgians fighting in Donbass.

yes, there is- they use them for internal political reasons; OTH, the US military recruits, all volunteers, r mostly poverty drafted for pay, training & benefits. So, by definition, they r mercenaries too.

it could still happen!

....they r more consistent than the West....

which very good at backstabbing

After the collapse and dismemberment of the USSR....

Logic is the reality that Western Europe is not hostile towards Russians at all.

Very unlikely. Azerbaijan is part of the CIS and so would have Georgia remained if Russia wasn't hostile towards it.

Yugoslavia wasn't even instigated, that powder cake was about to blow without interference opposite to actually instigated proxy wars

I've heard that theory a lot, but there is no real evidence to back it up. Military disposition is one side of the coin. Actual intentions another.

Read about Hitler, his 'Mein Kampf' and Lebensraum im Osten.

Up to 30 million people are estimated by Western historians to have died between 1918 and 1956 in Stalinist repression, civil war, famine and collectivization, although the true figure may never be known. http://www.dpcamps.org/jewsVsUkrainians.html

It wasn't just him who enforced the five year plans subsequently but the vast majority of the communist party that demanded heavy industrialization to meet Western standards for quick capital. People always blame just him. It is never one man. It was a collective plan worked out and proposed by the Gosplan and unilaterally decided to be implemented union wide.

that notion belongs to history. It's incredibly immature and backward.

That is still neither genocide, nor attempted genocide, nor a massacre, not attempted massacre and also not ethnic cleansing or attempted ethnic cleansing.

The Russian garrison opened fire on the Georgians despite the fact they were informed about the operation and told by both Georgian MC and officials to keep out of fights. Georgians responded in kind when attacked by them.

Attack Georgia because of a bunch of volunteers fighting to defend Ukraine from their aggression?

.. it's about difference, and there is none.

Yes, they are more consistent in their hypocrisy than anyone else on the planet, and the world is tired of it.

Russia should really not accuse others of backstabbing.

You should read less conspiracy theories that never provide any legitimate evidence and concentrate more on evidential facts and actual historical reality.
What I just read is a all over the place twisting actual events with very colorful imagination.

Maybe so, but they mispercieve Russia & expect no reaction to NATO expansion.

The CIS membership isn't something written in stone and is subject to change.

Russia only became hostile in response to Georgia's & Ukraine's actions, & her position is healthy, not rotten.

But NATO intervention made it worse!

responses

I heard that his book was considered outdated in Germany by 1939

with the peace pact signed with the USSR. He knew that Stalin had read it, why sign the pact & give him time to prepare to back stub Germany? Hitler wasn't stupid. But he underestimated Stalin's cunning.

Attacking USSR unprovoked & opening a 2nd front was the last thing he needed.

The Red Army was better prepared for its own offensive that historians realize.

The myth that they didn't have time to rearm was to hide huge losses in captured tanks,etc. that were concentrated so close to the border for advance.

It wasn't just him who enforced the five year plans subsequently but the vast majority of the communist party that demanded heavy industrialization to meet Western standards for quick capital. People always blame just him. It is never one man. It was a collective plan worked out and proposed by the Gosplan and unilaterally decided to be implemented union wide.

Nicolas II was also believed to be the kind tzar.

Stalin set the direction & others were following orders lest they be sent to GULAG or worse

To Russia's security it's still valid.

Many civilians & POWs were executed, others forced to leave E. Ukraine.

....should have known better.

No, there r other means to punish it!

The difference is how they came about. The West sent its mercenaries to Georgia & Ukraine 1st

They r consistent with their foreign policy

while the West is consistent in its hypocrisy.

If she does it, it's not w/o good reasons

What evidence can u provide to support ur statements?

Who was to benefit from NATO expansion

, BMD around Russia & China

, coups in Kiev & Tbilisi, as well as earlier regime changes in L. America, Iraq, Iran & Afghanistan? Certainly not Russia & China!

What exactly are you trying to say.

Russia became hostile in response to Georgian independence due to paranoia and you call that healthy? that is all the things wrong about a megalomaniac regime. Everything about that is rotten to its very core.
Ukraine is no difference. Again paranoia. Grabbed an entire territory interntaionaly recognized part of a foreign country, to prevent something speculative in the future.Why? purely because of geostrategic reasons. Rotten to the core. Nothing about overextending your reach outside your own country on the pretext of "self-defence" is healthy. Don't be a tool.

They arrogate to have "historical rights" when clutching and snatching territories from other countries like Ukraine with military force and consequently instigating a secession in yet another region, to distract and keep the situation unstable so that the entire Crimea issue is forgotten, but when it comes to Georgia, it's efforts to regain control of artificially seceded regions, its absolutely detestable! But when ethnic groups in Russia declare independence, they get almost nuked.

Had Russia lost Chechnya, its eastern flank would have been driven out of the Caucasus completely, leaving it without a geopolitical anchor. ..It can be said that no one intends to invade Russia. From the Russian point of view, history is filled with dramatic changes of intention, particularly in the West. The unthinkable occurs to Russia once or twice a century. ..
Russia does hold the northern Caucasus, but it no longer boasts a deep penetration of the mountains, including Georgia and Armenia. Without those territories Russia cannot consider this flank secure. ..
Russia's loss of Ukraine and Moldova allows both the intrusion of other powers and the potential rise of a Ukrainian rival on its very doorstep. Powers behind the Carpathians are especially positioned to take advantage of this political geography. ..From the Russian point of view, creating a sphere of influence that would return Russia to its relatively defensible imperial boundaries is imperative. https://worldview.stratfor.com/article/geopolitics-russia-permanent-struggle
This support for the Russian nation remains powerful, despite the existence of diverse ethnic groups throughout the country. https://www.businessinsider.com/10-maps-that-explain-russias-strategy-2016-1#-12

For the Serbs!

At least further massacres and attempted genocides were prevented.

Stalin made a huge strategic error in deploying his army and aerodromes so close to the border and that's exactly what the Germans needed, especially knowing the state of the Russian forces.

Hitler would have attacked anyway. But for now he needed to keep the Soviets in check to deal with Western Europe. Originally he wanted to invade Britain but that plan failed miserably.

Oh sure, but of course you know more than historians.

..Germans repeatedly postponed their invasion..

None of that ( if true at all to begin with ) meets the format of either genocide, nor attempted genocide and ethnic cleansing or attempted ethnic cleansing.

Care to explain?

They showed bodies of Georgian soldiers claiming those were Americans but they were so obviously not, that they dropped that nonsense later. ..
The entire Georgian conflict literally began with Russian mercenaries sent over the border.

The Georgians gave us all they had, and we gave them crap.
https://nypost.com/2008/08/18/devil-sent-down-to-georgia/

Under the presidency of Columbia University–educated Mikheil Saakashvili, Georgia launched vigorous bids for membership in the EU and NATO, and has contributed troops to the missions in both Afghanistan and Iraq. ..
Moscow’s interests in Georgia are largely motivated by post-imperial resentment and not humanitarian concern for the well-being of Abkhazians and Ossetians; its recognition of Abkhazian and South Ossetian “independence” is in violation of international law, as is its building permanent military bases in both territories; and it continues to station troops on sovereign Georgian land in violation of an EU ceasefire. http://www.worldaffairsjournal.org/article/daze-war-russia-georgia-conflict-film

What "documentary proof"- conspiracies?

An online encyclopedia may not be academic but at least those are actually researched.

All the countries who seek protection.

What they commit is on themselves.

James Bissett, Canadian Ambassador to Yugoslavia, Bulgaria and Albania, wrote in 2001 that media reports indicate that "as early as 1998, the Central Intelligence Agency assisted by the British Special Air Service were arming and training Kosovo Liberation Army members in Albania to foment armed rebellion in Kosovo. (...) The hope was that with Kosovo in flames NATO could intervene ...". According to Tim Judah, KLA representatives had already met with American, British, and Swiss intelligence agencies in 1996, and possibly "several years earlier". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_Liberation_Army#Foreign_support
According to a 2001 report by Human Rights Watch (HRW):
The KLA was responsible for serious abuses... including abductions and murders of Serbs and ethnic Albanians considered collaborators with the state. Elements of the KLA are also responsible for post-conflict attacks on Serbs, Roma, and other non-Albanians, as well as ethnic Albanian political rivals... widespread and systematic burning and looting of homes belonging to Serbs, Roma, and other minorities and the destruction of Orthodox churches and monasteries... combined with harassment and intimidation designed to force people from their homes and communities... elements of the KLA are clearly responsible for many of these crimes.
The KLA engaged in tit-for-tat attacks against Serbs in Kosovo, reprisals against ethnic Albanians who "collaborated" with the Serbian government, and bombed police stations and cafes known to be frequented by Serb officials, killing innocent civilians in the process. Most of its activities were funded by drug running, though its ties to community groups and Albanian exiles gave it local popularity. The exact number of victims of the KLA is not known. According to a Serbian government report, the KLA had killed and kidnapped 3,276 people of various ethnic descriptions including some Albanians. From 1 January 1998 to 10 June 1999 the KLA killed 988 people and kidnapped 287; in the period from 10 June 1999 to 11 November 2001, when NATO took control in Kosovo, 847 were reported to have been killed and 1,154 kidnapped. This comprised both civilians and security force personnel. Of those killed in the first period, 335 were civilians, 351 soldiers, 230 police and 72 were unidentified. By nationality, 87 of the killed civilians were Serbs, 230 Albanians, and 18 of other nationalities. Following the withdrawal of Serbian and Yugoslav security forces from Kosovo in June 1999, all casualties were civilians, the vast majority being Serbs.According to Human Rights Watch, as "many as one thousand Serbs and Roma have been murdered or have gone missing since 12 June 1999." A Serbian court sentenced 9 former KLA members for murdering 32 non-Albanian civilians. In the same case, another 35 civilians are missing while 153 were tortured and released. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kosovo_Liberation_Army#Reported_abuses  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_crimes_in_the_Kosovo_War#Kidnappings_and_summary_executions
On 14 May 1999, NATO aircraft bombed a column of Albanian refugees near Koriša. An operation during the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, at least 87 were killed and 60 wounded. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kori%C5%A1a_bombing
The Lužane bus bombing occurred on May 1, 1999 during the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, when NATO missiles targeting a bridge in Kosovo hit a bus. The bus was hit on the Lužane north of Pristina. On that day, 46 civilians of Serb and Albanian ethnicity were killed. Among the victims were 14 children. One section plunged off the bridge into the river below. Amnesty International believes that NATO did not always meet its legal obligation in selection targets of attack, one of which includes bombing of this bridge in Lužane, where NATO forces failed to suspend the attack after it was evident that they had struck the civilians. The bus (Niš-Ekspres) was on a regular express service, linking Pristina and Niš. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lu%C5%BEane_bus_bombing
The Bombing of Albanian refugees near Gjakova occurred on 14 April 1999 during the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia, when NATO planes accidentally bombed refugees on a twelve-mile stretch of road between the towns of Gjakova and Deçan in western Kosovo. 73 Kosovo Albanian civilians were killed. Among the victims were 16 children. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_bombing_of_Albanian_refugees_near_Gjakova
Both Serbs and Albanians were killed in 90 Human Rights Watch-confirmed incidents in which civilians died as a result of NATO bombing. It reported that as few as 489 and as many as 528 Yugoslav civilians were killed in the NATO airstrikes. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_during_Operation_Allied_Force
On April 12, 1999, NATO airstrikes struck a railway bridge in Grdelica, hitting a passenger train on the Niš - Preševo line. According to Večernje Novosti, 15 of the killed civilians were identified, a large number of passengers were classified as "missing".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_during_Operation_Allied_Force#April_12,_1999:_Bombing_in_southern_Serbia

But, he added, the “Achilles’ heel of Georgian democracy is its judiciary system.

As a result of Moscow’s tumult-inducing strategy, the GD leaders have already made a number of loyal statements toward Moscow and condemned the pro-Western forces as well as Rustavi 2, which recently “insulted Putin” (Kommersant, July . Meanwhile, Georgia’s de facto ruler, Bidzina Ivanishvili, finds himself in a hopeless situation. He faces one of two terrible scenarios: either uncontrolled inflation leading to revolution or social rebellion, or the government, fearing the Russian embargo, will be forced to send Moscow even more signals of loyalty. In either case, Russia wins.