• This is a stand-to for an incoming competition, one of our most expensive yet.
    Later this week we're going to be offering the opportunity to Win £270 Rab Neutrino Pro military down jacket
    Visit the thread at that link above and Watch it to be notified as soon as the competition goes live

Brown: we will stand up to Russias naked aggression

Do you support mr.Brown in his position toward Russia?

  • He is too soft toward Russia

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Absolutely support

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I hate to say it but I support mr.Brown

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Partially support

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • To demand anything the West must itself play by the rules.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The article is no more than electoral trick

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Empty words

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • I disagree with mr.Brown

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
#1
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/31/russia.georgia

No one wants a new Cold War or the encirclement of Russia. But when I spoke to President Medvedev yesterday, I told him to expect a determined European response. As David Miliband has said, there can be no return to 'business as usual' unless and until Russia commits fully to Georgia's territorial integrity and withdraws to its previous positions.
I fear they are absolutely unrealistic expectations and likely very soon the relations will return to 'business as usual'.

I believe Russia faces a choice about the nature of its responsibilities as a leading and respected member of the international community. My message to Russia is simple: if you want to be welcome at the top table of organisations such as the G8, OECD and WTO, you must accept that with rights come responsibilities. We want Russia to be a good partner in the G8 and other organisations, but it cannot pick and choose which rules to adhere to.

That is why I will argue tomorrow that Russia should accept Georgia's territorial integrity and international mechanisms for addressing these conflicts, and withdraw troops to their previous positions. And, in the light of Russian actions, the EU should review - root and branch - our relationship with Russia. We should continue to strengthen the transatlantic relationship and may need to meet more regularly as the G7. We are also reflecting on the Nato response. We must re-evaluate the alliance's relationship with Russia, and intensify our support to Georgia and others who may face Russian aggression.
...
the changing global order cannot be governed by institutions designed in the middle of the last century. We now know how much more we have to do to create an effective system of international rules.
It is an exellent idea - the system of international rules. So why not to formulate them plainly and act according to them? In Kosovo for example.

Do you support the position expressed by mr.Brown.
 
#2
Sergey,

**** off, won't you and take your hypocritical and two faced crap with you.

Sorry, MODS but it needs to be said.


PS You out of Georgia yet?
 
#3
Following NATO's illegal occupation of the Serbian Province of Kosovo and the EU's unlawful recognition of said province, then we are in no position to get on the moral high ground regarding Russia doing exactly the same with South Ossetia.

Didn't Milliband and the Russians both use the excuse that supposed ethnic cleansing can justify both these clear breaches of international law?

As for Brown: F*cking hypocrite yet again.
 
#4
in_the_cheapseats said:
Sergey,

* off, won't you and take your hypocritical and two faced crap with you.
Mate, it is a freedom of speech. Hint: each time as you see the Labrador simply ignore the message.

PS You out of Georgia yet?
I was in some EU countries recently (Alas!!! excluding the UK). Btw, the Poles apparently don't expect Russian tanks in Warsaw anytime soon.
 
#7
The_Cad said:
Following NATO's illegal occupation of the Serbian Province of Kosovo and the EU's unlawful recognition of said province, then we are in no position to get on the moral high ground regarding Russia doing exactly the same with South Ossetia.

Didn't Milliband and the Russians both use the excuse that supposed ethnic cleansing can justify both these clear breaches of international law?

As for Brown: F*cking hypocrite yet again.
You'll remember, of course, the russian forces that occupied the Airfield?
 
#8
parapauk said:
The door swings both ways. If Russia claims Kosovo justified what it did, it must by implication endorse Kosovo's independence.
It is an interesting idea. As Kosovo is not so important for Russia then such a variant is at least discussable.

But there is another option: the West revokes its recognition of Kosovo as an independent state and demands similar move from Russia. Again, it is an interesting and discussable variant.

Other (asymmetric) options are unviable.
 
#9
I have a vision of Brown, on the steps of an aircraft having returned from Moscow, waving a sheaf of paper claiming "Peace in our time".

Then the tanks roll into Poland and we all get a terrible feeling of Deja Vu.
 
#10
parapauk said:
Btw, the Poles apparently don't expect Russian tanks in Warsaw anytime soon.
That's because they know the Polish army could nail an invading Russian force to the wall.
Right.
 
#11
KGB_resident said:
parapauk said:
The door swings both ways. If Russia claims Kosovo justified what it did, it must by implication endorse Kosovo's independence.
It is an interesting idea. As Kosovo is not so important for Russia then such a variant is at least discussable.

But there is another option: the West revokes its recognition of Kosovo as an independent state and demands similar move from Russia. Again, it is an interesting and discussable variant.

Other (asymmetric) optiona are unviable.
I don't see them as asymmetric. Kosovo has been endorsed as nation by 46 nations after they declared themselves independent.

You invaded Georgia and simply made a statement, followed up by a vote in your Paliament which hasn't been endorsed by a single other nation.

You won't get any support from any of the other ex-USSR bits now autonomous as if they do all they will be doing is setting precedent for you to ignore any other national boundaries that you don't like.

Do you have any friends anymore? I'm unsure
 
#12
in_the_cheapseats said:
The_Cad said:
Following NATO's illegal occupation of the Serbian Province of Kosovo and the EU's unlawful recognition of said province, then we are in no position to get on the moral high ground regarding Russia doing exactly the same with South Ossetia.

Didn't Milliband and the Russians both use the excuse that supposed ethnic cleansing can justify both these clear breaches of international law?

As for Brown: F*cking hypocrite yet again.
You'll remember, of course, the russian forces that occupied the Airfield?
You'll remember we didn't start WW 3 because of it. Why should Russia give a fcuk what Broon says - we couldn't say boo to a goose thanks to successive Govts particularly since the "peace dividend".

Like nuclear deterrence - intention AND capability are required. Mind you a strongly worded letter should have the Russian Army p1ssing itself.

Nobody likes it but we opened a can of worms with Kosovo and now we need to be able to deal with the consequences.
 
#14
in_the_cheapseats said:
KGB_resident said:
parapauk said:
The door swings both ways. If Russia claims Kosovo justified what it did, it must by implication endorse Kosovo's independence.
It is an interesting idea. As Kosovo is not so important for Russia then such a variant is at least discussable.

But there is another option: the West revokes its recognition of Kosovo as an independent state and demands similar move from Russia. Again, it is an interesting and discussable variant.

Other (asymmetric) optiona are unviable.
I don't see them as asymmetric. Kosovo has been endorsed as nation by 46 nations after they declared themselves independent.

You invaded Georgia and simply made a statement, followed up by a vote in your Paliament which hasn't been endorsed by a single other nation.

You won't get any support from any of the other ex-USSR bits now autonomous as if they do all they will be doing is setting precedent for you to ignore any other national boundaries that you don't like.

Do you have any friends anymore? I'm unsure
They ILLEGALLY declared themselves independent and all 46 nations who recognised Kosovo are flouting international law, a law put in place precisely to protect the territorial integrity of nation states and prevent the very situation we are now in with Geogia..

As we have seen, you flout the law then you give the green light to anyone else who fancies some extra lebensraum.
 
#15
On the Georgia thing, fcuk em and as for Brown and (shit can't believe Im having to say this) David Cameron gobbing off about the situation they should shut the fcuk up and sort our own problems first. Brown the nob should get a reality check and Cameron should shut up and work on kicking that bunch of liers and traitors out of power.
 
#16
in_the_cheapseats said:
KGB_resident said:
parapauk said:
The door swings both ways. If Russia claims Kosovo justified what it did, it must by implication endorse Kosovo's independence.
It is an interesting idea. As Kosovo is not so important for Russia then such a variant is at least discussable.

But there is another option: the West revokes its recognition of Kosovo as an independent state and demands similar move from Russia. Again, it is an interesting and discussable variant.

Other (asymmetric) optiona are unviable.
I don't see them as asymmetric. Kosovo has been endorsed as nation by 46 nations after they declared themselves independent.

You invaded Georgia and simply made a statement, followed up by a vote in your Paliament which hasn't been endorsed by a single other nation.
You won't get any support from any of the other ex-USSR bits now autonomous as if they do all they will be doing is setting precedent for you to ignore any other national boundaries that you don't like.

Do you have any friends anymore? I'm unsure
So what do you mean? That it was right to invade Yugoslavia but not right to invade Georgia? Just because in one case there were many invading countries and in another one only single invading force?

Well so what about Turkey that still occupies (for decades) territory of EU country? Why not to demand that Turkey must obey the rules?
 
#18
KGB_resident said:
parapauk said:
Btw, the Poles apparently don't expect Russian tanks in Warsaw anytime soon.
That's because they know the Polish army could nail an invading Russian force to the wall.
Right.
It's true I'm afraid. Looking at the Moscow millitary district, you find the the only really usable large Russian ground formation as far as west of the Urals is concerned is 75,000 troops in two tank and two motor rifle divisions, and a SF brigade, plus support units. Even if you add in airborne units to that total, you're not going to do any better than 100,000 troops, 70% of who would be conscripts. Try taking Poland with a force that size and see how far you get. Russia's total ground force strength is (in theory) 400,000 but I wouldn't class a great many of them as capable. The performance in Georgia was largely a result of Russia's best units being stationed in Chechnya next door.
 
#19
The_Cad said:
I have a vision of Brown, on the steps of an aircraft having returned from Moscow, waving a sheaf of paper claiming "Peace in our time".

Then the tanks roll into Poland and we all get a terrible feeling of Deja Vu.
I have heard it said that chamberlin did that simply as a ploy to give us more time to re-arm to face the german forces. After the 'war to end all wars' the democratic nations (including britian) used to 'peace dividend' as the excuse to drastically cut defence capabilities. This gave the axis countries the idea that they could succesfully spead their are of influence by force.

gordon brown has overseen a savage curtailing of the UK's defence capability thanks to the perceived 'peace dividend and a resurgent russian has no reason to listen to us. GB and his lot want to think the world is cute and fluffy and no-one would hurt anyone else, but people are no different now than they were in the 30s. GB would not accept that the reductions in our armed forces were a mistake and he therefore will not do the essential thing and start a program to re-arm the UK.

things will have to get very much worse before our cowardly government accepts the fact that we need increase the means to back up our words with force if we are to be a 'player' on the world stage.
 
#20
SkiCarver said:
The_Cad said:
I have a vision of Brown, on the steps of an aircraft having returned from Moscow, waving a sheaf of paper claiming "Peace in our time".

Then the tanks roll into Poland and we all get a terrible feeling of Deja Vu.
I have heard it said that chamberlin did that simply as a ploy to give us more time to re-arm to face the german forces. After the 'war to end all wars' the democratic nations (including britian) used to 'peace dividend' as the excuse to drastically cut defence capabilities. This gave the axis countries the idea that they could succesfully spead their are of influence by force.

gordon brown has overseen a savage curtailing of the UK's defence capability thanks to the perceived 'peace dividend and a resurgent russian has no reason to listen to us. GB and his lot want to think the world is cute and fluffy and no-one would hurt anyone else, but people are no different now than they were in the 30s. GB would not accept that the reductions in our armed forces were a mistake and he therefore will not do the essential thing and start a program to re-arm the UK.

things will have to get very much worse before our cowardly government accepts the fact that we need increase the means to back up our words with force if we are to be a 'player' on the world stage.
Considering Chamberlain was one of those responsible for the previous round of defence cuts then my analogy betwen him and cyclops stands!

Considering how many Maxist/Leninists we have in our government, they probably see a resurgent Russia as a good thing.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top