Devils On The Loose In Georgia, And The Devil Deals The Cards
By Mitch Berg
How badly are the Russians behaving in Georgia?
Oh, yes – it’s much worse than the Mainstream Media would tell you even if they did a proper job of covering this war.
Amid photos of the horrors of war, grateful South Ossetians and triumphant Russian troops, one series leapt out at me as a former intel officer: Bearded irregulars riding atop Russian-built armored vehicles (old BMPs, for the military-hardware buffs). The vehicles had been splashed with white lettering.
What did the scrawls announce to the world? These thugs proudly proclaimed that they’re Chechens serving in the Vostok (“East”) Battalion commanded by Badrudin Yamadaev – who shares a reputation for gangland violence with his brother, Ruslan.
Read the piece for the background on this “unit”. Summary: It’s as if the Mafia or the Crips or Los Reyes were given machine guns and tanks (or BMP MICVs, for the equipment buffs).
Even in Russia, people have demanded this “unit” be disbanded. Yet it never happened. Why? (emphasis added by me):
Two reasons: First, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin wants the Georgians to suffer – to really suffer. And Chechens are the world’s subject-matter experts in atrocities.
Second, this gives the Russian army itself a veil of deniability: When Putin’s spokesmen insist that the Russian military isn’t involved in the worst savagery in Georgia, they’re technically telling the truth (if we don’t count air attacks and artillery bombardments), since the Chechen thugs on their payroll are on the job.
Talk of getting Georgia into NATO was far-fetched; they were “a nation too far” for NATO. But we obviously need a new approach to dealing with Russia. Because Morris is right:
And there’s plenty else to be outraged about – not all of it Russia’s fault. Images of dead and disfigured Georgian soldiers show them wearing US-surplus canteens, boots and helmets, or equipped with antique US anti-tank weapons. After the Georgians did all their tiny country could to support us in Iraq, all we gave them was cast-off junk – thanks to Congress and the State Department.
Our military was only allowed to train the Georgians for peacekeeping, anti-terrorism and small-unit tactics. The Georgians gave us all they had, and we gave them crap. The Bush administration should hang its wobbly head in shame.
Perhaps the west, should it intend to get serious about containing Russian aggression, needs a new organization, formed from nations who are less than a generation removed from Russian domination. Call it the Eastern Europe Treaty Organization, or the Borscht Bloc for all I care. Get the Baltics, Poland, the Czechs and Slovaks and Ukrainians and Romanians and Bulgarians and whatever’s left of Georgia when this is over. Nations that, unlike the (West) Germans and Dutch and Spanish remember what they’re fighting against.
Rhetorically, in most cases.
(Via Fingers)
August 18th, 2008 at 8:44 am
Mitch:
“containing Russian aggression”
I suppose then the Japanese were containing our post-Peal Harbor aggression at Iwo Jima.
August 18th, 2008 at 9:56 am
“…this gives the Russian army itself a veil of deniability: When Putin’s spokesmen insist that the Russian military isn’t involved in the worst savagery in Georgia, they’re technically telling the truth…”
And that’s all Rick needs.
And Iwo Jima was a battle in a war. Once a war starts, aggression is to be expected.
August 18th, 2008 at 10:06 am
“Once a war starts, aggression is to be expected.”
Ergo, Georgia should not have started this war.
August 18th, 2008 at 10:11 am
Russia shouldn’t have issued Russian passports to Georgians. It’s no surprise that Rick thinks Georgia trying to control a rebellion in it’s sovereign territory was an act of war.
You are naive to a fault, Rick.
August 18th, 2008 at 11:12 am
I’m starting to think you should change you moniker to Comrade Rick.
I’m trying to decide if you are utterly fooled & confused to the point that Russia is blameless, or are you a straight up operative of the Communist Party.
You are a veritable encyclopedia of Orwellian like Double Speak & revisionism.
August 18th, 2008 at 11:25 am
Kermit:
Regardless of whether you think Georgia was justified in attacking Russian troops in South Ossetia, how can an attack on troops be anything other than an act of war?
Mr. Shirt
ICYMI – The Communists have not had much to do with running Russia for a while now.
“a veritable encyclopedia of Orwellian like Double Speak & revisionism”
I have pointed out the plain fact that Georgia attacked Russian troops first. In plain English, that is called aggression.
August 18th, 2008 at 11:31 am
In plain English, that is called aggression.
It’s plain, and yet it obfuscates.
Let me put this in lefty terms; Georgia is the “aggressor” in the same way the Sandinistas were the “aggressors” when they attacked the Contras.
Russia has been the aggressor in South Ossetia for quite some time, fomenting separatism, giving out Russian passports without a whole lot of bureaucratic twaddle, basically goading the Georgians into having to take some action to validate their claim to the place.
For you to ignore that history…
…makes you a pretty typical lefty.
August 18th, 2008 at 11:47 am
President Medvedev has practically declared the South Ossetians “Russian citizens”. Imagine Wisconsin declaring everyone from the St. Croix to the Mississippi, south of Hwy 8 and north of Haistings “Wisconsin citizens” and then setting up a “peacekeeping force” in the Midway.
Now you tell me, Rick. Who is the aggressor, Russia on foreign soil, or Georgia defending their sovereignity?
August 18th, 2008 at 11:59 am
So we are on the side of the Sandanistas now?
Russia was being naughty. Bad Russia. But, don’t run around saying Russia was the ‘aggressor’ in a deliberate attempt to obscure Georgia’s attack.
Just because we cut off oil and steel shipments to Japan did not make us the aggressor in WWII.
August 18th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
Imagine Wisconsin declaring everyone from the St. Croix to the Mississippi, south of Hwy 8 and north of Hastings “Wisconsin citizens” and then setting up a “peacekeeping force” in the Midway.
Exactly, Kermit. And since the area you’ve described was once part of the Wisconsin Territory, it’s an especially apt comparison. Fortunately, Jim Doyle is marginally less expansionist than Putin.
August 18th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
So we are on the side of the Sandanistas now?
So all you really are is a contrarian? Is that it? Because I’ll take discussions with you a lot less seriously if that’s the case.
Russia was being naughty. Bad Russia. But, don’t run around saying Russia was the ‘aggressor’ in a deliberate attempt to obscure Georgia’s attack.
Rubbish. Russia has been trying to provoke this for quite some time. You can plug your ears and go “nyaaaaaa” until the DNC tells you to stop, but that doesn’t change the facts.
Just because we cut off oil and steel shipments to Japan did not make us the aggressor in WWII.
Comparing a trade sanction and active provocation is disingenuous even by your rather self-indulgent standards.
August 18th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Russia has been trying to provoke this for quite some time.
About, 18 years?
August 18th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Kerm and Mitch:
You seem to think that if Georgia’s claim to South Ossetia is justified, than they can not be the aggressors. But no matter how justified, it is a case of aggression because they attacked first. You think it is justified aggression, others disagree.
“Comparing a trade sanction and active provocation is disingenuous”
Russia’s actions in South Ossetia were far less provocative than U.S. actions against Japan. Russia ratcheted up pressure, but did little to alter the status quo. For almost 20 years Russia has had de facto control of South Ossetia, minor enhancements to that de facto control did not negate Georgia’s de jure claim. More importantly, they did nothing to undermine Georgia’s military strength.
On the contrary, without U.S. oil imports, Japan faced a real use-it or lose-it strategic dilemma. Unless they struck immediately and gained new fuel sources, they would rapidly lose their fleet fuel reserves and thus the ability to deploy their forces. In context, the U.S. fuel embargo was far more provocative, intentionally so.
August 18th, 2008 at 1:30 pm
RickDFL said:
“Russia was being naughty. Bad Russia.”
Oh my goodness. Another proponent of a “Rascally Puppy” approach to foreign policy. I was silly to think it was just a “Madia on Iran” thing.
August 18th, 2008 at 1:32 pm
RickDFL said:
“On the contrary, without U.S. oil imports, Japan faced a real use-it or lose-it strategic dilemma. Unless they struck immediately and gained new fuel sources, they would rapidly lose their fleet fuel reserves and thus the ability to deploy their forces. In context, the U.S. fuel embargo was far more provocative, intentionally so.”
So we are on the side of the Japanese now?
*snicker*
August 18th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
“the U.S. fuel embargo was far more provocative, intentionally so. ”
Let me guess….Howard Zinn?
August 18th, 2008 at 2:14 pm
You seem to think that if Georgia’s claim to South Ossetia is justified, than they can not be the aggressors.
Nope. Merely that you are ignoring (disingenuously) the Russian provocations.
August 18th, 2008 at 2:20 pm
“Howard Zinn?”
No, never read him. James McGregor Burns, Donald Kennedy, some Marshall bio and ect. Roosevelt had been under pressure from liberals to take a firm line with Japan, while the military feared the embargo would trigger a war before we were ready. The major U.S. military commanders all recognized that cutting off oil was very close to an act of war. That is why there were all of those war alerts prior to Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt knew he was risking war but it gave him a. his best chance to secure peace via a Japanese retreat from China or b. a Japanese first-strike which would give him a huge moral advantage. That is what makes him a great Pres.
Just because it was provocative does not mean it was an act of war or even bad diplomacy. In fact I fully approve of it.
August 18th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
The Japanese angle is pretty funny. How many hundreds of thousands of Russians did the Georgians kill in The Rape of Osettia?
August 18th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
“No, never read him. ”
That’s funny, ’cause it sounds like you two have spent a lot of time spooning.
August 18th, 2008 at 2:34 pm
“How many hundreds of thousands of Russians did the Georgians kill in The Rape of Osettia?”
It is safe to say more than the number of Americans killed by Japan prior to Pearl Harbor.
August 18th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Rick, just say “I don’t know”. You sound less stupid that way.
August 18th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
“The Communists have not had much to do with running Russia for a while now.”
Right, sure. is that what they’ve been telling you at the party meetings? The Communists have held prominent positions of power for nearly 100 years. they’re power waned a good bit in the 1990’s but never went away. they are now back in power, even if they call themselves by a different name.
So ummm, since you “have pointed out the plain fact that Georgia attacked Russian troops first.” can you tell me where? What’s that you said? Osettia? which is a part of what country? Oh, it’s a part of Georgia you say?
Okay so let me get this straight, Russian troops were attacked by Georgia, on Georgian soil… and somehow you think the first military move was whose?
August 18th, 2008 at 10:20 pm
Okay so let me get this straight, Russian troops were attacked by Georgia, on Georgian soil… and somehow you think the first military move was whose?
In a disputed region, with a “majority” russian population “defended” by russian “peacekeepers”, albeit provoked, Georgia did make the first military move. We can argue about the semantics in quotation marks all night, but these are facts.
Also, there are two Ossetias – South and North. South is in Georgia, North is in Russia. This is why the whole of Ossetia is in dispute.
August 18th, 2008 at 11:13 pm
Take the bread from the workers’ mouths, spend on what you think is more important. Russia has been run by criminal gangs since 1917.
August 18th, 2008 at 11:58 pm
Terry,
Russia has been run by criminal gangs for centuries, they just used to call them “royalty”.
JPA,
Did Georgia attack the Russians in North or South Ossetia? If South, as I believe is the case, I stand by my statement.
Mexico is currently all pissy because one of our border guards, standing on our soil, shot at a man trying to cross the border. They are mad, because a US government agent fired a shot into Mexican territory. One bullet into an empty desert. Imagine if we sent “peace keepers” to curb the crime.
August 19th, 2008 at 10:07 am
Mr. Shirt:
The U.S. and Mexico have a well recognized common border with a stack full of mutually and Internationally recognized treaties to define things. Georgia and Russia don’t. I wish them luck sorting it out.
August 19th, 2008 at 10:59 am
Face it Rick the Ruskies are doing in Georgia now what the Germans did in Czeckoslavakia 70 years ago. Europe is also busy waving around a piece of paper promising “Peace in our time” from another dictator.
Funny how history repeats isn’t it?
August 19th, 2008 at 11:53 am
jpmn:
Face it. History in not an endless repetition of Munich 1938. Anybody with half a brain could list about a dozen major differences between then and now. Let’s start with the fact that Germany did not have de facto control of any part of Czeckoslavakia, nor did they attack the Germans.
You want to play historical analogies. Big country grabs de facto control of disputed territory, little country attacks to assert de jure authority, big country invades little country – sounds like the Mexican-American War to me.
August 19th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
Analogies and parallels have their uses and their limitations.
Examples of both are both useful and useless.
August 19th, 2008 at 8:11 pm
shirt: Did Georgia attack the Russians in North or South Ossetia? If South, as I believe is the case, I stand by my statement.
Again, Georgia attacked Russian “peacekeepers” who were there to “protect” russian “interests” in the disputed region. It is not as simple as you make it out to be – that is all I am trying to point out.
Tell me, if South Ossetia decided to join North and become part of Russia – who would you support, given majority population in the South are russian citizens who want to reunite with their “brothers”? This is not a hypothetical question – it is the reality on the ground Georgia and Russia are dealing with, and the quagmire we are getting sucked into.
August 19th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
shirt: Russia has been run by criminal gangs for centuries, they just used to call them “royalty”.
Yep. Russia had only been free for a couple of month during the first revolution of 1917, until blasted communists decided to take advantage of the chaos which ensued. Russians were always governed by despots, they do not know any better. They do not know what to do with the real freedom, ’cause they were never free. This is why Putin has support of majority of the population – no, not the old style Soviet 100% vote support, – but real popular support form the rank and file.
August 19th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
The percentage of Russians who remember Stalin as “the good old days” is amazing.
The Russians are a huge case of Stockholm Syndrome. Russia never had a renaissance, so they never really got the same sense of individual worth that the west has.
The chapter on classical Russia in Birth Of The Modern by Paul Johnson is as fascinating and concise a summary as I’ve seen.