• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Georgia and Russia at war

Status
Not open for further replies.

gofreak

GAF's Bob Woodward
So what's with Russia advancing troops beyond the breakaway regions?

Are they saying this is to protect those regions, or are they land-grabbing?
 

~Devil Trigger~

In favor of setting Muslim women on fire
gofreak said:
So what's with Russia advancing troops beyond the breakaway regions?

Are they saying this is to protect those regions, or are they land-grabbing?

you already know the answer to this
 

Zapages

Member
Kung Fu Jedi said:
I'm American, and still prefer the BBC over almost any other news source. Especially on International issues.


I'm American too.... But its really biased as it really favors Israeli, Indian, and Western interests...

I prefer Euro News... They seem a better on the most part...
 

Hypnotoad

Member
gofreak said:
So what's with Russia advancing troops beyond the breakaway regions?

Are they saying this is to protect those regions, or are they land-grabbing?

There was a interview just now in german public TV about that. The journalist spoke with high-ranking generals who talked about establishing a security belt around Chinvali, which as most here should know by now lies right at the edge of Ossetian territory. He said that the Russians were sincere in the way they described the situation.

In another report, it was confirmed that georgian troups shelled Ossetian refugees on their way to the boarder. Contrary to their claims, Georgians still attack with artillery.

By the way, the station these reports were on are not know to be Russia-friendly or anything.
 

gofreak

GAF's Bob Woodward
~Devil Trigger~ said:
you already know the answer to this

This would have serious repercussions, given they'd already given assurances to the UN and other 'partners' that they would not be occupying territories beyond South Ossetia.
 

avaya

Member
Zapages said:
I'm American too.... But its really biased as it really favors Israeli, Indian, and Western interests...

I prefer Euro News... They seem a better on the most part...

You don't seem to watch the BBC much do you if you think they favour Israeli interests :lol
 

Walshicus

Member
avaya said:
There ain't nothing Putin can do to Viktor and Yulia. Well apart from a winter or two of total discontent.
I swear, if Putin even tries to harm one hair on Yulia's perfect head I'll shove Polonium so far down his throat his boxers will glow.

Nobody hurts Yulia... :mad:
 

Zapages

Member
avaya said:
You don't seem to watch the BBC much do you if you think they favour Israeli interests :lol


I've been watching them for quiet a while(for the past 10 years or when I was not even a teenager)... If there is anything positive for the Palestinians they'll give it a spin. Its not much so for the bad Israeli news.... Different story all together.


So WW III anyone or re-initiation of Cold War part II?

Also Euro news carries far more diverse news stories that later appear on the BBC, ie. except for politics as well. Science/Technology news anyone?
 

Zenith

Banned
Zapages said:
I'm American too.... But its really biased as it really favors Israeli, Indian, and Western interests...

I prefer Euro News... They seem a better on the most part...

really? the beeb's always covered the Palestinian side like most of Europe.

bbc world though is definitely a "global" channel, not just coverage of international affairs from a british perspective.
 

Walshicus

Member
goomba said:
They favour US interests, which in turns means they favour Israeli interests.
There are not enough smileys in the world to convey my sentiments with regard this post.


Oh, and Euro News is great. Watch it.
 

Zapages

Member
Zenith said:
really? the beeb's always covered the Palestinian side like most of Europe.

bbc world though is definitely a "global" channel, not just coverage of international affairs from a british perspective.

I find Euro News much more as a global channel than BBC International... Its mostly India this or that half of the time that watch here in the US and then the news is mostly political oriented...
 

Rur0ni

Member
Russian troops have reportedly left Senaki (the base they captured). No one states where they 'left'. I like to think they've advanced.

It's also now 1:10am over there (Aug 12th)

Edit: Some wondering what Russia is trying to do, so far it's legitimately pushing Georgian forces back and knockout out military facilities. Moving to Gori makes strategic sense. But if the Russians keep moving the next couple days... :O
 

Zapages

Member
Napoleonthechimp said:
I've never known the BBC to really favour anyone. I've always thought of them as pretty fair.

I thought like you too... But after a while I could tell the bias they unfortunately had... So they do favor... :(

Euro News is awesome...

Dawn News is awesome for English speaking for Pakistani news. :)
 
Zapages said:
I thought like you too... But after a while I could tell the bias they unfortunately had... So they do favor... :(

Euro News is awesome...

Dawn News is awesome for English speaking for Pakistani news. :)

Euronews is soulless.

It's like the record 15 minutes of stuff then they leave their VCR's running until the next day.
 

Zen

Banned
Hwang Seong-Gyeong said:
Plus if anything Nato is going to use and dump Ukraine just like they did with Georgia.

That never happened. How did they 'use' Georgia? Georgia is largely responsible for knowingly falling into Putins trap with this, and Georgia is a Nato member, only a prospective one.
 

Zapages

Member
Instigator said:
Euronews is soulless.

It's like the record 15 minutes of stuff then they leave their VCR's running until the next day.

I guess its different from region to region... Here in the USA East coast its awesome... :)

Sorry to hear that its sucks in your region?


So cold war II right guys???
 

goomba

Banned
In its near 86 year history, BBC has a long, unbroken and dubious distinction. Today it's little different from its corporate-run counterparts in America, Britain and throughout the world. In fact, on its tailored for a US BBC America audience, what passes for news matches stride for stride what people here see every day - mind-numbing commercialism, shoddy reporting, pseudo-journalism, celebrity and sports features, and other diverting and distracting non-news that should embarrass correspondents and presenters delivering it. It offends viewers and treats them like mushrooms - well-watered, in the dark, and uninformed about the most important world and national issues affecting their lives and welfare.


That's the idea, of course, and has been since BBC's inception. John Reith was its founder and first general manager. Reassuring the powerful, he set the standard adhered to thereafter: "(You) know (you) can trust us not to be really impartial." BBC never was and never is.



Impartiality has no place on BBC nor does its claim about "honesty, integrity, (and being) free from political influence and commercial pressure." How can it? Its Director-General, Executive Board Chairman, BBC Trust Chairman and senior managers are government-appointed and charged with a singular task

- to function as a "propaganda system for elite interests." On all vital issues - war and peace, state and corporate corruption, human rights, social justice, or coverage of the Middle East's longest and most intractable conflict, Westminster and the establishment rest easy. They know BBC is "reliable" - pro-government, pro-business and dismissive of the public trust it disdains. Now more than ever.


This article covers one example among many - BBC's distorted, one-sided support for Israel and its antipathy toward Palestinians. In this respect, it's fully in step with its American and European counterparts - Israeli interests matter; Palestinian ones don't; as long as that holds, conflict resolution is impossible. Therein lies the problem. With its reputation, world reach, and influence, BBC's coverage exacerbates it.

http://www.ukwatch.net/article/bbc039s_proisraeli_bias
 
Zapages said:
I thought like you too... But after a while I could tell the bias they unfortunately had... So they do favor... :(

Euro News is awesome...

Dawn News is awesome for English speaking for Pakistani news. :)

Watch any news service long enough, and you'll perceive some form of bias, real or imagined. I've seen Euro News and yes, it's good. I still prefer the BBC and think it offers the best all around International coverage.
 

Ventrue

Member
goomba said:

This is laughable. I believe (not entirely sure) that the BBC works like the Australian Broadcasting Company in that the business/funding side is indeed government run but the editorial content is independent. The positions listed there seem to support that; depends what type of manager they mean. Believe it or not, this often leads to the fairest coverage because they aren't owned by corporations and the government can't interfere in the actual news.

You could still accuse them of bias of course, as you can accuse anyone; they undoubtedly have some biases. But calling them government puppets is weak.

State-funded media =/= state-run media.
 
Tamanon said:
Plus, wouldn't you then have to contend that any news station is controlled by their advertisers?

Then the Egyptian Tourism Board, Turkish Airlines and all those Investment companies own BBCNews by the balls with all the commercials they run.
 

navanman

Crown Prince of Custom Firmware
My view (tinfoil hat) is that Russia is going to split Georgia in 2 from Gori to Poti and claim everything north of it & whatever land is needed to control the oil pipeline.

The only east to west highway in Georgia runs through Gori. Its the natural division line unless Russia goes all out and takes the whole country.

I see Bush on the news now, more lip service, bit harsher this time but lip service again. He knows he can do nothing and so do Russia.

ossetia_aug11highlights.jpg
 

Wallach

Member
A co-worker pointed out to me that this situation was pretty much mirrored in the beginning of the first Ghost Recon game. Sure enough, it's pretty damn close.
 

Rur0ni

Member
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Russia's "brutal escalation" of attacks against the former Soviet republic of Georgia has jeopardized Russia's relationship with the United States and European nations, President Bush told reporters Monday after returning from his trip to Asia.

"Such an action is unacceptable in the 21st century," he said.

World powers have urged Russia to agree to an immediate cease-fire with Georgia and accept international mediation on the crisis in South Ossetia, as the international community sought to head off all-out war between the two.

Bush said evidence suggests Russia may be preparing to depose Georgia's government.

"Russia must reverse the course it appears to be on and accept this peace agreement as a first step in resolving this conflict," Bush said.
:lol what?
 

HokieJoe

Member
In no particular order, three things:

NATO

Oil and gas pipe lines

Sudentland


Hwang Seong-Gyeong said:
Ossetia's population is 70,000, 1,400 died in one day. Close to 2% of the population died in ONE day, what would have happened if Russia didn't even intervene? Plus there are reports that out of the 70,000 that 30,000 left the area as refugees.

If that's not ethenical cleansing then what is? Numbers speak for themselves.


Where was Russia's concern about ethnic cleansing/genocide in Kosovo?
 

HokieJoe

Member
manipulate said:
neither the west nor russia have any grounds for moral/principalistic stances here, although you could make more of an argument for russia. the recent shit with the US pushing for georgias inclusion in nato was ridiculously aggressive

What? Russia has a long history of oppression in Georgia. I don't blame them for wanting Russia the fuck out. Poor little Vladmir, he's still butthurt over the USSR's demise. F'ing asshole.
 

besada

Banned
ErasureAcer said:
The U.N. doing nothing yet again in a major world conflict...what a shock.

I've seen this posted several times. The UN can't do anything. Russia holds veto in the Security Council, the only group that can authorize any sort of force.

The member countries of the UN are able to go it on their own (like Kosovo) but the UN isn't going to authorize action, because the Russians will veto any action.
 

camineet

Banned
I had thought for the longest time that Georgia was a part of Russia that had broken away at the end of the cold war. I didn't realize that Georgia was not a piece of Russia, but one of the 15 or so Soviet Republics, thus, part of the old Soviet Union, but not Russia proper.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom