Should the UK go to war with Russia ?

[AlfredJPruffock]

The dramatic military attack by the military of the Republic of Georgia on South Ossetia in the last days has brought the world one major step closer to the ultimate horror of the Cold War era- a thermonuclear war between Russia and the United States-by miscalculation.


The question is whether The Bush administration are encouraging the unstable Georgian President, Mikhail Saakashvili in order to force the next US President to back the NATO military agenda of the Bush Doctrine.

This time Washington may have badly misjudged the possibilities, as it did in Iraq, but this time with possible nuclear consequences.

Since the end of the Cold War the developments by NATO and most directly by Washington was to systematically pursue what military strategists call Nuclear Primacy.

Put simply, if one of two opposing nuclear powers is able to first develop an operational anti-missile defense, even primitive, that can dramatically weaken a potential counter-strike by the opposing side's nuclear arsenal, the side with missile defense has "won" the nuclear war.

This is the issue where Russia has drawn a deep line in the sand, understandably so.

The forceful US effort to push Georgia as well as Ukraine into NATO would present Russia with the spectre of NATO literally coming to its doorstep, a military threat that is aggressive in the extreme, and untenable for Russian national security.

This is what gives the seemingly obscure fight over two provinces the size of Luxemburg the potential to become the 1914 Sarajevo trigger to a new nuclear war by miscalculation.

The trigger for such a war is not Georgia's right to annex South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Rather, it is US insistence on pushing NATO and its missile defense right up to Russia's door.

[Nicky G]

Rather, it is US insistence on pushing NATO and its missile defense right up to Russia's door.

Russia couldn't care less about the little missile shield or NATO, but this is the line of propaganda they (the Soviets) are using. Amazing how all of this has turned out to be America's fault (again) and even more amazing that intelligent people believe it. I'll say it again, this is a provocation designed to strain relations with the West to justify a military build up and a future attack on the United States. They tried it with Iran and North Korea (both failed), now they're raising the stakes. If i'm proven wrong and Russia doesn't continue to agitate you can have the keys to my Morris Minor.

[Nicky G]

Put simply, if one of two opposing nuclear powers is able to first develop an operational anti-missile defense, even primitive, that can dramatically weaken a potential counter-strike by the opposing side's nuclear arsenal, the side with missile defense has "won" the nuclear war.

Again, utter nonsense. Do you realize how many ICBM's Russia has? How many it has that are most likely undeclared? Do you realize that any first strike would come from submarines? That before that there would be a little “diversion” in the form of an “Islamic” terror strike where US leadership is decapitated?

[Diver]

Russia couldn't care less about the little missile shield or NATO, but this is the line of propaganda they (the Soviets) are using. Amazing how all of this has turned out to be America's fault (again) and even more amazing that intelligent people believe it. I'll say it again, this is a provocation designed to strain relations with the West to justify a military build up and a future attack on the United States. They tried it with Iran and North Korea (both failed), now they're raising the stakes. If i'm proven wrong and Russia doesn't continue to agitate you can have the keys to my Morris Minor.

And your caravan Sas?

[Churchill]

The dramatic military attack by the military of the Republic of Georgia on South Ossetia in the last days has brought the world one major step closer to the ultimate horror of the Cold War era- a thermonuclear war between Russia and the United States-by miscalculation.


The question is whether The Bush administration are encouraging the unstable Georgian President, Mikhail Saakashvili in order to force the next US President to back the NATO military agenda of the Bush Doctrine.

This time Washington may have badly misjudged the possibilities, as it did in Iraq, but this time with possible nuclear consequences.

Since the end of the Cold War the developments by NATO and most directly by Washington was to systematically pursue what military strategists call Nuclear Primacy.

Put simply, if one of two opposing nuclear powers is able to first develop an operational anti-missile defense, even primitive, that can dramatically weaken a potential counter-strike by the opposing side's nuclear arsenal, the side with missile defense has "won" the nuclear war.

This is the issue where Russia has drawn a deep line in the sand, understandably so.

The forceful US effort to push Georgia as well as Ukraine into NATO would present Russia with the spectre of NATO literally coming to its doorstep, a military threat that is aggressive in the extreme, and untenable for Russian national security.

This is what gives the seemingly obscure fight over two provinces the size of Luxemburg the potential to become the 1914 Sarajevo trigger to a new nuclear war by miscalculation.

The trigger for such a war is not Georgia's right to annex South Ossetia and Abkhazia. Rather, it is US insistence on pushing NATO and its missile defense right up to Russia's door.

The end result of all this is that NATO will be disbanded and a "New World Order" will take its place.

Thank you and good night.

[Cyberman]

The Russians are desperate to reassert themselves, having lost their former occupied territories. Georgia is applying to join Nato, it also has substantial amounts of oil passing through it. Its reasons for attacking Georgia are that if it does not act now it may then have to tackle NATO, it also has control over more oil, and it sends a message out to the rest of the world.

This could easily become an extended war as the world waits to see what the West are going to now do. Are the West going to be seen to be weak when a very strong ally of theirs is being attacked? or will the EU/Nato/US start channelling support through Turkey?

It is also an opportunity for the West to teach Russia a lesson over its support for Serbia and its opposition to activities in Iran and Iraq. If you think this is all about the rights of a few Russian passport holders then you are a bigger fool then even the merits of your little "tit for tat" analyses convey.

News this morning is that Russia continues to push on through Georgia. This is further proof that this whole situation has been manipulated by Russia to enable the taking over of a sovereign state.

We must now initially mobilise Turkey through Nato and the EU to enter the southern region of Georgia to support the capital Tblisi, with the permission of Georgia, to stop Russia encroaching further south. Then we can add reinforcements from Nato if required. Hopefully, once Russia sees that the West will not roll over, they will cease their incursions and we can have a peaceful solution, with Russia withdrawing.

Failure to act shows real weakness that the Russians will exploit and allow them to threaten other bordering states.

[GreenerGrass]

News this morning is that Russia continues to push on through Georgia. This is further proof that this whole situation has been manipulated by Russia to enable the taking over of a sovereign state.

We must now initially mobilise Turkey through Nato and the EU to enter the southern region of Georgia to support the capital Tblisi, with the permission of Georgia, to stop Russia encroaching further south. Then we can add reinforcements from Nato if required. Hopefully, once Russia sees that the West will not roll over, they will cease their incursions and we can have a peaceful solution, with Russia withdrawing.

Failure to act shows real weakness that the Russians will exploit and allow them to threaten other bordering states.

This whole situation reminds me of the Cuban missile crisis, when the USA put nukes in Turkey and then had to secretly withdraw them. They have learnt nothing.
You want NATO troops to move into Georgia and start World War 3 to save a p1sspot former soviet republic? Even Bush isn't that stupid.
UN troops maybe, but, oh no, the UN is even more of a joke than it was before since the USA and Blair helped to destroy it.

As someone else said, we can't be too nasty to the Russians in Europe or the lights go out when our power stations run out of gas. They don't even need to invade us.
As others have said this whole situation was caused by the prospect of Georgia joining NATO and trying to place a US "missile shield" in former Warsaw Pact countries. Think how the USA would react if Russia started messing about in Mexico like this.

[Cyberman]

This whole situation reminds me of the Cuban missile crisis, when the USA put nukes in Turkey and then had to secretly withdraw them. They have learnt nothing.
You want NATO troops to move into Georgia and start World War 3 to save a p1sspot former soviet republic? Even Bush isn't that stupid.
UN troops maybe, but, oh no, the UN is even more of a joke than it was before since the USA and Blair helped to destroy it.

As someone else said, we can't be too nasty to the Russians in Europe or the lights go out when our power stations run out of gas. They don't even need to invade us.
As others have said this whole situation was caused by the prospect of Georgia joining NATO and trying to place a US "missile shield" in former Warsaw Pact countries. Think how the USA would react if Russia started messing about in Mexico like this.

Putting defensive/peacekeeping troops into Georgia at the request of Georgia will not cause World War III, but appeasement may do. Failure to act could be a catalyst because Russia will see NATO as weak and will give them added incentive to be aggressive towards the West.

Economic sanctions against this tyrannical, evil, bullying 'superpower' must also be a priority, regardless of any cost to us. Peace has to be far more important than Russian oil or gas.

[snaw]

Putting defensive/peacekeeping troops into Georgia at the request of Georgia will not cause World War III, but appeasement may do. Failure to act could be a catalyst because Russia will see NATO as weak and will give them added incentive to be aggressive towards the West.

Economic sanctions against this tyrannical, evil, bullying 'superpower' must also be a priority, regardless of any cost to us. Peace has to be far more important than Russian oil or gas.

Actualluy. kind of agree with that. DOing nothing here sends out completly the wrong message.

[bored]

Putting defensive/peacekeeping troops into Georgia at the request of Georgia will not cause World War III, but appeasement may do. Failure to act could be a catalyst because Russia will see NATO as weak and will give them added incentive to be aggressive towards the West.

Economic sanctions against this tyrannical, evil, bullying 'superpower' must also be a priority, regardless of any cost to us. Peace has to be far more important than Russian oil or gas.

So in your logic, adding more troops to the region will lead to faster peace?