Russian PM Dmitry Medvedev holds a meeting at his Gorki residence today. He has warned against Georgia joining NATO.
TASS: Georgia’s accession to NATO may trigger 'terrible conflict,' says Russian PM
On July 12, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg reiterated NATO’s intention to grant membership to Georgia
MOSCOW, August 6. /TASS/. Georgia’s accession to NATO may trigger "a terrible conflict" and lead to catastrophic consequences, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said in an interview with the Kommersant FM radio station, a portion of which was broadcast on Monday.
He pointed out that the 2008 armed conflict between Georgia and South Ossetia, which also involved Russia, could have been prevented. "It was not inevitable," Medvedev stressed.
Read more ....
More News On Russian Prime Minister Medvedev Warning That Georgia’s NATO Entry Could Lead To A Terrible Conflict
Russia warns of 'horrible' conflict if Georgia joins NATO -- FOX News/AP
Russian PM warns NATO admission of Georgia could trigger 'terrible conflict' -- Reuters
10 Years After War, Russia Warns Of 'Horrible' Conflict If Georgia Joins NATO -- RFE
Russia and NATO Could Fight 'Terrible Conflict' If Georgia Joins Alliance, Medvedev Warns -- Newsweek
Medvedev Warns NATO Admission of Georgia Could Trigger 'Terrible Conflict -- Moscow Times
Georgia’s NATO entry could lead to terrible conflict, Russian PM warns -- RT
22 comments:
NATO's house is in disorder so expansion should be at the bottom of their priorities.
Hardly any NATO country meets its Article 3 obligation of being able to conduct self defense.
Hardly any NATO country feels threatened by Russia at the moment.
Hardly any domestic voting block wants to spend 2% of GDP on defense let alone meet Article 3 requirements.
Most major NATO country's military's are not suited to expeditionary warfare at the moment. Germany and British military's have shrunk so fast it's doubtful they could defend their own borders or expeditionary forces.
Given these facts adding another country that could likely face a Russian attack is foolish.
Understandable point of view from the Russians. Georgia should not be in NATO. Imagine if they wanted to do something similar with Mexico.
Anon # 1,
I couldn't have put this any better myself. Such an idea would be spectacularly stupid. I find it hard to believe anyone would even consider this. Unfortunately with the exception of Trump and his team do demonstrate a certain degree of sanity the US government has shown itself to be spectacularly stupid.
This could be looked at from several perspectives. Actually this doesn't make any sense for Georgia. With such a move they would be much more likely to face a Russian attack than if they stayed out NATO. This makes no sense for them either. The best approach for them is to STOP BEING PROVOCATIVE TOWARDS RUSSIA!! Such a more common sense approach would have likely avoided their fight and utter humiliation in the war with Russia in 2008.
Admitting Georgia into NATO makes no sense for America either. The US military is worn down from a multitude of fruitless operations around the world that not only don't serve to advance America's interest but actually undermine them. It'd be problematic for the US military to defend America right now let alone to be responsible for the defense of yet another country. Furthermore, when we are invaded, Georgia is not going to send forces, resources, weapons, money, food, supplies, or anything else to help bolster our defense and to help us resist he invader.
This doesn't make sense any way one looks at it. On the face of it, Georgia is obviously manipulating us. They may be counting on certain goodies courtesy of America assuming the fallout from Russia's response can be mitigated. In this case, they can point to something. America, however, gains nothing of value from such an arrangement. When evaluating a course of action that has zero benefit, huge costs at a very minimum, and even more catastrophic potential cost, the course of action is obvious. DON'T DO IT!!
Of course the US government has become legendary at doing stupid. Perhaps Trump can save us yet again. After all Trump diplomacy is likely why we aren't at hot war with Russia, North Korea, and Iran right now. I suspect after the mid terms Republicans will gain seats with Representatives and Senators whose policies are more compatible with POTUS. Then we can FINALLY look forward to polices that make more sense.
Bottom line, bringing Georgia into NATO would be beyond stupid. In fact, it would be even stupider than our involvement in the Ukrainian coup. At the time, I stated it was arguably the stupidest move ever made by a major world power. Events have proven me to be correct. This one would be on the order of many magnitudes stupider.
Anon # 2,
This is an interesting analogy. Your point is valid assuming the US is a sane and normal country. Unfortunately the US is currently allowing itself to be invaded by vast hordes from Mexico who don't respect it, hate it, wish it hurt, and have no regard for the people they are invading. As such, our response would probably be mild to non existent.
This does bring up an interesting point though. The US military is worn down, poorly led, poorly trained, and it is burdened either with outdated equipment, or highly expensive but useless equipment on a modern battlefield. As such, we are not likely to pose a threat to Russia in any kind of conventional war. On the other hand, the Russian military is in very good shape to threaten the US should they reach an agreement with Mexico for the deployment of Russian military assets. This is something we would want to avoid. Admitting Georgia into NATO would be just the kind of thing that might trigger such a reprisal. We would want to avoid this.
The main threats to America are in terms of most dangerous, 1.) an all out nuclear attack by Russia, 2.)an invasion of the US mainland by Russia, China, Russia and China, or Russia, China, and some combination of their allies, and 3.)an Islamic terrorist attack utilizing a combination of suitcase nuclear weapons and dirty bombs detonated simultaneously across multiple metropolitan areas. Any foreign policy decision we make needs to take this into consideration. Also, this will or should determine how we are going to allocate our limited resources towards our national defense.
With this in mind under Trump the threat of Islamic terrorism has diminished somewhat. We need to continue this trend. To now allocate resources to fight a conflict with Russia that we don't need and may not be able to win risks undermining the gains we have made in this area. Essentially Georgia in NATO increases all three major threats to the US exponentially and contributes nothing anywhere else economic or otherwise that would make them worth this.
Such a policy shouldn't be pursued. It shouldn't be pursued in the same manner that people generally don't pursue policies of jumping out of the windows of tall buildings onto the concrete below. The fact that such an action is even being considered at all is troubling.
Poster
of course you carry out the party line, comrade
Anon,
The comrade insult is what people who post here resort to when they have no good arguments to make and hope by impugning the character of the other they can somehow look good. Basically anonymous posters 1 and 2 made excellent arguments as to why Georgia in NATO makes no sense. I expounded upon their excellent arguments.
Now if you can offer something constructive as to why America should be a member of NATO if Georgia is going to be please do so. Specifically how does it represent our interests? With huge costs as well as even bigger potential costs combined with no upside benefits why should Americans be place in even graver peril than they are already in for the advancement of a chump country that offers us nothing and costs us so much? Now, if you can offer something constructive to this, please do so. Please explain what I am missing. Otherwise don't waste our time!!
I couldn't begin to wonder why Georgia, having been under fire from Russia once not so long ago, would want to join Nato now. Same with Poland that was divided up between Stalin and Germany at the onset of WWII. And any east European country after WWII that was blessed with the glories of a workers' paradise? How about those ungrateful Tatars from east Ukraine that were shipped to the workers' paradise by Stalin in WWII by the hundreds of thousands and whose place was taken by Russians who live there now? Finland. An entire country with an anti-Russian gene. Lithuanians. It's the weather. Estonia. The name says it all.
I wonder if Medvedev fears Georgia will invade Russia again?
Ungrateful wretches. Invade and bomb them. Again.
Anon #1,
Why would Georgia "...likely face a Russian attack...."?
Anon #2,
Your comparison of Mexico and Georgia is the equivalent of comparing an apple with a fruit that hasn't been invented yet.
B.Poster, from now on I'm adding two letters to the front of your assumed name; large I, small m, and dropping the 'B.'.
Also, did you even graduate from kindergarten in troll school? If so, how?
Also, why are you unaware of Georgia's contribution to the world's forces battling terrorism in the Mideast? Is it because you had your paltry check from that Russian handler reduced to the value of your post, which is to say you owe him money and thus couldn't pay your electric bill to read at night and keep in contact with the real world? Georgia picked up their weaponry and joined the fight. That's my kind of Nato ally.
And a word of well intentioned advice Imposter; please check your mailbox back in Moscow. I hope it's the giant sized one. And reinforced at the seams. You're gonna need it 'cuz I'm sure that thing is gonna be creaking from medication ads and offers from crazy farms in Russia when they see your latest.
Roger
What, exactly, is the USA's compelling national interest in Georgia joining NATO?
How will Georgia joining NATO further tip the balance in our favor?
I see a lot of downsides, the worst being war.
And only one upside, using Georgia as a cat's paw to see if Russia is bluffing about war. /s
~ Anon #87
Roger,
I'm not unempathetic to what you write. Please understand that. Anon # 1 explained why it is unfeasible for us/NATO to take on another member right now even if we actually wanted to. Also, you have to remember that it is going to be Americans whose heads are on the chopping block should this policy go awry. Essentially we are going to be the ones that are going to bear the brunt of a Russian reprisal.
I expound upon this by pointing out the US military is not in particularly good shape right now. A policy that risks conflict with a major world power like Russia simply isn't advisable. So the problems actually extend beyond the UK and Germany. We simply aren't in a good position to be able to fight this kind of war right now and are unlikely to be for the foreseeable future.
Anon # 2 likens this to Russia establishing an agreement with Mexico. Very respectfully I think this is actually an apt analogy. Now as I said the US can't even find the will to stop the hordes that are invading us from Mexico. As such, our government probably would not act with alarm over such a thing.
Thank you for the history lesson regarding the conflicts between Russia, Georgia, and others. Actually I am quite familiar with it but it helps to be reminded. The countries have a long history. There's no reason for us to get sucked in as pawns on the side of Georgia, Poland, or others. I think the timeless wisdom of our founding fathers such as George Washington and John Adams are in order. According to George Washington "why quit our own to stand on foreign lands?" The statements of John Adams are especially profound. While America supports liberty everywhere we can ultimately only guarantee our own and we do not go through the world looking for monsters to slay.
Now if someone wants to fight on the behalf of any of these countries they can go join them. Actually I respect you a great deal sir. At least you do not seem to be a crazy Democrat/Leftist frothing at the proverbial mouth for a confrontation with Russia for no good reason other than maybe to save HRC's political career.
We could have a national debate on this. For example are Ukrainians, Georgians, and others worth this. Keep in mind they've used as pawns in the past. How many Americans are worth sending to the slaughter for these people? Also, even if we did decide this is what we wanted to do neither America nor our military are in any position right now to add even more to the burdens we are already carrying. Other NATO countries are no better off.
Bottom line: adding Georgia to NATO assuming America stays in is a bad idea strategically and tactically. Even if it is a good idea morally of which I have substantial doubt the strategic and tactical costs are enormous with no corresponding benefit. Conclusion: this is a far worse idea than supporting the Georgian coup was.
You can tell the Russian trolls take this super serious. Even double posting. My God.
So let me sum this up:
Putin: "don't let Georgia, a country of free men, do what they want, ie join Nato, or else"
Riiight. And my comrades here are up in arms joining him in this.
Vodka for all!
Thought you were renaming him to Loser. .a big I as in Idaho. Got it. ..Imposter is alright.. he's just under orders. It's a difficult job, writing all that jobberish as soon as the Vlad-sign comes out at night. :)
Anon#87,
Pretend you're a Russian commander. Now, with Georgia in NATO, you've got more forests to possibly fight through, more defended cities, mined highways, stay behinds ambushing your logistical tail means more casualties and less food and bullets. A bigger nightmare and all accompanied with a rain of munitions coming from the sky 24/7 and with a frosting of intermittent communications, more of all those fun things that occur in wars.
Comrade colonel, maybe we should have stayed home.
Poster,
Why the fear of yours and some anons that Russia is going to start a war because Georgia wants a NATO insurance policy against another Russian attack on them?
I agree with the nuke suitcase scenario. The religious dinosaurs in Iran would be my candidate for that stunt, if they last long enough. Also agreed Ukraine is questionable in any scenario short of war. That government appears to be Ukraine's own worst enemy, in my opinion.
This said none of you anons have said why Russia would throw away all the gains they have experienced since the Soviet Union fell apart. If ya'll think Russia is going to invade Georgia should it become a member of NATO you are insulting a country that lost 26 million citizens in WWII. They have seen the elephant. They know about war. Add to that ones in Afghanistan and Chechnya. Putin is no fool. He knows he's not dealing with obama these days.
Russia just announced they are not building the T-14 tank or SU-57. Does this sound like a fearful country? Their military is primarily defensive. Their only aircraft carrier sails with a tug everywhere it goes and can't pass it's smog test, if anyone saw photos of it's brief stay off the Syrian coastline. Putin's announcement of a naval buildup ignored that two major ships of that buildup have been abuilding for 12 and 14 years respectively according to a Russian admiral who mentioned this just after Putin's announcement of the buildup and they are still not finished.
They had better hope that Wagner group we and the SDF remodeled recently is not indicative of the new Russian volunteer army.
Take away the nukes and where are they? Well, they're good at obliterating hospitals in Syria. Probably schools also if they don't move.
Your last sentence of the first paragraph mentions a reprisal. Reprisal for what?
I don't understand your fears. I would never think that NATO will start a war. Having another member, no matter how small, is better than a NATO with fewer members methinks.
The insults of "comrade" become tiresome. I will try and address each comment time permitting. I am going to reveal my true identity yet again. Anyone who is intellectually honest will be able to find that I am not a Russian troll. My name is Robert Foshee. My company website is www.fosheecpa.com.
Some people simply have different opinions on the best way forward for our country based upon what we believe to be a careful analysis of the facts at hand. I do find it interesting that we can all view the same information, in real time, and under the same conditions yoet come to different conclusions!!
Roger,
Very respectfully your "Roger having fun Smith" post is steeped in insults and superficial analysis. You post here regularly. Generally your posts are thoughtful and reasonable. As such, you know better than to accuse me of being a Russian troll. With certain others who either lack the ability to read or to think critically I am not surprised. With you I would have expected better. I am going to assume this was a bad moment for you and move on. After all we all make mistakes.
Your last reply to me represents a much more serious and reasonable discussion which I will get to later. Again, thank you for the replies.
Anon #87,
You are spot on. Now when I try to point out such things I am accused of being a troll or worse. How is it that I strike such a never in people.:-) I actually think I am very nice.:-):-)
Roger,
In your response to Anon #87 put it the other way. Pretend you are an American commander. Your personnel have been fighting in a series of fruitless wars around the world for the better part of 20 years, probably longer. Most of the wars don't actually advance American interests but actually undermine them. The troops are tired, worn down, suffer from poor morale, substandard equipment, and training has suffered as has been evidenced by accidents of late and equipment failures. Now you are being asked to assume even more responsibilities. Also, keep in mind that during the first Georgian war retired Col. Ralph Peters had to admit the Russians demonstrated capabilities that we did not have. Given the trends, it is reasonable to assume that such advantages will be even more lopsided now.
At the end of the day, I see no upsides combined with huge downside risks. As to who is the "cat's paw," Georgia is actually safer not joining NATO. By their actions no one in Western Europe seems to view Georgia as a threat. Using them in this manner would be unconscionable. Of course they may be using us thinking they can manipulate, take American largess, and manage the Russian fallout from this.
Now for the anonymous poster who called me a loser. Address the points made in thread. It helps if you carefully read them and read as much of the articles the editor posts as well. If you are unable to do this, don't waste our time.
Anon,
It is difficult to identify which anon to address. The remark of Gerogians as "free men" may be a bit over simplistic. Of course free people in America have a right to decide if they want to sacrifice themselves and their family members in fights that don't serve their interests, have huge downside risks, and have no guarantee of victory.
During the Georgian war during the fog of war it is difficult to say who actually started it. In the run up, certain Georgian leaders seemed to be itching for that fight. I think it possible that they sought to manipulate us into joining their fight. Again, this is the fog of war. We made a huge mistake with Ukraine. It is vitally important that we carefully analyze these things. Basically "look before you leap."
Roger,
Your last reply to me is much better and makes much more sense than your "Roger having fun Smith." I appreciate that.
Answer to the first question: an insurance policy is only good if the insurer can meet the claim. At present, NATO essentially is America and neither it nor America can realistically be expected to be able to meet such a claim right now. Besides before we place yet more unrealistic burdens on America and the American people we need to have a fair debate on this. They hysterical anti-Russian yelling and screaming doesn't count as reasoned debate. The editor once asked in regards to Montenegro does America want to send its sons an daughters to die for Montenegro? He correctly concluded the answer to be no. The same likely applies to Georgia. This is especially true in light of the questionable actions surrounding the Georgian war.
"Take away the nukes and where are they?" They have some of the best trained and best led forces on the planet as well as what appears to be a high degree of motivation combined with some of the best intel services on the planet as well. Besides we can't just take away the nukes. On the other hand take away the fancy and very expensive gadgets from the US military that don't work sometimes and aren't even fit for modern war, where are we? Essentially we have "military porn." As I have stated before, we might actually "win" such a war. Given the costs, risks, and lack of need for it, lets try and do what we can within reason to not find out.
Georgia has helped us with some token assistance in the GWOT but this was to get something of value which they've long since received. Of course our ideological makeup makes us easy to manipulate sometimes.
"Having another member..." I think the other anons address this and I expounded upon it. In summary, we don't have the resources to take care of our current commitments. If a person has to many commitments, at some point they must learn to say NO!! There probably are steps that Georgia can take. I would suggest the following: 1.)build up your domestic defenses to the point that an invasion would be to costly for Russia to consider. Essentially make any victory so pyric they would not consider it. 2.)Try and offer something of value to Russia that they would lose in the event of an invasion. 3.)Don't make needless and provocative moves that might inflame the situation of which NATO membership would be one such possible move.
These would be moves in the right direction. I actually don't think Russia would invade Georgia right now or in the foreseeable future but a move to NATO makes this more likely. Rightly or wrongly Russia does not trust NATO. Furthermore America simply cannot assume the responsibility for the defense of yet another country right now. The problems with this are strategic and tactical. Even if such an expansion makes moral sense, fulfilling the current commitments is problematic let alone adding new ones. I hope this addresses all points and again thank you for the dialogue.
Post a Comment