Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
NASA Space

Russian Invasion of Georgia Might Jeopardize Space Station 515

mknewman writes "Sen. Bill Nelson, one of NASA's biggest proponents on the Hill, is openly questioning how Russia's military intervention in Georgia will affect our access to the space station after the Shuttle is retired in 2010. Currently, NASA is able to use Soyuz vehicles for crew access and lifeboat operations thanks to an exemption from the Iran Non-Proliferation Act. The exemption expires in 2011, only one year after the Shuttle is due to head to the museums."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Russian Invasion of Georgia Might Jeopardize Space Station

Comments Filter:
  • What? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:17PM (#24584971)

    The summary makes absolutely no sense.

    Can anyone shed light on what is going on?

  • by Goalie_Ca ( 584234 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:18PM (#24584979)
    I can't believe that a slight pertubation to the timeline of the hopeless ISS is what really troubles nerds when two countries are at war. Seriously..!
  • moral decline (Score:4, Insightful)

    by polar red ( 215081 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:21PM (#24585035)

    These problems occur, when a country prouding itself to be the greatest, democratic nation on earth, breaks its own rules(like : not intruding on other nations Sovereignty), which lead to other nations breaking those same rules, ... This empire is on its way out i fear, and the results won't be pretty.

  • by Animats ( 122034 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:21PM (#24585053) Homepage

    US manned spaceflight will end in 2010, when the Shuttle is retired. There won't be any follow-on for at least a decade. The US can't afford it any more.

    NASA might be able to sell their interest in the ISS to China or Russia.

  • by BitterOldGUy ( 1330491 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:24PM (#24585113)
    ...somehow since then we aren't allowed to piss them off.

    Russia has the greatest weapon of our time: oil. They have more than the Saudis. Nobody is going to piss them off and disrupt their supply.

  • by wardk ( 3037 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:25PM (#24585131) Journal

    if only there was a terror threat from space. NASA would be up to their eyeballs in no-need-to-account-for cash.

  • Re:moral decline (Score:5, Insightful)

    by couchslug ( 175151 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:27PM (#24585173)

    "which lead to other nations breaking those same rules, .."

    Our Cold War opponents broke them at will in the recent past anyway, because it served them well and they could.

    "Rules" are window dressing to amuse the earnest and naive people who believe in them. Power is what matters, because to the extent one has power one can make up and enforce rules.

  • by MissingRainbow ( 969435 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:27PM (#24585175) Homepage Journal
    Let us all be correct in the terminology here. It is not Russian Invasion, but Russian Retaliation. It was Georgia, with support from USA and Israel, who first initiated the attack against Russian peace keepers. In my opinion [blogspot.com], it is dangerous to have the US as an enemy but fatal to have as a friend. I encourage everybody to read the articles at WSWS [wsws.org] for a good analysis.
  • by jollyreaper ( 513215 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:28PM (#24585187)

    I still have my doubts as to whether the shuttle replacement will pan out.

  • by couchslug ( 175151 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:29PM (#24585223)

    "Yeah, US foreign policy has been pretty much spineless when dealing with Russia since Reagans day... somehow since then we aren't allowed to piss them off."

    We didn't risk much for the trivial players back then either. Some game pieces are expendable, while others have more value.

  • by Bullfish ( 858648 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:33PM (#24585285)

    I doubt this will really matter in the end. Especially long term. The Russians will likely leave by the end of the week as soon as the Georgian military is dismantled. In the end, Georgia started this, and really, what effect did the crushing of the Prague spring, the Hungarian uprising of 56 etc really have on relations between the west and Russia?

    And as others have pointed out, the Georgians started it with an area of effect attack on a city populated by ethnic Russians. If there is trouble with the ISS, it will be for other reasons.

  • by justdrew ( 706141 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:36PM (#24585339)
    what would America do if some asshole country rockets barracks of our peacekeepers in the middle of the night for no reason after 10+ years of mostly peace? we'd go get some revenge and we'd teach a lesson. which is all Russia did. Good for them.
  • by Evilest Doer ( 969227 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:38PM (#24585395)

    I can't believe that a slight pertubation to the timeline of the hopeless ISS is what really troubles nerds when two countries are at war. Seriously..!

    Or, you could look at it this way. Overall human progress is being delayed because two countries are involved in a pissing and "my-dick-is-bigger-than-yours" contest. Or, similar to what Ernest Rutherford said, we've got more important things to worry about than another stupid war.

  • by 93 Escort Wagon ( 326346 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:39PM (#24585413)

    Yeah, US foreign policy has been pretty much spineless when dealing with Russia since Reagans day...

    I know it's fashionable to rail against the US, but in truth the European countries have shared this shortcoming due to their addiction to Russian oil.

    Economic realities drive foreign policy for most countries in the world. We only manage to stand up in righteous indignation when we've got nothing really to lose. It's why we (eventually) were willing to isolate Apartheid South Africa, but never took any measures of consequence against China for {choose any one of many offenses}.

  • by justdrew ( 706141 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:40PM (#24585431)
    is it any wonder? We should have been working on the next gen replacement for the shuttle since 1990 at least. We've fucked up and now it's all going tits up.
  • Re:moral decline (Score:2, Insightful)

    by polar red ( 215081 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:41PM (#24585439)

    "Rules" are window dressing to amuse the earnest and naive people who believe in them

    That's all true, but when you keep shouting at the top of your lungs about those moral standards, you're a hypocrite

  • Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MozeeToby ( 1163751 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:42PM (#24585465)

    Ok, here goes. Most of the international community thinks that Russia is either over reacting or taking advantage of Goergia's internal conflict with a Goergian province that declared independence. This may lead to repercussions, possibly including not renewing the exemption to the non-proliferation treaty. If the internation community chooses not to renew that exemption, based on what the summary says it sounds like Russia will not be able to launch Soyuz vehicles after the exemption expires.

    Keep in mind that this is based on the summary and a quick look at what Wikipedia has to say about the conflict and it's repercussions. Therefore, I might be completely wrong so this should be taken with a big grain of salt.

  • by Free the Cowards ( 1280296 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:42PM (#24585475)

    That's right! No web site, anywhere, should ever talk about anything besides people dying, because people are always dying and it's always the most important thing happening.

    Sheesh. You realize humans are capable of paying attention to more than one thing at a time?

  • by jgtg32a ( 1173373 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:44PM (#24585509)
    Just like every other war?

    All that's needed is some almost plausible BS to go in.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:46PM (#24585553)

    The war between Georgia and Russia is a classic "He started it first!" "Nuh-uh! He started it first" "No, I saw what he did. He started it first." etc. You may have seen such a scene on a playground once and even been a part of one. The truth is that both sides are culpable.

  • by Z00L00K ( 682162 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:50PM (#24585659) Homepage Journal

    Both sides are guilty here, no doubt.

    But Russia made it worse by their actions.

  • by Free the Cowards ( 1280296 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:52PM (#24585683)

    The US can't afford it any more.

    What bullshit! The US doesn't want to pay it any more. It can certainly afford it. Bringing NASA up to Apollo levels of funding would be a virtually unnoticeable drop in the current federal budget.

  • by wumpus188 ( 657540 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:54PM (#24585719)
    Georgia killed 6 people... Russia has killed thousands of Georgians.

    Watching much Fox lately or just pulling numbers out of your ass?
  • by Peter Cooper ( 660482 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:54PM (#24585721) Homepage Journal

    Is that sarcasm? Things like nuclear power and landing on the moon came out of a "my dick is bigger than yours" contest between countries.

  • by Columcille ( 88542 ) * on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @12:58PM (#24585787)
    The ethnic cleansing thing was one of the most amusing statements ever to come from Russia. Ethnic cleansing? Whatever. Georgia responded to separatists who once again launched terrorist attacks on Georgia. Russia, still pouting about Kossovo and unhappy to see a working democracy, decided to take the opportunity to show (1) Putin is still running things and (2) about all he knows how to do is drop bombs.
  • by dunkelfalke ( 91624 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @01:00PM (#24585823)

    now please explain to me how georgia could kill only 6 people by shelling a sleeping capital city at midnight?

    also of note is the fact, that georgia borders chechnya where lots of russian troops are waiting for any action.

  • by DustoneGT ( 969310 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @01:04PM (#24585891)
    If the United States government supports Georgia, we should rescind our Declaration of Independence and rejoin the British Empire.

    Let's look at a similar situation in history. A renegade province of Mexico rebelled and kicked the Mexican government out. A strong ally to the North took them in and waged war with the Mexican military, killing many and eventually taking much more land. I'm talking about Texas.

    If we want to back Georgia on this one, we should give Texas back to Mexico.

    The South Ossetians want to be an independent country. The voted overwhelmingly to do so in 2006. The Russians respect that. The Georgians and their allies (read: us) do not.

    The right of a people to choose their leadership should not be overlooked here.
  • by ShibaInu ( 694434 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @01:06PM (#24585925)

    And, what are we going to do? The US military is tied up in Iraq and Afghanistan, and even if they weren't, getting to Georgia isn't going to be easy. The Euros don't have the balls to do anything meaningful to their largest energy supplier. So, what do you suggest? WWIII?

    This is a larger part of a regional conflict that includes Chechnia. There are layers of ethnic hatred in the region that go back a long way and I find it hard to believe anyone's side of the story. This is a tragedy, but at this point the best thing to do is just to get the shooting to stop.

  • by Shakrai ( 717556 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @01:15PM (#24586085) Journal

    The right of a people to choose their leadership should not be overlooked here.

    Is that why the Russians are busy trying to undermine Saakashvili?

  • by Bemopolis ( 698691 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @01:17PM (#24586119)

    Yeah, US foreign policy has been pretty much spineless when dealing with Russia since Reagans day...

    Yeah, I'm sure glad we had the foresight to arm and fund the muhajadin in Afghanistan. I mean, that went great and NEVER AFFECTED US EVER AGAIN...

  • by justdrew ( 706141 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @01:17PM (#24586125)
    sounds like bullshit show elections to me.
  • by X.25 ( 255792 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @01:22PM (#24586219)

    Why don't you ask somebody from Poland, the Baltic States, Finland or Ukraine what they think of recent Russian actions?

    Why don't you ask someone from Balkans what they think about US actions in regards of bombing sovereign nation, taking part of their country and allowing it to declare independence?

  • by MrSteveSD ( 801820 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @01:30PM (#24586377)
    Jeopardize Space Station, would be an equally valid title. I'm sure the Russians have suspicions that the US was ultimately behind the Georgian bombardment and invasion of South Ossetia.

    Watching the media reporting on this has been fascinating. If Russia had been the Western Ally rather than Georgia, the media would have been focusing on the Georgian bombardment and invasion of South Ossetia and all the casualties it caused. People killed in Russian air-strikes would get a mention in words, but certainly not pictures. When the media report on official enemies, the gloves come off. The BBC's Newsnight program called Russian announcements Orwellian Newspeak. I can't recall the BBC ever calling US or UK announcements Orwellian Newspeak, no matter how propagandistic and dubious they sound. Instead the media is happy to band around phrases like "Winning Hearts and Minds" without question.

    For anyone interesting in the way the media works, watch the documentary "Manufacturing Consent" (based on the book by Herman and Chomsky). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wksCW3ooJ5A [youtube.com]
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @01:42PM (#24586609)

    The Russians are very closely aligned with the rebels in South Ossetia (the Russians sign most of their paychecks). They used the rebels to provoke Georgia into attacking (which they did because their leader thought the US would back them up).

    So Georgia attacks first, and Russia gets to attack back while looking like the good guys.

    Meanwhile, the rest of the world is not willing to risk too much to defend Georgia. Although Europe is more willing to do so than the US because of the pipeline going through Georgia.

    The situation is very complex, with lots of ego on both sides.

  • by BLAG-blast ( 302533 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @01:45PM (#24586661)

    No! In a "real" democracy, the guy with 49% beats the guy 51%.

    sounds like bullshit show elections to me.

    More or less BS sounding show elections than the guy winning with 49%....?

  • by Kohath ( 38547 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @01:52PM (#24586817)

    It was Georgia, with support from USA...

    Yes. Everything bad that happens is the fault of the USA. It's the answer that's always available. It works for dictators. It works for their sympathizers on US university campuses. It works for any aggressor in any situation. It saves having to think or understand any situation and provides an excuse for any action.

  • by insomniac8400 ( 590226 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @02:01PM (#24586993)
    Georgia struck first. They were hoping to take control of Ossetia by force. And Ossetia only provoked Georgia by claiming to be independent for the last 20 years, Ossetia did not spark this confrontation. The world community is at fault for not supporting Ossetia as a sovereign nation. Ossetia even had democratic elections to affirm that everyone there does not want to part of Georgia. Make no mistake Georgia attacked Ossetia because the US still recognizes Ossetia as part of Georgia which would make this attack in the eyes of the US, a civil war. The problem with Georgia's plan is that Russia accepts Ossetia as a separate country and the US wasn't going to be able to stop Russia from doing what we would have done in such a situation. If you don't like that logic, think about Israel. They are a country we accept to exist, but Palestine does not. So Palestinians attack it, and we help to stop those attacks. The only thing that has hurt our relationship with Russia was John McCain getting involved with the current president's business and claiming Russia was the invader based on the incorrect news headlines. And to top it off Joe Lieberman, who is Jewish, sides with John McCain. It boggles my mind that a man from a country constantly attacked because it's enemies don't recognize Israel's right to exist could do a 180 and not recognize Ossetia's right to exist. McCain basically made a speech off the incorrect information in the press and Joe Lieberman is a hypocrite trying to be vice president.
  • by Bruha ( 412869 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @02:10PM (#24587159) Homepage Journal

    I'd love to know where you get your intelligence.

    Oh you're taking Russia's word that they were only responding to Georgian aggression. Great thinking there buddy.

    Russia will occupy these two provinces and suddenly there will be new breakaway regions adjacent to these. Russia will rinse and repeat, while the west begin a process of appeasement or hollow diplomatic actions and Russia will eventually forcefully integrate Georgia back into the fold.

    Yeah our commitment to democracy goes only so far.

  • by Shakrai ( 717556 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @02:11PM (#24587167) Journal

    So the Finns, Estonians, and Poles were engaged in ethic cleansing and genocide when Stalin decided to try and conquer them?

    I don't pretend to have all the answers for the Balkans but I think trying to compare Bosnia and Kosovo with Finland and the Baltic States is a bit of a stretch. Do you even remember what the Serbs were up to back in those days? The images of people in camps starving to death?

  • We all signed on to the same game: that is a representative democracy, the candidates know the rules and they know they go for electoral votes and not popular votes. Bush was the last person I wanted to see in office, but it's stupid to say it was invalid because you can't use the correct metric.

    There were other issues that occurred in the US elections that make them suspect, but that does not excuse irregularities (especially much larger ones) in other people's elections.

  • by Columcille ( 88542 ) * on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @02:29PM (#24587529)
    Most of the world recognizes Israel. Most of the world does not recognize South Ossetia. This isn't just the US throwing its weight around. Russia is trying to force things its way. Russia could choose to recognize the People's Republic of Texas if it wanted to but that wouldn't change the fact that Texas remains part of the US. And I know all the Russians living in South Ossetia do not want it to be part of Georgia, but there is something odd about Russian Citizens getting to say what Georgia should do with its territory.
  • by mea37 ( 1201159 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @02:33PM (#24587621)

    Consistant foreign policy would be nice, yes.

    But as long as you're trying to put things in first-person perspective, how would you expect the U.S. to respond if one or more states were to suddenly declare independence?

    "Ok, no worries about the federal money and infrastructure build-up from which you've benefitted. We'll just relocate any strategic military assets we might have placed within your borders." I doubt it. More likely, a civil war.

    Any "democratic" government probably ought to have a specific procedure for secession. Absent that, any attempt to break away from ones parent country has always been, and will always be, a morally grey area. While the U.S. certainly has benefited from, and engaged in the role of being, foreign aid to one side in a civil war, that doesn't make it right in the general case.

    I'm not convinced either side (Georgia or Russia) is taking the "high road". I also don't claim to have the historical -- or even current event -- perspective to weigh all the factors in the rights-and-wrongs of a border dispute. Given the one-sided nature of most of the posts here, I'd wager most of the posters are in that same ill-informed boat.

    My two cents: By default, I assume national sovereignty. If a population wants to secede, I generally consider it an internal affair; and just because the local population expresses a wish to be separate, that doesn't automatically make it so from a sound international standpoint.

    But were there human rights violations, war crimes, etc. going on between Georgia and Southern Ossetia? That would certainly weaken any sovereignty claims... Lacking those things, what were peacekeepers doing on Georgian soil in the first place? Did Georgia accept their presence, or were they essentially an occupying force?

    If I put my troops in harms way, can I really claim the right to retalliate when they get hurt? Can Russia draw a strategic connection between bombing near the Geogian capital (something like 30 miles out of their way) and protecting those in Southern Ossetia?

    Simply too many questions to justify all the "Country X is good and Country Y is evil" rhetoric around here.

  • by flyingsquid ( 813711 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @02:43PM (#24587757)
    also of note is the fact, that georgia borders chechnya where lots of russian troops are waiting for any action.

    Keep in mind that Russia attacked on two fronts: one in South Ossetia, and one in Abkhazia, and it took place on land, on air, at sea, and electronically. From a tactical standpoint, the electronic warfare campaign probably didn't do much, Georgia isn't heavily wired like other countries. What is unsettling is that, according to a New York Times piece, the information attacks began weeks before the actual hostilities. It's clear that the Russians were just waiting for an excuse to go into Georgia.

    Did Georgia behave irresponsibly? Sure. But Russia's response- launching a second front in Abkhazia, driving deep into Georgia and cutting the country in half by occupying Gori, bombing the airport in Tblisi, and hitting civilian targets (intentionally or not)- is disproportionate. It would be as if you challenged someone to a fistfight and then he beat you with a baseball bat so badly you ended up in the hospital, and kept beating you after you asked for mercy. And it's one thing when a tiny nation of 30 million does something irresponsible, but Russia is a major economic and military power. What's reallydisturbing about Russia's behavior in Georgia is that it isn't an exception, it's part of a pattern. Look at what we've seen recently: poisoning of a dissident with radioactive Polonium, the media put under strict government control, political dissent largely crushed, the poisoning of an opposition candidate in the Ukraine with dioxin, and now a major military offensive into Georgia. Of course, the way that the Bush Administration has behaved in recent years- suspending the rule of law, 'regime change', domestic spying, and torture- means that America isn't in much of a position to lecture other countries on how to behave. On the other hand, America's international policy is almost guaranteed to improve in November, whereas there is no indication that Putin is surrendering his grasp on power anytime soon.

  • by arth1 ( 260657 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @02:51PM (#24587883) Homepage Journal

    My questiosn is, why is war between Russia and Georgia any of our damned business, anyway?

    As always, oil.
    The big BTC (Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan) pipeline is a way to get oil to the West without dealing with Russians, and the pipeline is 13% owned by US interests.

    Plus, of course, Russians are the traditional enemy, which the US is against, no matter what. Remember how we protested so heavily against the invasion in Afghanistan, and supported the poor oppressed Taliban in their noble fight against the godless commies? No? People tend to forget...

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @03:02PM (#24588103)

    > Did Georgia behave irresponsibly?

    So murdering 2,000 innocent people is just "behaving irresponsibly"? Tsk, tsk, what a naughty Georgian president! But what happens when 2,700 Americans are murdered? America goes apeshit, invades countries half way around the world, and causes 10's perhaps 100's of thousands of deaths.

    After preventing thousands more murders, Russia attacked the Georgian army to teach them a lesson. They should have kept going until they got the Georgian president.

  • by defaria ( 741527 ) <Andrew@DeFaria.com> on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @03:09PM (#24588185) Homepage

    "Proportionate" wars yield stalemate by definition. Disproportionate wars are how wars are won!

  • Re:moral decline (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @03:18PM (#24588351)

    read your history a bit more careful. WWI ended after the Versailles treaty or the armistice of November 11, and WW2 ended after the surrender of 19/08/1945. this falls under DIPLOMACY. Without surrender, the battle keeps raging.

    Diplomacy sure as hell didn't end WW2.

    Major, unrestrained, no-holds-barred ass-whipping ended WW2.

    2500 years of european history TEACHES you that the ONLY time europe was in peace, was after the formation of the european union. this formation was completely voluntary, and without need of violence.

    Yeah... right. I'm sure all the bodies and destruction before that came about didn't have a damned thing to do with it.

  • Re:What? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Master Of Ninja ( 521917 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @03:25PM (#24588481)
    But does logic really matter in international politics? Serbia invaded Kosovo, which was part of Serbia, and got a kick in the teeth for their efforts. Kosovo is the precedent and a very dangerous one now. As they say rights are only guaranteed by power, and in this case might is right.

    From the rough discussions I've seen is that Georgia has been historically very territorially aggressive, only limited by the fact that the Russians directly sit next to them. The region of Ossetia at least is from a different ethnic group (not sure about Abkhazia) and by the standard of Kosovo have the right to self determination. The most cynical view that I've seen is that Georgia wanted to make sure that any referendum on the future of Ossetia goes their way by essentially wiping out anyone who would vote to join Russia.

    The current invasion of Georgia is due to their initial act of aggression, gambling wrongly, and losing it all. They're in for many years of re-building at the moment.
  • Putin's a Bully (Score:4, Insightful)

    by tjstork ( 137384 ) <todd DOT bandrowsky AT gmail DOT com> on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @03:41PM (#24588757) Homepage Journal

    What Georgia is really all about is Putin sending a signal to all the states bordering Russia that they could be next, and to also test the resolve of NATO in a public way that is safe for Russia.

    It's obvious that the Russian invasion of Georgia was pre-planned and that they baited Georgia into doing what they do. Attacks of the scale the Russians have done take time to organize, and the Russian response was immediate. How else, one might ask, do the Russians suddenly appear not even a day after the crisis, with several hundred tanks and thousands of men, without first having had a plan.

    Putin baited. Georgia foolishly took the bait and provided Putin an excuse to smash Georgia in such a way as to intimidate those NATO states that are actually bordering Russia, and those states that might join NATO (like the Ukraine).

    Anyone thinking that this is about Russia defending its own people is a fool. I thought we'd learned from the Sudetenland that this sort of an argument is crap. This is an effort by Russia to bully the states on its borders, as they have been doing now for the last few years with things like turning off the gas, turning on the gas, issuing passports in bulk to people in one's own country...it's classic Soviet Era stuff.

    AS far as the Space Station goes, well, the Shuttle is just going to have to keep flying until Ares is ready. That's it. The only reason the Shuttle is being grounded is because the Congress mandated panel did what Congress told it to do, and, the Congress can easily change those parameters to allow for new geopolitical realities. The shuttle will fly, it won't be safe, but, Alan Shephard rode a fricking ICBM during the cold war "built by the lowest bidder", and that's what space shuttles do.

    What happens is this: USA continues shuttle, kicks the Russians out, probably keeps the Russian modules, and the NATO countries have a nice little space station.

  • by ganjadude ( 952775 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @03:42PM (#24588781) Homepage
    If you do not do what the international community wishes.... We will have to write you a very stern letter telling you how unhappy we are!
  • by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @03:51PM (#24588917) Journal

    Of course use of force is wrong... that is it's wrong when it's by someone we don't currently like against someone we do currently like.

    You and a lot of other people seem to have been living in a rather strange fantasy land. The world doesn't function the way any current group of peace protesters, free market advocates, neo-Conservative geopolitical reactionaries or cynical political hacks want it to be. Here's the low down. Russia has been an empire for centuries. At various periods it has lost control of its hinterlands (which have been ever-expanding ever since the Tatars were overthrown), but it has always regained that control as a new regime (at one point the Muscovite Princes, later the Czars, later still the Soviets and now the Putin-dominated republic) consolidates power. This has only been exacerbated by the West's ill-thought out strategy of enlarging the EU and NATO into Eastern Europe and further right into the Caucusus.

    I suppose this is in part because a whole bunch of very foolish people thought Russia was permanently relegated to bankrupt second-rate power. But the formula we have been seeing since Putin took power is extremely familiar to those who have even a cursory knowledge of Russian history. That all these folks, some of them in such supposedly well-informed places as the State Department and Britain's Foreign Office only goes to show you that somehow over the last seventeen years those with meaningful knowledge of Russia have either been pensioned off or are busy giving lectures at universities.

    I'm not saying that Russia is right. Of course its not. Under not just the Soviets, but even under the Czars, peoples like the Georgians (like the Estonians, Ukrainians and so forth) have suffered. In a perfect world things would be much different. But we don't live in a perfect world, we live in this world, a world where wealth, power, nationalism and if nothing else, the sheer force of history itself pushes events along on an inertia which we often can only watch in impotence and disbelief.

    The long and short of is this. Russia is not going tolerate NATO moving right into its geographical kidneys. It may permit the illusion of independence for the former Soviet republics, providing they recognize where the real authority lies. It's possible that the Western Slavic and Baltic countries may indeed be able to escape the resurgent Empire (though I wouldn't lay money either way yet), but for countries like Georgia, forget about it.

    The Balkans War and everything that followed was a direct result of the Soviet collapse. NATO was able to yank Kosovo out of splintered Yugoslavia only because Russia was still in serious turmoil. I'm not defending the Serbians. They, collectively, can be an insanely vicious, hateful and ultimately self-destructive people (and don't think the Russians don't think so either). Their atrocities against the ethnic Albanians earned them the loss of Kosovo and the permanent obliteration of the uber-nationalistic Greater Serbia claptrap. But the window of opportunity for such events has now closed, and the job of the foreign offices/ministries/departments of every nation and extranational agency in the world better understand that very quickly. Foreign policy should be based on reality, not on pipe dreams.

  • Re:What? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by shallot ( 172865 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @03:53PM (#24588961)

    What I think will happen is that giving it a few weeks people will forget about this. The whole situation will be framed as Ossetians (sp?) are just like Kosovo - they have a right to be independent, and with Russian influence in the region they will eventually become re-united with Russia.

    I wouldn't use the word independence in this context. If the Ossetians want actual independence, they want it for both the southern and the northern part of their homeland, and the northern part is part of the Russian Federation. Moscow is very much unlikely to allow any such change, because this is Caucasus we're dealing here - they can't allow any sort of major independence drives in there because it would lead to a major mess. There are so many ethnic groups which could claim precedent, it's just not an option. Even if there was no geostrategic value in the region (which there is now because of the oft-mentioned oil and gas pipelines), it would still be delicate.

  • by shallot ( 172865 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @04:20PM (#24589337)

    Why don't you ask someone from Balkans what they think about US actions in regards of bombing sovereign nation, taking part of their country and allowing it to declare independence?

    Your quick retort is off base there, because it implies that only Serbians who are against those things live in the Balkans. Other people from the region generally saw those acts either as salvation or as interventions necessary to get things fixed.

    Indeed, many a Croatian, Bosniak or Albanian will tell you that the US and others should have intervened in the Yugoslav wars much before and with much more force, than they did.

    Foreign intervention by great powers(tm) is a historical fact of life, anyway, and they are hardly ever universally right or universally wrong.

  • Re:What? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by fm6 ( 162816 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @05:55PM (#24590871) Homepage Journal

    Most of the international community thinks that Russia is either over reacting or taking advantage of Goergia's internal conflict with a Goergian province that declared independence.

    A better way to put it: people think that Russia is supporting Georgian separatists (from two regions, not one) as a means of interfering in Georgian internal affairs, with an eye to resuming their historical domination of Georgia, one that lasted from 1812 to the break up of the Soveit Union in 1990 (with minor interruptions). In the past, this has been limited to giving the separatists military backing and granting residents of breakaway regions Russian Federation passports. Now this has escalated into an actual war (provoked by Georgian actions that can be characterized as an unprovoked attack on Russian-protect regions or as a legitimate attempt to secure Georgian borders, depending on who you talk to), complete with a full scale military incursion, in which the Georgian forces are totally outclassed by the Russian invaders. There are also accusations that Russian-backed separatist militias are attempting to force ethnic Georgians out of the breakaway regions. There have also been reports of massacres.

    Last, but certainly not least, Russia is demanding that Georgia pick a new President. Since the current guy is democratically elected (and a strong advocate of closer ties to the west), this amounts to a demand that Georgia become a client state.

    The effect on the ISS is miniscule compared with the other ramifications. NATO has agreed to allow Georgia to join, once they've met "technical requirements". If this had already happened, the U.S. would have a treaty obligation to help defend Georgia against the Russian invasion. We're talking world war here, not unlike the way a dispute between Serbia and Austria escalated into the first world war. It seems likely that one of the purposes of the Russian invasion is to make the U.S. think twice about its policy of expanding NATO eastward.

    Barring a world war, there's not a lot anybody can do about this. The party line in Russia is that the west is determined to keep down all the Slavic countries. (In this narrative, the NATO attack against Serbia was about that, not about preventing genocide in Kosovo.) Putin's defiance of the west only makes him more popular, all the more so if we impose sanctions.

    But of course the sanctions will happen: western leaders have to take action, no matter how symbolic, or look ineffectual. (Yes, they are ineffectual, but they can't afford to look it.) That pretty much brings to an end any Russian-western cooperation in space exploration.

  • Re:What? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by martin-boundary ( 547041 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @06:48PM (#24591517)

    How do you invade your own territory?

    Be careful how you state this. If Georgia has truly invaded its own territory, then it follows that Saakashvili bombed his own people. Saddam was hanged for this.

  • by megaditto ( 982598 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @07:39PM (#24592133)

    Its simply amazing that given the history of soviet behavior in the post ww2 period that any of you dopes believe in anything the Russians say especially the Russian shills here.

    So they did invade a few countries and overthrew a few democratically elected governments, but so what? I mean, which country wouldn't do the exactly same thing if given a chance?

    Life is not fair, but in this world you either fuck with people, or they fuck with you.

    You should stop bitching and join the club of all the other weak countries shafted by the Roman Empire, the British Empire, the French Empire, the Russian Empire, and the United States (who invaded some 30+ countries since 1946)...

  • by Kesha ( 5861 ) on Wednesday August 13, 2008 @07:53PM (#24592313) Homepage

    Reuters video of Georgian troops firing Grad rockets at Tskhinvali: http://www.reuters.com/news/video?videoId=88607&videoChannel=1

  • by aralin ( 107264 ) on Thursday August 14, 2008 @07:23AM (#24597021)
    See Israel vs Palestine, West Bank and Gaza settlements.

The one day you'd sell your soul for something, souls are a glut.

Working...