SITREP Russia-Georgia War, Aug 19 08

By DemocracyRules

THE RULES OF ENGAGEMENT

As I mentioned on a previous post, Russia has engaged the services of thousands of English-speakers to post enormous amounts of anti-Georgian material.  Some of these people may have visited Gina Cobb.  Left unchecked, they tend to ride roughshod over the truth. Hence, I offer some pointers to Russians who post here:

–- This is the core meaning of Democracy: noun, 1 a: government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections. (Webster’s)

–- Freedom House is a non-profit group which gives detailed information about democracy and how the worlds’ countries stack up.  On a scale of 1 to 7, with 1 being extremely democratic, and 7 being not at all democratic, Freedom House rates Russia 5.96 in  2008.   The country has been backsliding since 1999.  Georgia rates better at 4.79 in 2008, with some recent impressive improvements that bode well for the future.  No single source can definitively define or quantify democracy.  However, before using the word in debate and discourse, it’s a good idea to know how it’s ordinarily defined.

–- Don’t call anyone a Nazi.  You can't prove this point in a debate.  It is just a useless insult.

-- Please keep your comments civil and to the point. Do not insult the owners of the website or your postings will be edited or deleted. Public discourse is diminished when people engage in ad hominem attacks. When you post please try to take positions that are factually defensible.

Obviously, myriad opinions abound about Russia and Georgia. However, comments that stand out are those that are carefully fact-checked and cite reliable sources. Please add the web address of the sources, so that if other readers want to, they can review the source material. That way readers can make up their own minds regarding what is true or not. I may delete posts that are unsubstantiated common opinions, structured as invective.

-- Posters who use the "Defense of Detail" can be called on it. The "Defense of Detail" is a common method used to hijack debate.  It works like this. The first debater makes a substantive point. The pressure is then upon the second debater to respond. However, the second debater ignores the main point, and focuses instead upon some small matter to equivocate about. The effort is to redirect the thought stream into an irrelevant side issue.

This helps the second debater avoid addressing the main point. The easiest way to deal with the "Defense of Detail" is to redirect the debate back to the main point.

-- When someone insults me I know I am winning.  Gina wrote something interesting about arguing the law.  To paraphrase, "if the Law is against you ague the facts; if the facts are against you argue the law; if both are you against you, pound the table."  Conversely, when someone begins to pound the table, or threaten, or make insults, then I know they have no meaningful reply to my argument.

– Pro Patria means “For country”, or “I stand for the good of my homeland.” I am a Canadian, and when I use it I mean “I support my country”.  Canadians are generally not very patriotic, and we should be better at it.  When I use this on a posting in Lebanon or elsewhere, I mean that “I support Canada”, but the implication is that it is a good thing to support one’s homeland.  All citizens of democratic countries need to be ready to die defending the democracy of their homeland.  To do that you have to love your homeland, and love democracy.

Pro Patria

Comments

[Vladimir Samarin]

Maybe, I am kind of proud to be a reason for such a special posting. Though I have cautiously answered most points of your 'Engagement Bylaws', I feel I have to add something.

RE: "As I mentioned on a previous post, Russia has engaged the services of thousands of English-speakers to post enormous amounts of anti-Georgian material. Some of these people may have visited Gina Cobb. Left unchecked, they tend to ride roughshod over the truth."

I am a real Russian person with job, family, children, faith and everything that usually defines a civilized person (at least in the Western meaning of the word 'civilization'). You can even see me in the website of my business (http://www.zoom-russia.ru/vvs.htm).
I have to say, that I am neither engaged, nor hired or in some other way officially or non-oficially involved by my country in what you call 'posting anti-Georgian materials'. I act on my own goodwill, knowledge and comprehension of the situation. Yes, I also use my skills in English that are higher than average (but not perfect, as it is not my native language).
Well, I -- sincerely -- do not understand why you do think that you or your sources hold monopoly on truth, while you take apparently anti-Russian position, whether you leave me checked or uncheked. You judge, so you are being judged.

I know what Freedom House is, and what Webster's is; I can assure you that the definition of 'democracy' in Russian does not differ from that in the Webster's.
But labelling is a tricky game. The old gashioned system in the USA have no provisions for direct elections of president; in Russia we have direct elections. In this particular regard we are considerably more democratic, aren't we? I even admit, that at our last elections I did not vote for our current president Mr. Medvedev, and until now there were no repression on me, my family, relatives or business.

As for Georgia. Besides Freedom House, there is world history.
Once the most influential, strong and cultural kingdom of Caucasus, Georgia was disintegrated after the Tamerlan's invasion in the 14th century. And until the end of the 18th century the territory was constantly devastated by multiple attacks of the Turks and Persians. In 1795 the Persians invaded Georgia (in fact, just some remnants os what Georgia once was -- kingdom Kartli-Kakheti) again and destroyed Tbilisi. The population downsized to mere 100 000 people.
The dying king Georg XII applied in 1800 to the Russian Emperor Paul I with a desperate request to take Georgia under the Russian crown. On Dec.22 same year Paul I signed the manifesto of adoption of Kartli-Kakheti. 10 years later the third Georgian kingdom, Imereti, was also included to Russia. To the end of the 19th century after a series of Russian-Turkish wars, Russia gathered all territories that now are known as Georgia. The price was blood of thousands of Russian soldiers -- 'barbarians', as the modern Georgian officials call us Russians.
Generally, in the 20th and 21st centuries Georgia was independent for 21 year; in 1918-1921 and since 1990. Within these 21 years Georgia happened to unleash or join 7 wars and military conflicts.
We Russians were never anti-Georgian, and cannot be: the integrity of Georgia is payed of by the Russian blood; but dirty games of politicians playing with nationalist feelings of peoples spoil the peace in Caucasus.

By the way, do you know the role Russia played in what the Americans celebrate on July 4th? That 'armed neutrality' on seas declared by Russia an about 1780 (joined by the Netherlands, Denmark and Sweden, and later by Austria, Portugal, Prussia and the Kingdom of Both Sicilies) finally mad England to cease sea blockade of the US?
Do you know that during the Civil War two squadrons of Russian battle ships were sent to NY and Frisco to demonstrate Russia was ready to defend the independency of the USA from possible intervention of European countries?

Nothing matters; Russia and Russians for decades and centuries are depicted as violent vodka drinking bears oppressing freedom and democracy worldwide.
There is always another truth, Mr. DR; whether you accept it or not. Prejudices are bad advisors.

P.S. As for nazi word. I respect your opinion. Believe it or not, in Russia this word is maybe even more insulting than wherever else; their invasion cost us more than any other country.
But, well, how would you describe the policy of Zviad Gamsakhurdia, softened by Shevardnadze, but then again reinforced by Saakashvili regarding ethnic minorities and autonomous territories?
The West tried to punish Milosevic for his actions in Kosovo. But don't you think the justice should be same for all?

[From DR -- An excellent example of the Defense of Detail]

[Yes but truthfully]

to DR - when you have no answers to posts - which is often - you simply post 'Defense of Detail'. That's like writing 'Dont worry be happy'. It's silly and simply points to the fact that you don't have answers to valid points in these posts. I would also add that what you write is not to the point and additionally a type of defence of detail because it is sooooo one sided and prejeduced.
Vladimir has written some very good, intelligent points which you simply ignore. You and Gina continually talk about this site being a place for discourse and discussion. Please add that it is one sided if you want to continue answering as you do.
How about this question - the USA has invaded Iraq and Afghanistan for their reasons. Both were invasions of another countrnies sovreign territory. Russia invaded Georgia for it'S reasons. Also an invasion of another countries sovreign territory. Why does the USA think that it owns any moral high ground?????
AN EXCELLENT EXAMPLE OF TOTAL HYPOCRACY.

[Vladimir Samarin]

Dear Mr. DR,

I don't feel attacked, so I am not defending in general or in details. whatever you call it.

What I do, I explain my position (which differs greatly from yours, but is shared by many, if not the most people of Russia). I add details that enrich the picture. I could even understand why you see the situation so onesided: you look at it from soo far, that cannot see it 3D.

I also ask questions, which you avoid to answer, preferring to blame me in the 'defence of details'.

Maybe my last question sounds rhetoric, but it is critically important for discussion, so I repeat:

The West tried to punish Milosevic for his actions in Kosovo. But don't you think the justice should be same for all?

Don't you think that the USA (and NATO, to a smaller extent) conduct foreign actions guided by an old principle "Quod licet Iovi non licet bovi"?

If yes, who is entitled to define who Jupiter is, and who oxes are?

If you don't, than please try to explain in plain words why, on what grounds the USA 'defend democracy' worldwide unilaterally, invading or attacking other sovereign, independent countries?

Taking into account that Gina is a skilled lawyer (isn't she?), I expect precise and accurate answers, where information prevail over emotions.