Can anyone recommend a good website for following the action here? Analysis as to what it means for the rest of the world is a plus.

I fear this could get big, but then I also fear wet cats...

-Blast

http://www.drudgereport.com/ Here's where I check the news because there's so many resources.

Not to fan the flames, but this has been one of the more common models since Perestroika fomenting into WW3. Having one or more of the breakaway blocs draw NATO into a conflict with Russia is a precipitous condition.

blackfive.net is an opinion based milblog. They hit a lot of areas, but have been fairly steady on the Georgia issue. A current post has a dozen links to other sites that can give more info.

I hate shameless propaganda there. Check Reuters about that:
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSLB9471020080811

The opposite side coverage could be found here:
http://en.rian.ru/onlinenews/

But for the serious unbiased scientific view of the events on the subject I'd watch for this article live development:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_South_Ossetia_(2008)

IMHO before you get too deep in the supposed action, motivations, politics and blame laying it is usually helpful to get some basic background. A simple map, a rundown of Georgia's relative size, location in relation to other nations, population, demographics and resources:

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/gg.html

Believe it or not the CIA database on such things is pretty much both neutral and informative. A good start. Notice that Georgia is "slightly smaller than South Carolina" and average income is $4,700 (2007 est.). That ought to put things in perspective.

Once you have a framework a quick read of a couple of papers dealing with the politics and implications for the US might round out the background nicely.

One from a political perspective:
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL33453.pdf

And one from a security perspective:
http://ftp.fas.org/sgp/crs/row/RL30679.pdf

Neither are too difficult or long. There is some overlap but each adds something.

Once you have digested the background information the news makes a lot more sense. Understanding the background also prevents you falling for many of the more extreme claims and predictions.

Beware of Drudge. He made his name breaking a couple of important stories and maintaining a fairly tight journalistic standard. But once established his standards got left behind and he became the go-to guy for rumors. Many of which have been, are, floated for political reasons.

The Drudge Report is pretty close to tabloid level journalism. He doesn't question sources harshly or do much fact checking. His output is often less about actual news than rumors of news and news about rumors. When he gets caught reporting one way and it turns out the other you can expect that the story will just be quietly dropped. There aren't many corrections, apologies or attempts at self-correction. Like the National Enquirer the focus is on the extreme and outrageous because this draws people in and maintains the hit count. He caters to voyeurism and morbid curiosity, the tendency of people to stare at car wrecks.

Just for the record, I don't believe everything I read. The Drudge Report has links for most of the major news outlets including the international ones. It also has links for earthquake maps and info. I also don't just go to CNN or FOX for news. It's all pretty much tabloid journalism. If it bleeds , it leads. I never go by one source alone and if it is labled shock or something like that I don't read it at all. The Drudge Report is a good place to start research from. You really don't have to read all the articles. I just think having most of the news links in one place is easier. I agree about the way they handle things if they report a story wrong, they do just drop it. If I could find a website that lists all the links that Drudge does, I'd probably check there too.

The BBC is a good place to look http://news.bbc.co.uk/

They lean to the left (PHRASECENSOREDPOSTERSHOULDKNOWBETTER. views) but they do give the facts .

They have reporters everyplace on the planet and seem to cover every story out there. If something is going on, you can bet a BBC reporter is there or on the way to it.

And right now have a story on the Russian troops in Georgia. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7554507.stm


I just looked, and counted. They have 5’links to different aspects on this story.

They said today on a radio talk show that Russia has over 14,000 nukes, The USA has in the area of 5,000.

Yea they are probably not up to our standards, but anyone with 14,000 of them is probably going to be able to get a few up & flying.

Don’t make the mistake of thinking the bear has no teeth.

If you knew they were going to push a button to set one off in the silo in 15-min, how far and fast would you run if you were in the neighborhood?





If you said anything more then just stand there and watch, so much for Janes!

So, you're arguing for mass-killing of defenseless Russian civilians, with 5000 US nukes?

Fellas, we're already veering off from Blast's original question about specific news sources, and rapidly diving off the "no politics" cliff, too.

The one constant in struggles like this is that civilians are under threat from both sides. That's the real survival story IMO -- and the one that puts my stomach in knots. There is no hell like a refugee's hell.

And all I was saying that out of 14.000 of them, a few may still work.

Hopefully none of these ever get into the hands of terrorist.

I remember reading someone in our Department of War's assesment of German that was written in 1932. He expected Germany to collapse from internal pressure and bad leadership by 1941.

Oops.

I'm not counting them out. Not by a long shot.

A thorough analysis.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/11/georgia.russia3



Up to the minute info from a variety of legitimate news sites.

http://www.antiwar.com/index1234.html

Re Russia and whoever, to tell the truth, I don't really care. Re wet cats, my wife is cringing...

The BBC World Service on the radio is very good. More accurate than the rest of the BBC news services.
The Sock

CNN reporting Russia appears to be digging in and not leaving. US is asking Turkey for permission to put an air craft carrier off their coast for "humanitarian aid."

haha...good one Duh.

Patrick Buchanan's aftermath: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/08/blowback_from_bear_baiting.html

Amen to that, Ironraven! And now that we've found that the Brits couldn't even defeat Moqtada al Sadr, don't expect much help from the Europeans. They're (the pols, NOT the soldiers, who are still very capable and deadly) sadly into appeasement, not confrontation.

I hope you included that link to indicate how wrong a person can be in their analysis of a situation. He tries to use moral equivalence to compare us and the old Soviet Union. If you can't see the difference between good (USA) and evil (USSR), then yeah, Pat Buchanan would make sense. Pffft!

Blast-

Try counterterrorismblog.org/2008/08/russiageorgia_cyberwar_assessm.php

That's funny. The majority (like 99%) of Drudge's items are simply links to existing stories. That's shameless propaganda?
He's basically an RSS feed that selects what he thinks is pertinent. The irony with what you said is that Drudge is the homepage link for many left-leaning journalists so they can keep up with what is going on!

Ironic that you would link a story from Reuters accusing Drudge of propaganda. Reuters has been caught doing REAL propaganda before. "Reuters admits doctoring photos...." www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3286966,00.html

Wikipedia is scientific, and unbiased? Bwahahahahah!

I'm shocked, shocked I say! I was told by the media (NBC, CBS, and ABC) for so many years that the Russians were just like us, and didn't want conflict. How could they have been so wrong?

It's all about oil, gents. Georgia is in Russia's pipeline.

I would suggest breaking out some decent single malt and a pipe; the sooner you realize that "wars" like this are the future, the better off you'll be.

And don't get started about water...it's even worse.