by Alex Rodriguez
GORI, Georgia -- Levan Kakashvili has been sleeping under a tree. What used to be his house is now a mound of broken bricks behind a five-story flat blackened by Russian bombing raids.
He blames the Russians for his plight, but he blames his own leader, U.S.-backed Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili, for giving the Kremlin an excuse to pummel the tiny former Soviet republic in the widening 4-day-old conflict that began over control of the breakaway province of South Ossetia.
"I'm very angry with him," said Kakashvili, slapping water from an outdoor spigot on his face and wiping dust off his shoes. "He knew that if he hit Tskhinvali [South Ossetia's capital], the Russians would hit Georgia. Now they are bombing us into oblivion."
Hours before reports that Russian forces moved on this city as part of a feared all-out invasion, Georgians in Gori were stuffing into their cars whatever belongings they could salvage from the rubble of their apartments--winter coats, kitchen utensils, bath towels--and leaving.
And as they evacuated, they said they have lost confidence in their 40-year-old president, who only five years ago embraced U.S. President George W. Bush and put his country on the path of democratic reform and an alliance with the West.
They said they were equally disheartened by the lack of intervention from the U.S. and Western Europe to bring an end to the hostilities. Avtandil Sisuashvili, 72, said the mere warnings to Russia from the West left him wondering just how meaningful was Georgia's alliance with the U.S. and the European Union.
"We need to know whether we are still under Moscow's rule or whether we are protected by the West," said Sisuashvili, standing inside his apartment, which was littered with broken glass shattered by the bombing's shock waves. "We're not sure anymore whether the West defends us. Russia feels like it can do whatever it wants. We don't feel safe anymore."
Read the full story on the conflict in Georgia at ChicagoTribune.com.
• 
• 
• 
Comments
I believe the U.S. is in a tough position.
How can we argue that the Russians are in the wrong at a time we are in a war based upon lies?
The Russians are going after a breakaway republic that wishes to be under them, so be it. That should be the end of it.
We, as an ally, have left a lot to be desired.
Posted by: Q Jordon | August 12, 2008 11:31 AM
The Georgians have every right to be disappointed in their western allies. As more information comes out it only becomes more obvious that the only thing Georgia was guilty of was being a democracy with western-stlye leadership and sharing a border with Russia.
Posted by: Jeff | August 12, 2008 12:01 PM
Europe has to come to grips with the fact that the Cold War didn't really end; that the end of the Soviet Union did not mean the end of the Russian Empire; taht Russia's leader is an utterly ruthless KGB officer; that Russia will try to retake as much of the post WW2 holdings and sphere of influence as possible.
They can submit to the yoke or they can unify and rededicate NATO to it's original purpose -- the defense of the West against Russian oppression. They should also look to expand NATO membership as much as possible.
We're facing the most trying times we've seen since the late '40s. Which American Presidential candidate is best suited to the leadership task ahead? McCain isn't my first choice, but Oprahma isn't even on the list!
Posted by: MJ | August 12, 2008 12:01 PM
How many McPoints did you score yesterday, Jeff?
Posted by: jackson | August 12, 2008 12:10 PM
The United States, and this Administration in particular, has a penchant for being always in "a bridge too far" position. We had no business supporting the expansionist adventures of the present government in Georgia; especially our suggestion and support for their admission to NATO to which they could contribute nothing positive. And why did we have military advisers in Georgia who are now in harms way? Ridiculous!!These ethnic enclaves should be allowed to go their own way as we will soon find out if there is any attempt to fully incorporate the Kurds into a central government in Iraq. Our attempt to rub Russia's nose in the dirt regarding a missile defense system in Poland (or wherever) under the patently absurb guise that it is to protect Europe from Iranian attack reflects a simplistic view of the intelligence of the remainder of the world.
Posted by: Frank | August 12, 2008 12:11 PM
Where's Condi Rice? I mean, come on, this is the part of the world she's supposed to be an expert on.
Posted by: Cheryl Hussein | August 12, 2008 12:23 PM
Jeff, what further do you think the US should have done? Should we have entered the conflict directly? Should we have gone to war?
Tell us what brilliant strategy you have for this situation.
Posted by: MBT | August 12, 2008 12:28 PM
Condi Rice was in Russia last month cozying up with Saakashvili and, apparently, making promises she couldn't keep. Better that Sarkozy is now involved instead. Fortunately Bush and his foreign policy team will soon be gone.
Posted by: rupert | August 12, 2008 12:32 PM
The US shouldn't've done anything. NATO should have issued a statement condemning Russia and maybe sent peacekeepers from all member-nations. Georgia is a prospective NATO member which is one of the reasons why Russia wants to bomb them into the stone age.
Jackson, as usual I have no idea what you're talking about. I've given up trying to figure out what goes on in that fevered mind. Although I will tell you that Obama is paying people like yourself to blog out of campaign funds. I hope you're out there earning.
Posted by: Jeff | August 12, 2008 12:51 PM
NATO has already issued such a stement Jeff.
http://finchannel.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17952&Itemid=13
Jeff your nearly complete lack of military knowledge or common sense makes your proposals really laughable. Peacekeepers can only be introduced where there is a peace to keep. To send them into the middle of an ongoing conflict means that they would be required to fight one side, or possibly both. So, do you propose putting US troops (member of NATO) into combat with the Russians?
Posted by: MBT | August 12, 2008 1:22 PM
Jeff,
Actually it is McCain who is doing this.
http://www.johnmccain.com/ActionCenter/BlogInteract/BlogInteract.aspx
Posted by: MR FACE | August 12, 2008 1:28 PM
"MCCAIN SPEAKS"
WE WANT TO COME!
WE WISH WE COULD COME!
YOU CAME TO IRAQ!
WE WANT TO COME!
WE WISH WE COULD COME!
BARRACK OBAMA IS BEING WEAK ON FOREIGN POLICY BECAUSE WE CAN'T COME, AND WE WISH WE COULD!
BUT WE CAN'T SO BARRACK OBAMA, THE "ELITIST" THE ROCK STAR LIKE PARIS AND BRITNEY WISH THEY COULD COME, BUT THEY CAN'T EITHER BECAUSE, PRESIDENT BUSH WISHES HE COULD COME, BUT HE CAN'T
I CAN'T BECAUSE WE CAN'T
YOU CAME TO IRAQ!
BUT WE CAN'T COME TO "GEORGIA" SWEET "GEORGIAAAAAAA"
ASK THE "NEITHERLANDS"
ASK PHIL GRAM
ASK UBS
ASK "FERDINAND"
JUST DON'T ASK US TO COME TO "GEORGIA" OH SWEET, SWEET GEORGIAAAAAA!
Posted by: Roger Morris | August 12, 2008 2:32 PM
Actually no, Obama's been doing that for months (Hillary discovered the practice in the primaries) but the press simply won't report it because it's Obama doing it. You can bet McCain doesn't get the same deference.http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/stephm/gGBfqq
Posted by: Jeff | August 12, 2008 2:54 PM
The bush/mccain mis-administration has no mroal authority to ask Russia not to invade and occupy. If it was good enough for bush/mccain, it is good enough for Putin. Now that bush/mccain are getting a taste of their own medicine, bush/mccain isn't liking it very much. However, bush/mccain ceded moral authority for influencing the international theater when bush/mccain illegally invaded and occupied Iraq while the rest of the world voiced their strongest disapproval in the bush/mccain policy. Now bush/mccain knows what being ignored feels like, and bush/mccain doesn't like it. Just like a couple of spoiled children these bush/mccain guys are.
Posted by: tried and true American | August 12, 2008 6:31 PM
As usual, the Deranged Left offers nothing here, but comments to Jeff about McPoints and other nonsense. Really, can you folks EVER debate anything on its merits and with some intelligence?
Georgia should be disappointed. Without sending in troops, the U.S. and NATO should send some military there. Would Russia continue to play these games if there are 2,000 NATO and U.S. troops there? It would be a show of support for the Western-friendly, freedom-friendly, Democratically elected Georgian government. And it would send a message to the Communist Russians, without a shot being fired.
Posted by: John D | August 12, 2008 9:46 PM
This was a civil war and Russia jumped in and over responded to the infighting. Ossetia broke a cease fire agreement and was said to have hit a village in Georgia. Events are all detailed in Wickapedia>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_South_Ossetia_war
Posted by: say what | August 13, 2008 6:30 AM