Comments on: Why A Conflict With Russia Isn’t Going to Happen

By: Jason, Managing Editor

Jason, Managing Editor — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:24:51 +0000

1) Pipelines full of oil and natural gas are pretty easy to blow up if you’re really trying. The fact that the pipeline is still running is pretty much proof that Russia (with its huge air force and available special forces) does not want it shut down.

2) The c17s flying to Georgia are cargo aircraft carrying 2,000 Georgian troops home from Iraq. There is no way that a military intervention would be done with unarmed cargo planes anyway.

3) I have seen no evidence at all of a U.S. naval intervention nor is there any likelihood that such an intervention (especially by ONE warship) would have any meaningful impact anyway, since the combat lines are well inland.

4) If anyone is sending "expect to be fired upon" messages to the Russians at that time and place, they are a moron.

By: RAH

RAH — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:07:14 +0000

The Russian tried to bomb the BCZ pipeline according to the BP person who inspected the site. So the theory that Russia does not eant to damage the pipeline is false. Russia and Gazprom has been gobbling up all they can of the worlds oil in contract. An independent source to Europe is a threat to Russian dominance of Europe’ gas and oil. Plus they were about to piped a natural gas pipeline next to the oil pipeline. The oil pipeline was just becoming operational. Russia miscalculated Bush’s reponse. He is now upping the stake under the "humanitarian relief " ploy. We are already flying in C17’s and airface and a US naval ship to the Black Sea. Bush expects Russian will not prevent any acccess to Georgian ports. That is a message that if they do try , to expect to be fired upon.

By: Jonathan Wilson

Jonathan Wilson — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 03:41:50 +0000

Well I guess there is one positive outcome of this war. It debunks the whole "We went into Iraq for oil" theory.

By: Michael Merritt

Michael Merritt — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 23:15:43 +0000

Clueless, under that argument, should we not be marching on Georgia?

After all, that’s what the left keeps saying about why we invaded Iraq.

By: Jason, Managing Editor

Jason, Managing Editor — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 18:09:57 +0000

I do not agree that even Russia would benefit from damaging oil transportation through Georgia. While it would increase the profitability of Russia’s own oil sales, this effect would be more than counterbalanced by the increased threat that the United States would feel compelled to intervene directly. Remember, Russia’s intervention in Georgia is only net-beneficial if they keep the conflict at a level where they can defeat Georgia, but prevent outside intervention. A threat to an important oil supply would definitely necessitate U.S. and E.U. responses that exceed what Russia wants to see.

This is precisely why Georgia’s president constantly mentions a threat to the pipeline and Russia denies it. Russia might like an implicit threat to the pipeline — putting the west "on notice", as it were — but Russia will not directly threaten the pipeline.

By: Why Bloggers Don´t Care About The Russian/Georgian Conflict | The Blog Herald

Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:59:22 +0000

[...] The US will never get into a massive conflict with Russia especially when Russia clearly wants Georgian Petrol Access I mean seriously what Russia is doing [...]

By: Jonathan Wilson

Jonathan Wilson — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 17:56:38 +0000

I must agree with Jason on this one.

But the only nation that would benefit from destroying the Georgian pipelines is Russia.

By: Jason, Managing Editor

Jason, Managing Editor — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:51:35 +0000

Oil is fungible, thus any negative impact on oil supplies is a problem for everyone around the globe, not just the users of that specific oil pipeline, because it increases prices globally.

The European response has been exactly the same as the U.S. response — strong words tempered by the knowledge that it is not possible to escalate to military confrontation in this situation.

By: Chris

Chris — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 16:44:39 +0000

As I understand it the Georgia pipeline is key for Europe, not the US. And in that vein its been interesting to the hear the low key if not non-existent European response. Or did I miss it?

By: Clueless

Clueless — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 14:31:10 +0000

Oleg has an interesting perspective on the war.

Many around the world will see this as the Americans trying to protect oil resources.

Was the Bush Administrations embracing of the Georgian nation simply to ensure the free flow of oil thru the BTC pipeline and on to the west?

If Georgia is of interest only because of a pipeline then this is even more reason for the USA to drill for more oil. If she is interested in Georgia because of a sincere desire to promote freedom and democracy then I fear she is not doing a good job of educating the people of Russia, Georgia and the world of her true nature.