wow, is that so?

russia will no longer be forced to deal with the usual business of the nato?

mh, i guess not wha:t nato not going to continue bussiness as usual with the russians means.

People i admire the russians, they have stated now that an anti russian propaganda offensive in the world would surely not help the nato's case in georgia.

Thats brave and clear. It's also sth. that the bourgeois will deny in all chords.

It seems russia is not intend on leaving georgia at the speed nato envisioned.
Thats a very inaccurate statement btw. From here it is hard to judge in how far russia doesnt already (with gori a few kilometres from the conflict zone, much closer then the ever as close lauded tblisi), show her intends to commit to peace.

So despite the russians could have overrun most of the country they are now in a few rather fixed positions. They still dig, ofcourse digging is a required daily routine in any operational army of some name, yet it is somewhat telling.

In a few places and georgia the russians are digging in, Gori, another military town and the military georgian hub near abchazia.
(all guesswork but it follows the descriptions of the situation).

perhaps still somewhere else, the highway near gori has been mentioned.

Poti has seen a few russian patrols, but the sole need to underline former "raids",
(no, also the navy is not going to bother us), shows there was no military activity.

this in turn proofs that even a journalistically scoring alJazeera is probably limited in what they are allowed to express.

Russian-english tv seems to have somewhat disappeared from youtube. Who knows what journalism they perform..

I would bet great. her last shows a week ago that i found on youtube were impressive, well phrased, well agumented, well underbuild.
(in terms of camerawork and shots)

alJ counters with their usual subtlety, an incredibly honorous shot (for me then) of what represents HRW in georgia made my day, i still feel jolly when i think about that one. There is also am appreciable trend to bring some face value news, and to confirm through different alJ reporters. Much like with me many rather big revelations get in between the lines and are made only once.

Since i focus on human rights issues, (military) protocol and accurate information on especially military "ground" level, it will be clear i would have liked a little more consistency in even their apreciation of the topic.

Especially the ground level informations appear a bit lost in the whole nato war of words and worlds, but also matters of protocol appear to have escaped public notice.

military protocol basically is , what and when you shoot and what not, and on that line how to protect your army's interesses.

For example i have not seen an analyses of that aspect of the russian action at all,
not a single incident explains why the russians are digging somewhere, or speculates on it even, what else is gori but saaksvillis todays favourit topic of conversation?

That means there is a newsblock on anything that could explain some of the russian action to us, and the responsabiliy to do that falls on people like me.

Well Gori is symbolic and military strongly related with the whole south osseta operations of georgia, besides that it appeared to be an effective stop on georgian comfort to control Gori, from wich the russians have not convincingly or greatly advanced at all since they captured it a week ago.

otoh it is obviously also true that the current positions russia holds in georgia actually deny georgia , and i think saaksvilli, much control, but could also serve as a base for future actions.

Proably one reason the russians are in no hurry to leave all positions, is they don't feel secure about the nato.
The moment they leave georgia nato might bring in troops, to escalate it into a multinational war, nato might start making the weirdest promises and wickiest commitments.

If they are in georgia, it will be more easy to see for the world, and easier for the russians to prevent, counterfeit or moderate, all sufficient to stop this war from becoming bigger.

So russia is in a position were it might be an option to prevent georgia from becoming all that (a nato fortress or base), and this is of strategic concern for the russian international politics at the moment.

it is not so hard to explain and the west would appear more in her right (stronger) if they at least showed they understood the russians.

it seems not, the anger of the russians about the western media has to do with for example western media repeating the russian forces will draw back into russia, or south ossetian territory, when actually the bufferzone is extended, Gori might even fall well into it (i remember i wanted it (gori) a week ago so perhaps thats a russian sneak then;)

so altho the russian intend (atm) is to only leave the reinforced peacekeepers, there should be no confusion about the actual area of operation they now have negotiated. that besides obviously russia is looking for diplomatical signs of "detente" a thing nato and esp. georgia as it gets represented in nato influence sphere (the media in the most of the world) completely fail to deliver so far.

well i think even a politician could understand this, so gl with it.